US Politics: Weimar, Washington, Whining, Bush II

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, butterbumps! said:

Is there anything the dems can do about this though?   I mean short of threatening to win the senate and confirming an avalanche of leftists to the court?

Depends on how hard they want to go. There is really absolutely nothing they can do to stop confirmation. They might be able to slow it down, but they cannot stop it.

They can, however, refuse to fund the government. They can refuse to pass another bill in the House ever again. There are some other things that are possible along those lines, but those are some of the ones that come to mind. There may also be some arcane parliamentary tricks, but chances are good that they won't apply and they won't be enough. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

8 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

I appear to be wrong, and McConnell is wanting to move fast. I think that's the wrong move electorally so I'm all in favor.

No, this cynical, and tactically the right move for him.

Like I said, I don't think another court pick will make four more years of utter destruction and chaos worth it for the part of the Republican voters Biden needs to make inroads with. The low education, Bible thumbers may or may not be swayed by it. I don't think it would (the pardon my French dumb fucks were voting for him either way). The more educated true Christian value voters (for lack of a better word) are probably upset enough over the kids in cages and his pandemic handling.

For McConnell this is risk management. He gives his senators in need a lifeline, with stop the Democrats from packing the courts, and he doesn't need Trump anymore.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

9 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

Is there anything the dems can do about this though?   I mean short of threatening to win the senate and confirming an avalanche of leftists to the court?

Abduct a bunch of GOP senators, thus stop any confirmation by force. Alternatives?

Find a magic spell that gives them a soul and a conscience.

Those are the most non-violent methods I can think of.

[DMC]

16 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

Is there anything the dems can do about this though?

No.  Shutting down the government isn't gonna change anything.  And the Senate can still confirm Trump's nominee with the government shutdown.

[Fez]

1) Fuck

2) I think Gorsuch is principled enough to not allow blatant election tampering. Beyond that though, outside of very specific issues, him being the swing justice is going to suck.

3) I think its a mistake for McConnell to try pushing a justice through before the election. Both because a) the attack ads right themselves, and b) he could use the looming floor vote as a way to juice Republican voter turnout. Better to start the process now and have a floor vote in the lame duck.

4) No way will Democrats be able to stop this. They can go to the mattresses, slow things to a crawl, refuse to fund the government, threaten all manner of retribution after the election. No way does any of this stop the confirmation train.

5) I can't even begin to see 4 Republicans stopping this from happening. Maybe they'll block an Amy Barrett-type nominee from getting the nod behind the scenes. But a mainstream (for Republicans) nominee is absolutely getting through.

6) Fuck

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

46 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

I don't know what Jace said, I have it on ignore. But you're clearly conflating terms. Liberals are the problem. They aren't LEFT enough.

Stopped here. This is batshit, and it validates literally everything I've said. Good luck bitching from the cheat seats while accomplishing nothing. Nothing. NOTHING! 

And Jace pointed out how you have spent years here being hostile to people who don't agree with your strident views. 

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

No.  Shutting down the government isn't gonna change anything.  And the Senate can still confirm Trump's nominee with the government shutdown.

It's a major threat and the government shutdown was one of the only things that cause Trump's approval to drop. It won't stop them from confirming the nominee. It may be a threat to Trump, however.

[butterbumps!]

14 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

Depends on how hard they want to go. There is really absolutely nothing they can do to stop confirmation. They might be able to slow it down, but they cannot stop it.

They can, however, refuse to fund the government. They can refuse to pass another bill in the House ever again. There are some other things that are possible along those lines, but those are some of the ones that come to mind. There may also be some arcane parliamentary tricks, but chances are good that they won't apply and they won't be enough. 

 

1 minute ago, DMC said:

No.  Shutting down the government isn't gonna change anything.  And the Senate can still confirm Trump's nominee with the government shutdown.

Yea I didn’t really think there was a viable nuclear option.  Do you think dems winning can undo the damage?

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 minute ago, Kalibear said:

It's a major threat and the government shutdown was one of the only things that cause Trump's approval to drop. It won't stop them from confirming the nominee. It may be a threat to Trump, however.

Which could also hurt the democrats.

Who’s polling on the generic ballot had been dipping these past weeks already.

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

It's a major threat and the government shutdown was one of the only things that cause Trump's approval to drop.

