Consequences by David Anderson| September 22, 202011:31 am| 151 CommentsThis post is in: Open ThreadsFacebookTweetEmail Open thread
If Trump gets his nominee confirmed I think that will mean a majority of the Supreme Court will have been appointed by Presidents that lost the popular vote. And at least three of them confirmed by a Senate that represents a minority of the population.
“Consequences” – what a perfect theme for the next 2 months! There will definitely be consequences. I emailed Tillis, Burr and Schumer yesterday. I just donated to several candidates (some repeats, some new), and I’m going to write more Vote Forward letters today. I was doing stuff before last Friday, but I kicked up into another gear over the weekend!
trump would drop his sword quicker than you can say his name.
Sad face. Luckily I know this scene really well.
@Yutsano: It works if you click through to the YT web site itself. It’s just blocked from embedding, I think.
@JPL: tweet from @therealdonaldtrump:
Me, your favorite prescedent, knew he was Bluffing!!
You can still click on the sentence that says “Watch this video on YouTube”, which lets you watch this video on YouTube.
Trump and MoscowMitch will seat the next justice before the election. I pray the landslide for Biden is so big Putin’s boys won’t be able to hack it all as a Trump win.
Here is to a Democratic Senate majority next term and a soon to be 13 member Supreme Court.
@guachi: We either pack the court or start restricting its reach…
@Bruce K: @Amir Khalid: Sheesh. It’s like a guy can’t whine in peace anymore. :P
@Benw: What? lol
Any legitimacy left in the Supreme court should be GONE if they ram through another justice.
This may already have been mentioned on another thread, but Bloomberg is reported to have ponied up $16M to pay off Florida felons’ fees and fines.
Personally, I think the solution to Florida refusing to let people know how much they owe is to pay an outrageous sum (based on an estimate of what the probably amount is, then pay two or three times that much).
@Ksmiami: we don’t have the Senate.
We may well win the Senate despite election detabilization, but if we do I fully expect Republicans to challenge the closest Senate elections that tip it over. Likely on ground of the chaos they themselves created. The SC will affirm that Senate majorities created by the disputed senators are not valid until this is all sorted out. This will be aimed at delaying things until a midterm do-over election, amidst an ongoing recession.
@Ksmiami: Yes, but keep packing out of public discussion until November.
If the appointment is either done or looks like a done deal, it greatly lowers the stakes for anti-choice voters (they “won” and now wouldn’t need to hold their nose to vote Trump).
Threatening court reform raises them again.
Absolutely doesn’t mean we don’t do it, just keep it quiet for now.
@Bupalos: We will have the Senate. It’s not going to be close. That’s why the GOP is using the raw power they have now – they know they’re going to lose. They see the early voting numbers and who is more motivated. They’re going down fighting and we have people telling us to wring our hands and cry in response because all is lost. No. Fight harder.
McConnell and his minions are establishing a new rule for our legislative branch. They are saying all prior norms and customs are hereby relegated to the trash, and that anything the Constitution doesn’t forbid, the party in charge should, and anything less would be a dereliction.
When the Democrats gain their trifecta of control, they should do the following:
1). Abolish the filibuster;
2). Grant statehood to DC and Puerto Rico;
3). Expand the House so that district size will correspond, as near as possible, to the least populous state;
4). Expand the Supreme Court by at least four new justices and likewise the district courts;
5). Reenact the Voting Rights Act, including same-day registration, and stripping courts of their right to rule upon it.
6). Pass every bit of legislation that’s the GOP’s worst nightmare.
7). Their salty tears will be delicious.
I think it’s important to understand that a “close” election for polling purposes isn’t remotely a close election for other purposes. In a state with a million votes, a 50.5-49.5 result (a 1 percent margin) is 10,000 votes, which while theoretically subject to recounts in some states, is not going to be changed by any recount process. North Carolina had 4.4 million votes cast in the Senate race in 2016; a 1% margin would have been 44,000 votes; even a 1/2% margin would have been 22,000 votes. So actual opportunities for challenges are pretty rare.
@Richard Guhl: Thank you.
West of the Rockies
Sounds good. Let the Republicans go back to whining about tan suits and bare arms.
Funny how they freaked out about Michelle’s bare arms but have no problems with Melania’s bare breasts.
