He is scheduled to discuss the Honorable Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the future of the Supreme Court.
And if you haven’t seen this already, it’s brilliant.
I’m Joe Biden and I approve this message. pic.twitter.com/TuRZXPE5xK
— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) September 20, 2020
I’m going to try and be back later to show off what I did all week.
Open thread.
Baud
New Deal democrat
For anyone who might be interested, I have posted my weekly update of the polling nowcasts for both the Presidential and Senate races, here.
A shift to a Democratic majority in the Senate is looking increasingly likely, with a possible majority of 56 if the Ds pick up all of the toss-ups.
Baud
@New Deal democrat:
Wow. That’s good to hear.
Shalimar
OT, but it just occurred to me people are getting the math very wrong on the future Supreme Court nominee vote. Murkowski, Romney and Collins say they won’t vote for the nominee before the election. They do not say they will vote against. 53 Republicans minus 3 votes equals a 50-47 vote, not 50-50. McConnell can lose 6 Republicans and still have the votes to confirm as long as they all abstain instead of voting no.
dmsilev
@New Deal democrat: Link?
Glad to see both Democrats and ‘serious’ legal scholars openly calling for expanding the Court.
Baud
@Shalimar:
Tulsi didn’t fool anybody when she voted present on impeachment. I don’t think any of these senators are that silly. Everyone will see through it.
Another Scott
@New Deal democrat: I don’t see your link. Please update.
Thanks.
Relatedly:
I can’t imagine that Uncle Joe’s numbers are going to go down as a result of RBG’s passing.
Forward!!
Cheers,
Scott.
Percysowner
@Baud: Murkowski voted present on Kavannaugh
New Deal democrat
By the way, in addition to nuking the filibuster and adding seats to the Supreme (and lower) Courts, another reform completely within the authority of Democratic Congressional majorities is to do away with *Congressional* gerrymandering.
The Congress itself has authority to determine how Congressional seats are to be allocated. This is stated *directly* in the Constitution, and Chief Justice Roberts called attention to it last year. Before 1842, it was usually “winner take all” on a State-by-State basis. In that year the Whigs finally succeeded in changing the system to “district-by-district.”
A new Congress next year could inaugurate a version of “proportional representation” by allocating seats by the %age of votes for each party in each State, and/or could mandate how Congressional districts are to be drawn in each State.
Baud
@Another Scott:
That’s why I always disagreed with people who say Biden would have lost but for COVID.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud: It would be for or against the nominee, it would be for or against the motion to proceed. They would vote against the motion to proceed.
Baud
@Percysowner:
I didn’t know that. Still, that wouldn’t have made a difference. This would.
New Deal democrat
@dmsilev: Sorry, I thought I did but apparently it didn’t “take.”
Let’s try it an “analog” way: go to The Bonddad Blog. It is the latest entry.
Baud
@?BillinGlendaleCA: True.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Friday night, when these numbers started racking up, I wondered if we’d get to $50M by Monday morning, I typed out that speculation here and deleted it out of superstition
I genuinely wonder what the Rs think when they see these numbers. Michael Steele said on the Joy-less AM Joy that McConnell is willing to trade the Senate majority to lock in the Supreme Court.
@Shalimar: has Romney clarified his position? I know there were reports he was with Murkowski Friday night, but his spokesbot shut it down hard. I suspect McConnell and trump are counting on a lame-duck vote, where I could see Murkowski voting ‘no’ and a lame-duck, bitter Collins voting ‘aye’ because fuck you all I’m off to the tall grass
Baud
@New Deal democrat: Interesting.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
He’s willing to trade other people’s seats? How gallant of him.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Baud: I haven’t seen a story on it in a while, but it used to be CW that the majority of individuals in McConnell’s caucus hate him. That, I think, is how the ACA survived. I don’t know who McCain hated more, McConnell or trump. I suspect McCain would’ve had trouble answering the question, honestly.
debbie
Other than relying on GOP Senators to refuse to hold hearings on the nominee (ha), do the Dems have any options to stop this?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@debbie: IANot a scholar or parliamentarian, but as far as I know: Not really.
New Deal democrat
@debbie: I happen to think that if Biden explicitly promises to sign a bill expanding the Court to 13 members if the GOP goes through with this, it will stop them in their tracks – or at least enough of them.