That's because Trump was blamed for causing the shutdown, because he did.  In this case it'd be the Dems causing the shutdown.  The loser of the 95-96, 2013, and 2018-19 shutdowns were all the party that instigated the shutdown.  Granted, all three times it was the Republicans, but still, it's fair to assume the blame will go to the Dems.

2 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

Yea I didn’t really think there was a viable nuclear option.  Do you think dems winning can undo the damage?

They'd have to get the Senate and pack the courts.

[Fez]

So something I did not realize is that if Mark Kelly wins the AZ senate election he actually gets sworn in on November 30 rather than waiting until the new Congress. Because its actually special election and those are the state's rules for it.

Which may move up McConnell's timeline for a confirmation vote (if he's even considering waiting until the lame duck right now). I doubt there's 3 Republicans either who would block a vote, but safer to do it when there'd need to be 4.

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 minutes ago, Fez said:

2) I think Gorsuch is principled enough to not allow blatant election tampering. Beyond that though, outside of very specific issues, him being the swing justice is going to suck

Oh hell yes. 
He hasn’t been as terrible as Scalia, but I think Trump at this point will pick the most extreme candidate he could find to appease his base.

I’m talking we need to start gays in cages extreme.

[butterbumps!]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

They'd have to get the Senate and pack the courts.

Oh yea sorry I meant that as a given.  Does court packing actually undo this and is it the best or only option to hope for?   And does doing so give the court less legitimacy?  

[IheartIheartTesla]

There are a couple of Republican senators who have said they wouldnt confirm a nominee so close to the election, but I havent counted them and dont know if there are enough to stop the process.

At any rate, RBG passing is sad, and on Rosh Hashanah doubly so.

[Mindwalker]

Did you know that Dems in VA want to execute babies?

[A True Kaniggit]

3 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Did you know that Dems in VA want to execute babies?

What are you talking about?

All Dems want to execute babies.

And then eat them.

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

Does court packing actually undo this and is it the best or only option to hope for?   And does doing so give the court less legitimacy?  

Well, if you add two justices to the SC it helps undo this, yes.  There's also a lot of other reforms a Dem Senate could enact to help alleviate the GOP's court-backing at the circuit and district level as well.

As for packing the SC hurting its legitimacy, probably, but really this is a reflection on how the Senate has completely politicized and polarized their role in confirming justices.  It's frankly, and constitutionally, not the court's fault what Congress decides to do with it, but I bet SCOTUS would take a hit in public trust, sure.

8 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

There are a couple of Republican senators who have said they wouldnt confirm a nominee so close to the election, but I havent counted them and dont know if there are enough to stop the process.

Murkowski is on record saying that, yes.  I don't think Romney is but I'm sure he'd join her.  As for Collins, there is this:

But there's gonna be tremendous pressure for her to miraculously change her mind on that and from the people that fund her campaign.

I'm not aware of any other GOP Senator on record saying that.  And that's still only three even if Collins decides to essentially retire by standing firm.

[IheartIheartTesla]

Yeah, I thought the count stood at 3 at best, so that leaves the at-risk Republicans like Gardner and Ernst that pressure has to be applied against (Gardner being a better bet, coming from a blue state)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well, if you add two justices to the SC it helps undo this, yes.  There's also a lot of other reforms a Dem Senate could enact to help alleviate the GOP's court-backing at the circuit and district level as well.

As for packing the SC hurting its legitimacy, probably, but really this is a reflection on how the Senate has completely politicized and polarized their role in confirming justices.  It's frankly, and constitutionally, not the court's fault what Congress decides to do with it, but I bet SCOTUS would take a hit in public trust, sure.

Murkowski is on record saying that, yes.  I don't think Romney is but I'm sure he'd join her.  As for Collins, there is this:

But there's gonna be tremendous pressure for her to miraculously change her mind on that and from the people that fund her campaign.

I'm not aware of any other GOP Senator on record saying that.  And that's still only three even if Collins decides to essentially retire by standing firm.

Ah, but you see, if the election results are in dispute, then we don't know if we have a change in presidents, and there fore we need nine justices to decide the outcome, so Trump has to appoint someone!

Seriously, fuck her. I used to carry some water for her, but she's straight trash to me at this point. 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

so that leaves the at-risk Republicans like Gardner and Ernst that pressure has to be applied against

This is another argument to not waiting until the lameduck session.  If Collins loses, she probably will stand by her previous commitment.  I doubt Gardner or any other at-risk GOP Senator would too if they're voted out, but why risk it when currently they're all suckling at Trump's teat to try and get reelected?