I hope McConnell feels his impending loss of power like a killer bout of diverticulitis, gas, nausea, and constipation all rolled into one. May it eat his toxic core from within and contribute to his ruin and misery and eventual oblivion.
Sister Golden Bear
“Of course you realize, this means war!” using Chicago ways.
The Moar You Know
@Richard Guhl: Puerto Rico has not shown any signs of a majority wanting statehood and that’s not likely to change. In addition, in spite of Trump’s Paper Towel Aid program, the GOP is pretty popular there.
I’m with the rest of your suggestions. But forget about that one. It’s a Pandora’s Box full of all kinds of potential problems.
The Moar You Know
@West of the Rockies: I just came off a two-month plus fight with diverticulitis. Most of this fucking summer. You get all the other stuff you mentioned automatically with the infection; it’s a mandatory bonus pack that nobody wants.
Goku (Amerikan Baka)
That makes me feel a lot better and even though you weren’t responding to me, thanks
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@The Moar You Know: I was just listening to Rick Wilson’s podcast (yeah, yeah, I know) and he argues that Puerto Rican community in FL is far more pro-life than in generally acknowledged, and Rick Scott spent a lot of time and money building up good will in that community. I’m glad Dems are trying to turn the SC fight into a fight about health care
@Bupalos: The Constitution says each House of Congress gets to decide who gets seated. Or not.
THIS is how it’s done!
Goku (Amerikan Baka)
@The Moar You Know:
I really don’t understand that. PR was blatantly neglected by the GOP and the Trum admin after Hurricane Maria. They still haven’t recovered completely, 3 years later
@The Moar You Know: So how about the Virgin Islands?
This is exactly why I pretty much stay pissed at the Democrats.
Consequences? AYFKM?!? No, the Dems are too chickenshit to spell out consequences.
There are a number of things they could do, starting with shutting down the government if their demands aren’t met. But they won’t do any of them.
West of the Rockies
@The Moar You Know:
Oh, I am acquainted with that condition. I keep my weight down and am religious about taking Probiotic yogurt.
West of the Rockies
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Do we don’t have some Puerto Rican girls who are just dying to meet Joe? He could bring a case of wine…
@The Moar You Know: Re GOP popularity in PR. Cite? I’m kinda wondering how anyone would know. I thought they had local parties? They don’t vote in national elections where there’d be national party polling.
Do you mean that they tend to be more conservative? So do African-Americans, especially elderly. That doesn’t make them Republicans.
But I’ll admit I’m speaking from ignorance here. What am I missing?
@West of the Rockies: But then there would be a FoxNews exclusive about how Biden is messing and fooling around with them like they used to.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Because, among other things, they understand that the actual electorate would not respond the way you think they should
One of the differences between the parties is that we believe that the government can do good things and they don’t. Shutting down the government isn’t a threat to Republicans. Their only complaint is that it wouldn’t be permanent.
Lindsey Graham pledges GOP will support Trump’s nominee, despite not knowing who nominee is
What a worm.
@The Moar You Know: I still like the idea of breaking up DC into several pieces, and admitting each piece as a state.
There’s no way that idea would get any traction, more’s the pity.
@germy: No one ever said Lindsey was a top.
@zzyzx: Have you noticed that Trump’s threatening to use Federal troops against some of the states in the event of a close election or of protests in the wake of election night?
Shutting down the government between October 1 and when the counting’s done strikes me as an excellent idea right now. If ICE and CBP and all don’t have funds, they can’t show up in Wisconsin or Nevada or wherever and try and mess with the counting.
You know how RBG responded to the question “When do you think there will be enough women on the court?” with “When there are nine of them”.
Assuming Trump names a woman, plus Kagan, and Sotomayor, then Biden only needs to name six more women to an expanded Supreme Court to meet RBG’s criterion?
@The Moar You Know: Hold a referendum on the choice of statehood or independence.
Villago Delenda Est
@Sister Golden Bear: Upfist! Upfist! Upfist!
@Richard Guhl: It’s already on the ballot. The framing of the question is one way or the other from what I understand.
Funding shutdown hurts a lot of ordinary Americans, from the millions on actual Federal payrolls, on. And I’d bet anything Trump’ll find a way to justify steal funds from something to keep his lil’ jackbooted buddies going.