Omnes Omnibus
@debbie: There are a number of things they can do to delay. They can’t really stop a vote, but they can drag it out.
TaMara (HFG)
@New Deal democrat: And then he should fucking do it anyway. Because Merrick Garland.
narya
@New Deal democrat: My fear about that is that it would motivate R voters who might otherwise stay home. Showing all the cards in your hand might not be the best strategy. I’d rather he say something noncommittal like what we do will depend on the options available to us at any time.
Subsole
@debbie: Nope. Be sure to thank your local Green party.
@New Deal democrat: Disagree. It would need to be at least 15-17. Too easy to gradually escalate/frogboil their way around it otherwise. Hell, bump it to 21. Or 101 for all I care. Give ’em the ENTIRE fucking hammer, make it clear that doing this will destroy the court. Which is the last fingerhold their trashfire party actually has.
Will Dems do that? No. But that’s probably what it would take.
Besides, having more justices makes it less likely that we go thru a Constitutional crisis every time one dies.
WaterGirl
He’s coming out.
Yutsano
@Omnes Omnibus: If they stick to their schedule there are only two weeks before the election. There are five in the lame duck. If Yertle wanted to rush things he could. But I could see the Senate going to 60+ Democratic in 2022 over this.
Leto
I think my issue with Rs coming out with “not before the election” is the potential lame duck period. It’s how we got the USPS poison pill. We know they won’t respect McConnell’s “will of the people” horseshit (nor will he). I don’t think they’ll respect the threat of a court packing because I don’t believe they think Dems will go through with it. Idk, whatever Dems can do to delay/obstruct. I’m more hopeful today than yesterday, and I’ll be more hopeful tomorrow, etc…
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@New Deal democrat:
I think it would have the exact opposite effect, it would give the lame ducks a pious-sounding excuse to vote with McConnell. I’m also highly skeptical that Cunningham, Bollier or Gross want to answer questions about court expansion. Just my gut, I’d be happy to see evidence to the contrary.
Ken
@debbie: You mean options that are both legal and moral, right?
Leto
Joe laying the wood on McConnell and Lindsey. A+
Yutsano
Joe calling out Lindsey over his hypocrisy.
@Leto: Oh thank you. I thought I was the only one listening!
Steeplejack (phone)
@New Deal democrat:
Here’s your link: Bonddad Blog polling nowcast.
Yutsano
Joe will never be a great orator. But oh man he has speechwriters who are really good at knowing what needs to be said!
Leto
@Yutsano: I’m watching it via MSNBC, though the tv feed is about 20 sec behind the YouTube feed. Listening to a grown up speak directly about issues facing all of us. Yes please.
He’s currently speaking about voting, how much early voting is happening, and all I can think about is how POC in NC are having their mail-in ballots rejected at 4x the rate of white voters. UGH.
Yutsano
@Leto: “If Drumpf wins the election, then his nominee should go forward and have a clear hearing. But if I win the election, the nominee should be withdrawn. I should be the one to choose the successor to Ruth Bader Ginsburg!”
That rare anger…it’s welcome when it pops out.
Leto
@Yutsano: yup. He’s also proposing to sit the first black female SC justice, but making sure that says that he engages the Senate with their constitutional “Advise and consent” Part. But that the selection is “mine, and mine alone”.
Now calling Trumpov an “infection that will destroy this democracy.” And that we have to stop it. Like you said, very good writers. I know his voice is in there too but the entire team is nailing it.
A Good Woman
@narya: I am with you on this.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@narya: twitter says the Dems– Pelosi, Schumer, Biden and surrogates were all on message today promoting the connection between the courts and health care, which I think is the smart way to go.
LuciaMia
@Yutsano: He sounds a little winded. Joe, please take care of yourself, for God’s sake.
WaterGirl
@New Deal democrat: I put the link in the comment I am replying to.
Ruckus had trouble once with a link to blogspot, also.
Kathleen
@Yutsano: I think he’s very angry and he wanted to temper it for his speech.
WaterGirl
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Interesting. I read that McConnell’s #1 thing is keeping himself as the #1 Republican, and that he would let the SC nomination go in order to retain his power.
It’s all speculation, either way.
WaterGirl
@TaMara (HFG): That is exactly how I feel.
narya
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I agree that health care is the way to go–it’s an issue that has really shown its durability. And the longer the ACA has been around, the more people realize its benefits.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Good.