As has already been said, this is the key difference between GOP and Democrats. That so many assume it means we’re spineless fails to grasp that we try to act in ethical ways — and not just to act out to make our followers feel better.
Puerto Rico will and should do what they want to do. I’m in favor of statehood if the people of Puerto Rico clearly want it–I think it’d be good for them on balance. But independence might be better for them than the status quo, too.
The important thing is not to think of Puerto Rico as a proxy or pawn for US mainland Democrats, because it’s not.
@CaseyL: He raised that money from others and it doesn’t count towards the 100 million he’s promised. He is targeting paying the fines of Blacks and Hispanics who owe less than $1500. His analysts have figured out they are the most likely to vote for Biden.
I’m glad Democrats are focusing on the far Right court taking away peoples health care but there’s lot of popular positions they’ll block/undercut- environmental protection, laws cracking down on white collar crime and corruption, labor laws, protections for workers and consumers.
The economic impact of a far Right court is probably more damaging to an average person than anything else they do. The far Right justices aren’t just anti-choice. They’re affirmatively pro-plutocrat.
Voting rights, for example. The Roberts court has been disastrous for voting rights. The next court will be much, much worse on that.
@Kay: Totally agree with you, but it’s possible that Biden’s people have calculated that health care is the issue that gains the most people and loses the fewest among people not already willing to crawl over broken glass to vote for him.
[Admittedly a knee-jerk reaction to your post]
Waiting and watching
Just these 34 seconds should guarantee that no one votes for him. No one. But I’m dreaming.
I don’t know about you, but aside from the 200,000 dead people (nobody under 18, so it’s okay), my life and the lives of everyone I know have been upended, in some cases destroyed. My lifelong career of higher education is under existential threat. But it affects virtually nobody.
@West of the Rockies: I see what you did there.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@zhena gogolia: 200,000 dead and about 7 million more who may or may not be dealing with after-effects, and a pre-existing condition, we don’t know about yet.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I made my husband watch that clip. He almost vomited. People aren’t watching it! They’re hiding their heads in the sand.
@germy: Maybe one of the low-quality hires had a trophy shop make a fake Nobel for Trump, so he really thinks he won. I mean, it’s possible!
First Debate topics conveniently forgets about the virus
Chris Wallace, moderator of the first presidential debate, has selected topics for the 9/29 debate – The Trump and Biden Records, The Supreme Court, Covid-19, The Economy, Race and Violence in our Cities, The Integrity of the Elections
Hopefully, race and violence is just an unfortunate error..
@Betty Cracker: No one in the Democrat-controlled media has mentioned his Cy Young Award, either.
@Richard Guhl: There’s one on the ballot in PR this election
ETA: I see Yutsano beat me to it.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@zhena gogolia: the Biden media people are better than they get credit for, cause the snarky LP stuff appeals to political junkies and professionals, but I’m sue they’ll be on this. LP has given them a rough draft.
James E Powell
By every measure we use for deciding elections in the United States, Puerto Ricans voted for statehood in 2012 and 2017. When they do it again this November, the usual people will give the usual reasons why it doesn’t count.
Independence has appeal. I feel that way about California.
@zhena gogolia: It’ll be in an ad soon enough. I hope Trump keeps doing the deranged hate rallies, every day, in every swing state, from now until 11/3. I don’t think the fascist Don Rickles routine will win over new voters. It sucks that 40% or so of our fellow citizens are mindless cult followers, but I don’t think Trump is winning over new converts, so that’s something.
@germy: What is an unsolicited ballot? And what are the tells that someone is voting for Biden?
@JPL: I’m still upset that Chris Wallace thinks it’s okay to frame a topic Race and Violence in our cities.
@germy: I swear I just heard speculation if it is someone like Handmaid Coney Barrett (someone already on the Federal Bench, already “vetted,” previous Senate confirmation hearing), McConnell and Graham might skip hearings and go straight to a vote. Anybody else read/hear that?
@Felanius Kootea: And then add more justices for when they’re back in session. Period. Make this a Pyrrhic victory for the GOP
@Betty Cracker: FWIW, Don Rickles himself was supposed to be a very sweet man whose insult humor was always an act. “If I meant it when I insulted people, it wouldn’t be funny,” he said once. The audience was always in on the joke. Don’t compare Hair Furor to Rickles.
How about some levity?
James E Powell
This is true but it is also a very hard thing to get voters to grasp. An argument on abortion rights has the advantage of clarity.
West of the Rockies
Yup, you and hueyplong. Just a random hot thought… Are creativity and talent and a conscience the difference between a couple of narcissists like Jagger and Trump? I would way rather have a bunch of Micks and zero Donnies if it’s a choice.
James E Powell
For a very large percentage of people and nearly every Republican, if the virus did not affect them, it did not affect anyone.
@Kay: That’s exactly right. Sherilyn Ifill made a good point yesterday; she said the Court is already packed. That’s why I think it’s important that people understand that adjusting the size of the Court is about making sure that our government answers to us. It’s been done before.
Congress can pass legislation to fix the voting rights that were gutted in 2013. It even has bipartisan support! Biden will sign it and then a conservative SC will strike it down – as they will any progressive-leaning legislation that makes it thru the Senate. That’s not Democracy. That’s tyranny by the minority.
Thread about talented cartoonist and film designer:
When editorial cartoon work dried up, he did design work for Hollywood:
“He designed the Catina scene in Star Wars. The Nostromo, the doomed space ship in Alien. All of the first Conan the Barbarian, a film he art directed. The space ship in Close Encounters. And the time-traveling DeLorean in Back to the Future. Just to name a few.”
Wow. What an amazing body of work.
The Guardian has a gallery of some of his achievements.
WASHINGTON (AP) – President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden will face off on the Supreme Court, the coronavirus pandemic and race and violence in the nation’s cities next week when they meet for their first presidential debate.
The nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates on Tuesday announced the six topics for the first face-to-face event scheduled for Sept. 29 in Cleveland. The topics were selected by the debate’s moderator, Fox News’ Chris Wallace, and will each be the subject of 15-minute “blocks” in the debate.
The topics are: “The Trump and Biden Records,” “The Supreme Court,” “Covid-19,” “The Economy,” “Race and Violence in our Cities,” and “The Integrity of the Election.”
@Brachiator: Interesting that they focus on the movie work.
His editorial cartoons were brutal and brilliant. Maybe this is why the major publications would eventually stop hiring him.
@Betty Cracker: Howling with laughter. I guess I did need a touch of levity.
@germy: I don’t think I can bear to watch the debates.
@Quinerly: Was she actually vetted? McConnell vetted no one through in Trump’s term. Just rubber stamped.
@Betty Cracker: I’d love a better moderator.
Except that people at those agencies will be deemed essential workers and won’t have to stay home.
@Betty Cracker: Pengie don’t care? Oh pengie don’t care!
Now that we finally have the Democratic bases attention on judges let’s just barrage them with information :)
If I had to pick one to explain I think I would use Shelby County, the case where the Roberts court gutted the Voting Rights Act. It unfolded in this amazing way- Justice Roberts and the rest of the Right wing judges declared racism was over, gutted the Voting Rights Act, and they had barely finished speaking when half the southern states passed new and racist voting restrictions.
They weren’t just wrong. They were immediately proved wrong.
I haven’t seen that, but the legislative calendar is such that they probably don’t have time to actually do hearings if they want to vote before the pre-election recess. Trump is scheduled to name his nominee on Friday, which leaves (counting on my fingers) 39 days between then and the election.
I’d also mention that, in normal cases (which, I know, this is not), the vetting for a Supreme Court nominee is much more extensive than for a lower-court nominee. There’d usually be a complete FBI investigation, for instance, as was the case for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. That takes weeks, and is supposed to be completed before the hearings.
@randy khan: So take overpowered ersatz police force. Add in anger from working with no guarantee of pay. Put in election blender. Hit frappé!
@Kay: Charlie Pierce likes to refer to that ruling as The Day of Jubilee.
Just spitballing, but as Texas has been getting closer and closer to turning blue, splitting it up (particularly since you really couldn’t split the big cities into separate states) might not result in a net gain for the Republicans in the Senate.
@randy khan: Maybe the idea is that it avoids a total loss.
@randy khan: OK, then let’s sit around and wring our hands and say there’s nothing we can do. Or we can TRY a few things and see if some of them work.