Kathleen
@Yutsano: Random thought that popped in my brain – I wonder if any Senate Republicans have indicated to Joe or campaign surrogate that they are wavering in their support for Trump and if that’s what prompted his plea directly to Rethug senators.
WaterGirl
@LuciaMia: Yeah, he scared me with the when he first came out. I think/hope that it was an emotional reaction because of RBG.
New Deal democrat
Another thing: keep in mind that McConnell is devious enough to be willing to withdraw consent for a nomination now, in return for the Democrats refusing to pack the Court after a D win. That way he gets to pocket the current 5-4 majority.
Kathleen
@WaterGirl: I think he’s emotional and angry and he’s keeping it in check as best he can. He did a good job of containing the anger but he was stumbling a little bit more with his words and I attribute that to his controlling his emotions.
Omnes Omnibus
@WaterGirl: You’ll drive yourself crazy if you analyze his health via his voice with every appearance.
Baud
@New Deal democrat:
I don’t think the Dems would pack the court anyway. It’s a big lift and there are too many other things on our plate. It’s only because the hypocrisy is too obvious here that there’s momentum.
zhena gogolia
@Omnes Omnibus:
This is why I don’t watch these things. He’s fine. Watch two minutes of Trump and you’ll calm down. Aaron Rupar has a clip of him calling himself “Donald Prump,” for God’s sake.
Redshift
@New Deal democrat: And while we’re at it, repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929!
We hear a lot of talk about how hard it would be to get rid of the Electoral College, or even do an end run like the Natural Popular Vote Compact, but it would only take an act of Congress to increase the size of the House and give higher population states a bigger share of the electoral vote.
Redshift
@zhena gogolia: And he said we’re going to send men to Nars.
debbie
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
@New Deal democrat:
@Omnes Omnibus:
Thanks.
debbie
@Ken:
lol, yeah. No pitchforks…yet.
Fair Economist
@Redshift: A larger House would have made 2000 right, but Trump still would have won. It doesn’t fix everything.
oatler.
@Redshift:
Speaking as a Nartian I take offense.
taumaturgo
This is what the old and stale conservative leadership is very good at; surrendering before the fight. If the quiver wasn’t empty it is now.
Another Scott
@taumaturgo:
Underpants Gnomes plans never work.
Cheers,
Scott.
taumaturgo
@Another Scott: Desperate times call for extreme measures, not unlike what the GOP did acting in unison to steal a Supreme Court seat, unless the pain and suffering of the people during a shout down raise to a higher level of 6-3 Supreme Court majority for years to come. Someone, please inform the leader that is suicidal to fight with an empty quiver.
Another Scott
@taumaturgo: A “government shutdown” does not shut down the Senate.
http://www.crfb.org/papers/qa-everything-you-should-know-about-government-shutdowns
Pelosi has no power over Moscow Mitch. Gripe at him and the GOP – they are the ones who control the Senate.
Cheers,
Scott.
Ruckus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
They deal and have dealt with mcconnel for longer and he doesn’t strike most people as a complete idiot. Evil yes, complete idiot, no. They’ve also had to deal with him on a personal basis, which they really don’t have to do with trump. They depend on him, not trump for committee assignments. He is effectively their boss. And I’d bet he doesn’t let them forget that. So yes, I’d expect them to like him less.
Ruckus
@narya:
This would be smarter politically. And leave him room which he might just need.
Ruckus
@WaterGirl:
Worked fine today.
BTW I remember something, something but not what it actually was.
Chris Johnson
@taumaturgo: What’s got you ‘quiver’ minded? Hanging out with your real friends who are ‘quiverfull’ hard right Christianist Republicans? Aren’t you the nym that a lot of people have pied, around here?
All about how Pelosi is dooooooomed and the word that comes to your mind is ‘quiver’. Funny, that. Fuck off, friend :)
germy
@Chris Johnson:
Nancy Pelosi was on TV this morning. She refuses to rule out impeaching Trump or AG Barr to stall SCOTUS process: “We have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss now.”
Chris Johnson
@germy: Oh yeah? Heh. Alright, fair enough then.
patrick Il
@New Deal democrat:
Why do that? Take the 13.
tam1MI
It was suicidal to vote for Jill Fucking Stein in 2016, but you did it anyway.