Shhh. Don’t tell them.
I’m not a crier and I cried. All that work and sacrifice. People got their heads bashed in for that law, and that’s just the state violence that we saw. God knows what was done to them outside the view of the public, in police stations and jails. And this clueless, arrogant twerp who has no lived experience with any of that just gutted it and left it on the floor. African Americans paid dearly for that law. And Justice Roberts just threw it away, based on his poorly reasoned and half ass personal theory of racism. There’s no law in that thing. It’s Justice Roberts dumb opinion about a whole range of..things. It’s crap. Garbage, low quality work.
@germy: wtf Race and Violence in our Cities
Integrity of elections really
The list apparently was decided by the RNC
@Kay: And they knew they were wrong when they decided.
I am as white as that poodle that won at Westminster a few years back. But I have black grandchildren.
This is why I don’t talk to my brother any more. He isn’t a racist because he likes Asians and North and South Americans fine, he just doesn’t like black people. Not all black people, just the ones that want to work for him or run for office.
I grew up with him. We had the same parents. We went to the same schools. I don’t know what happened but something did because he is awful. We both grew up in the Jim Crow South. Maybe it goes back that far.
@Richard Guhl: this is a great list! It just needs a few more things added to it:
Just not to respect the sacrifice. Not to respect what they KNOW. To substitute his silly, coddled Federalist Society blathering for their whole lived experience. It’s amazingly arrogant.
And wrong. As we all saw, almost immediately. I think it’s his legacy. Nothing else he as done with have as much import and he got it wrong.
What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?
@germy: LOLOL I’d like to see them try to break up TX and FL. That would be funny. For DC…I’ve always thought the argument should be if DC is too small to be a State, then any State with a smaller population than DC either has to merge with a neighbor (so, like Wyoming has to merge with Montana or Idaho and form, say Idahoming, and it becomes the State of Dakota rather than North and South, and New HamMont for Vermont…I might be willing to make an exception for the original 13 States though, based on a historical significance argument). Either that or DC gets Statehood. Or any of said States can revert to being a US territory.
@Kay: Yes, that pretty well sums up Shelby.
@randy khan: If they split up Texas they’d presumably do it in a heavily gerrymandered way, pack’em and crack’em etc. Maybe you get one super-blue state and several red ones. And of course there would be no population restrictions on how you split them up, so you could create a lot of rotten boroughs with almost nobody in them to pack the Senate.
I guess more people know and can relate to the movies. Might also be easier to assemble this kind of gallery.
I have been looking at a couple of his obituaries. Interesting guy.
Biden needs to bait Trump into announcing that he has a health care plan at the first debate and bait him into lying about when it will be released (in 2 weeks or whatever)
Then the Dems need to create a big count-down clock for the GOP Health Care plan reveal and make a big fucking deal about it. Tick tock. And when the date passes with no reveal turn the whole thing into a giant campaign ad.
@Eljai: We can at least address the things they used to knock them down last time; keep ’em running.
For instance, the VRA was gutted on the grounds that it was unfair just to require federal pre-clearance of significant changes to voting for certain states. So require it for all states. That’s fine with me
Often, as with the ACA, the law gets attacked on procedural grounds that are easy to fix if you can actually legislate–the only reason it works is that Congress or the President is already actively hostile to the law.
If they do that, the ads write themselves – what are they afraid of? What are they hiding? Do they not want us to know that their nominee for Ruth Ginsburg’s seat on the Supreme Court is a member of the radical sect that was the inspiration for Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale? And so on and so forth.
Anyway, Trump was riffing off on how great it’s going to be that Kamela Harris will be exposed as incompetent in the hearings. Sometimes these people believe their own lies and it backfires on them.
Remember right after the Obama inauguration? The Congressional Republicans were off on some retreat, and Obama offered to come and talk with them about issues – they said sure… so long as it was televised. They were probably rubbing their hands together with glee, all of them, one of him. So we all got to be treated to a live performance of Obama stealing their lunch money one by one while they all stood around with their thumbs up their asses wondering what had happened. Those jokers had repeated that nonsense about how Obama was helpless without a TelePrompter so often that they’d started to believe it.
I don’t have a lot of confidence in these topics: The Trump and Biden records should be massively in favor of Biden, but we’re probably going to get a bunch of “Biden why did you write a racist crime bill huh?” and so on.
“Race and Violence In Our Cities” is a really good opportunity for Biden, but it’s going to be full of yapping by Trump and the questions will be centered on ‘why haven’t you condemned the violence’, because that’s where the media has gone recently.
More seriously, all of these should be in favor of Biden. But they won’t, because the moderators won’t stop Trump from lying, and Biden will have to spend most of his time pushing back Trump lies and Trump-friendly framing disguised as “taking the middle ground”.
ETA: And it’s moderated by Chris Wallace, the guy who really really really wants Trump to win but can’t quite squander every one of his principles at a time. So we’re going to get extremely mild Trump pushback and really hard questions for Biden, because that’s how this shit rolls.
American Samoa? sheesh..
I don’t think Texas is going to break up any time soon. Plus it also means that the rural areas will get even smaller compared to the large populations in the city. They are basically going to split their own votes.
@Kay: I dont think I’ve ever disagreed with you before Kay, but I truly believe that Robert’s overturned the VRA because he is a racist and because he; like Rheinquist; has little to no regard for the fundamental rights of anyone not white male. He covers his racism and misogyny with the thinnest veneer of comity and respect for the court as an institution as he undoes any/everything that stands in the way of a return to the Lochner era. Zero disagreement on you opinion that his work product is crap, poorly reasoned or low quality because Robert’s and his brethren such as the virgin mayor of keg city write shitty opinions.
I’m assuming there’s all kinds of evidence of crimes by Trump that’s being held until he’s voted out.
If any of that evidence is strong proof of being a Russian asset (i.e. extensive money-laundering) or specific voting/counting tampering , does there exist a legal justification to consider any or all of his lifetime appointments illegitimate and impeachable?
...now I try to be amused
@Kay: The fact that the Roberts court had their error demonstrated to them and they have done nothing to repair it makes me side with “evil” over “stupid”.
No one is going to split up Texas or Florida. The notion is ridiculous. Just because some right wing talk show host floats the idea doesn’t mean it is possible, especially with Dems controlling any part of the government. Just not gonna happen.
In any event, if you split up Texas into three logical states with east Texas centered around Houston, north Texas centered around DFW, and south/west Texas centered around San Antonio, Austin, and El Paso, there is a decent chance that 2 out of the 3 would end up Dem anyway.
I’m not sure how you would even do that. It would mean every single damn GOP politician in the state of Texas agreeing to diminish their authority and power by 1/3 as each would only be left with a small rump state to govern. Simply not ever going to happen. The state is way too inter-dependent when it comes to things like electricity, water, highways, universities, etc. For example, north Texas would be left without any flagship state universities.
@…now I try to be amused:
I don’t think they’d be in a position to repair it. Roberts has been in a snit over the VRA since he worked for Reagan. It OFFENDS him on some level.
Talk about a spectacular backfire though. No sooner had John Roberts declared racism no longer exists than 15 states showed us it still exists. They made a fool out of him. I actually would have said they were LESS racist than they proved to be, had I guessed.
Here’s a counterintuitive possibility:
Shelby County v Holder. That’s not a coincidence. I laugh when conservatives whine about “divisive” opinions. They used the first AA US President and the first AA AG to gut the Voting Rights Act. It doesn’t get anymore divisive than that. It was a “fuck you” by the little twerp.
James E Powell
Similar situation. Three of my six siblings are Trumpistas. One of them shared the same bedroom until I moved out at 18. We served as each others’ best man. The three who stayed in Ohio are all very well-off suburbanites with no apparent economic anxiety. Two of them have children who would be in serious trouble if pre-existing conditions allowed coverage to be barred. Somehow, all three morphed into hateful bigots. Our parents were nothing like this. I have no idea how this happened.
That wasn’t a backfire. Who cares if they made a fool out of him–his side won! They grabbed the power!
I could see that. Then Democrats will have to do more education of their voters on how the far Right justices rule consistently against ordinary people and their economic interests. Roberts always sides with the money people. Always.
Now that we have their attention :)
@cmorenc: Your counterintuitive scenario is a replay of the 1937-1940 Supreme Court.
@randy khan: This. If you break Texas or Florida up into 5 states, you might wind up with 3 GOP-majority new states, and 2 Dem-majority new states; net GOP gain, zero.
@James E Powell:
Those measures suck. You’re going to impose statehood on Puerto Rico by the same means that we had Donald Trump imposed on us? It’s not going to go well. It’s pure imperial behavior.
James E Powell
A useful guide to what we should expect would be the Matt Lauer interviews of Clinton & Trump.
I’m sick of the whole thing. I’m sick of the adoration of them and how they’re held up as these amazing genuineses. They’re smart lawyers. There are a lot of smart lawyers. Let’s take these folks down the right size. I saw the sainted and super duper brilliant Justice Scalia at a forum once. He was incredibly rude to a law student who asked a question and he got the question WRONG. He either didn’t understand what the guy asked or didn’t hear it all. His answer was wrong and delivered with such sneering rudeness I sat back in my seat. They all need to be taken down a peg, IMO. We created monsters.
@Kay: it’s a fuck you he’d been itching to deliver since he was a virgin. He agreed with Rheinquist that Plessy should have been upheld. An Ari Berman excerpt in Political does a nice summation – and John Lewis had his number from jump:
@cmorenc: I think this is really the most likely scenario. You can really divide SCOTUS decisions into four categories:
Culture war issues (abortion, gay marriage, LGBT rights, bullshit religious rights)
Political power: (Voting rights, gerrymandering, Citizens United)
Corporate power (unions, neutering the regulatory state, health care)
Criminal procedure and civil rights (Habeas corpus, warrantless wiretapping, online privacy etc.)
I would expect a SCOTUS with any sort of self-preservation instinct to hold off on going too far out on a limb on the culture war stuff but go all in on the preservation of conservative political power and corporate power stuff but stop short of dismantling the ACA. So less voting rights, more gerrymandering, less union rights, less environmental and health regulations, etc. But avoid touching the red hot stove that would be abortion or completely dismantling of ACA.
“Giving rights”. Because he owns them. Who raises these people? Did no one ever check them coming up and tell them they’re not the be and the end all? Who is he to give anyone anything? They already have them, John. All you are is the scribe they hire to draft the rules to enforce them. Their servant. The “rights” are already THERE.
James E Powell
In other words, you don’t have any arguments on the merits.
And it’s actually to the contrary. In 2016, the majority of people who vote for president chose Clinton. In 2012 & 2017, the majority of people who voted on the statehood question chose statehood. Why should that be disregarded?
I love Ari Berman, BTW. I think he makes voting rights approachable for regular people.
Josh Marshall is another one. Talking Points Memo has had a focus on voting rights for a long time, well ahead of when it was a big topic in D circles. I think they brought it into mainstream Democratic politics- out of the legal realm and into the public realm.
If you break up Texas, into red and blue components, it also becomes a non-factor in the presidential race as its electoral votes would split pretty evenly. I’ll take that/
As loathsome as I find Steve Bannon, he did make one fairly accurate observation about Dems vs. Rs.
Rs consistently go for head shot kills, while the Dems have pillow fights.
If the Dems don’t amend the Judiciary Act if they take power again, they’ve learned nothing at all from the Trump years.
@lowtechcyclist: Won’t work. A “shutdown” does not actually mean that all federal agencies cease functioning. The military is still funded and active. Same for federal prisons, the FBI and…yes…ICE and CBP.
A president actually has somewhat wide discretion as to how a shutdown work. So of course he’d shut down the pieces that could be used to slow down his rat-fuckery.
Bottom line: The reason Dems aren’t doing isn’t because they’re wimps. It’s because this is a bad idea.
Take Texas off the table and the last GOP electoral college victory would have been Reagan in 1980.
Manchin getting mad is such a great thing. This is twice in a short time, too. He was livid over them fucking with the postal service. Good! Post office, judges. That he can’t stand.
Exactly. He will cut off all the money for blue issues like food stamps medicare and medicaid reimbursements, environmental protection fire fighting in the west, and shift money to all the GOP stuff like farm supports, and give IOUs to stuff like defense contractors. The Dem House has zero ability to govern the course and impact of a shut down.
Burning down the country to spite Trump is a very bad idea.
You’re missing the point here: the point that lowtechcyclist and others of his ilk are hellbound bent to keep hammering is that the Democrats are DOIN IT RONG, no matter what the issue. Actual power or politics or outcomes be damned, they’re just not enacting performative outrage the way the Tragically Left are demanding, so the obvious conclusion is that DEMOCRATS SUCK.
I’m reminded of a cartoon I saw once, which was captioned, “Nature and Nurture both agree: It’s all Mom’s fault!” Similarly, left-wingers and right-wingers agree: “Everything is always the Democrats’ fault!”
James E Powell
I agree there is a fairly consistent set of people who blame Democrats for everything. But a lot of the frustration comes from Democrats not using the tools that Republicans used to neutralize the Obama administration. It may be that there are good reasons for that, but it is still frustrating.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Jon Marcus: Perhaps, but we are headed for a shut down because the GOPers are to busy fighting themselves to agree on a budget.
Fuckin’ penguins. Like they own the beach.
@James E Powell: As the guys at the Bulwark are saying (and I still can’t believe I’m quoting any old-school Republicans on this), for the modern GOP, norm-busting is part of the appeal for thuggish political moves. For Democrats, not so much. Can you fault them for that? Sure, I guess. But as Adam tirelessly points out, at the moment, Democrats control one-half of one-third of the federal government right now. Here’s a thought – why not wait to slag them for not using the dominant party’s power tactics till they’re *actually* the dominant party?
@James E Powell: In order to use the tools of the Senate to your advantage, you have to be in the majority. It’s been almost 10 years since Democrats held the majority. This is something the disgruntled democratic voters willfully ignore when they complain about the Party. A fair share of them are also woefully ignorant about how government works.
@lowtechcyclist: Shutting down the government means a lot of employees and contractors do not get paid. It is real pain to real people who are already dealing with a lot in this pandemic. You want to make it a thousand times worse. For what?
Especially when he decides to nominate Ivanka.
James E Powell
I’m not slagging anyone, but I understand the frustration.
What it comes down to is that Republicans can be completely corrupt and incompetent, but their voters will still turn out for them because they are white supremacists fighting for the survival of a racist country. The McConnell Era has been defined by the Republicans testing how far hateful bigotry can go to bind voters to them. We have yet to see if there is a limit. To our surprise and maybe even to their surprise, no act of corruption, immorality, incompetence, or evil has produced a significant drop their support. 200,000 dead makes no difference to them. Amazing, no?
@taumaturgo: You really are the most willfully ignorant mofo around, aren’t you? You may never get tired of your “corporate centrist Dems!” schtick, but by God, I sure do. You sound like the would-be working class (white, male) heroes out here in the Colorado Democratic Party who were just so INCENSED that, contrary to their plans for the great unwashed, the *actual* working class of all sexes, creeds, and colors went for Biden over Bernie. The nerve! To vote for the “corporate centrist Dem” over the Great Patriotic Socialist Leader whose mighty bellows would surely reduce Mitch McConnell et al. to pitifully writhing grub status! Those poor benighted souls, surely they must be the mere victims of false consciousness, practiced upon by those evil Corporate Centrist Democrats! Otherwise they would rise up and vote en masse for the Great Patriotic Socialist Leader!
@James E Powell: So what are you saying here, exactly? Do you think there’s one overriding principle at stake for *all* Democrats that would unite them all to exploit and manipulate power the way white supremacy now is that overriding principle for Republicans? If so, tell me what that is, and whether all Democrats are prepared to say, “X is the end that justifies any and all means to achieve, no matter how venal, corrupt, illegal, unethical, or immoral those means are.”
Jim, Foolish Literalist
they won elections, they won the House in 2010, then they won the Senate in 2014
it’s not magic and trickery, they win elections
Kinda totally agree with your replies and challenges here. And it was fun to read.
James E Powell
@Richard Guhl: The House or Senate can’t refuse to seat a duly elected member(Powell v. McCormick, 1969). They can expel a member after seating them.
J R in WV
The Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965, a very long time before Josh and Ari became news folks. Before I was allowed to drive, much less vote.
anything the Constitution doesn’t forbid, the party in charge should [do], and anything less would be a dereliction
This is the corporate doctrine of fiduciary responsibility applied to politics. It part of what causes publicly-owned corporations to so often make sociopathic choices. In a two-party system, it is a recipe for a positive-feedback escalation into civil war.