US Politics: Weimar, Washington, Whining, Bush II

[DireWolfSpirit]

Just a reminder for anyone who wasn't aware.

SCOTUS will be hearing oral arguments (In a matter of only weeks from present) from a group of red state's, in their case seeking to strike down The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).

It's likely to presume just days after the election.

And there is now ONE LESS JUSTICE to block the evil conservatives from throwing tens of millions off their healthcare after they lose the health insurance marketplace and lose the protections to millions with preexisting conditions.

We have come to a very dangerous place.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/21446256/ruth-bader-ginsburg-death-supreme-court-obamacare-case

[Fragile Bird]

Oooh, US government offices, like the White House, are receiving packages containing ricin. And they’re coming from Canada.

You’re welcome!

[Mindwalker]

Tramp just announced he'd fill the seat. He sounds sick. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the 2 WH staffers who tested positive last week. "It will be a woman... UNLESS...(rambling)"

[Lollygag]

This is something city people often aren't aware of and it's important to keep in mind when trying to guess who will do what. It's not as simple as calculating whether they'll win, lose, or retire. This is actually not a new phenomena at all (goes back as far as I can remember) though it has gotten worse. About Lamar Alexander's absurdly reasoned argument for not convicting in impeachment despite retiring...

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/31/21116689/trump-impeachment-lamar-alexander-witness-bolton

Quote

To put it another way, many Republicans exist in a social world where criticizing Donald Trump is an act of cultural treason. Bucking Trump doesn’t merely risk their congressional seat, but also their ability to find future employment and live comfortably in their communities even after retiring. Alberta describes profound fears of Trump’s “cult,” of “harassment of their families, loss of standing in local communities, [and] estranged relationships.”

...

First, it’s an example of the dangers of what political scientist Lilliana Mason calls “mega-identity” in politics: Partisanship has come to be so closely linked to other parts of people’s identities, like their religion and racial self-identification, that it has become a kind of master stand-in for cultural belonging.

In a country defined by two mega-identities, defeat for your side isn’t merely a political loss, but an existential threat to your entire way of life. When Republicans feel this way about politics, then it makes sense that they’d see a vote against their president as an act of deep betrayal — and treat the person responsible accordingly, even in private life. This kind of extreme identity polarization poisons politics in ways often invisible in day-to-day observation that, nonetheless, contribute to the fundamental dysfunction of our political system.

The second thing is that it shows the ways in which the modern right depends on its own form of “political correctness.” We’re often told that the modern left is in some ways uniquely censorious, particularly on issues relating to race, gender, and sexual orientation. “There’s no right-wing equivalent to this kind of ideological policing toward people sympathetic to right-wing causes,” as the journalist Cathy Young recently put it.

Alberta’s explanation of Alexander’s vote shows us that this is simply not true. In conservative cultural spaces, even a very long right-wing record like Alexander’s doesn’t immunize you from the consequences of violating the community’s political standards. Stalwart conservative legislators are, according to Alberta, terrified of what people in their communities think of them. Imagine the ways in which many ordinary people in red areas, who have far less financial and social capital than the Lamar Alexanders of the world, feel about expressing anti-Trump sentiment!

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

46 minutes ago, DMC said:

Of the GOP incumbents that could be lameducks, definitely don't see McSally, Ernst, Daines, or either of the Georgia senators - hence why I mentioned Gardner or Tillis.  Of sitting Senators, can't think of anybody.  I mean...maybe Lamar Alexander?  Anyway, like I said last night, that's another reason to fill the seat before the election.

I'm not sure it really matters at this point. There will be a 6-3 SC unless a few people do the right thing, which they probably won't. And if Biden wins and Dems hold both chambers, welcome to a brave new world my friend. 

[Mindwalker]

NOW he's getting back to topic (I swear he was even less coherent than usual) and said: "I actually like women much more than I like men." Aaand.. off again we go, Hunter Biden, "Blackstone".... It's morbidly fascinating. "Where is Hunter?"

OMG, now he's asking the crowd: "Would you rather have a woman or a man?" They cheered louder for a woman, so he's asking again: Who would rather have a MAN on the SC?" LOL. "It will be a woman... we haven't chosen yet"

"Last time we got a lot of votes from Bernie, because Bernie is all about trade..."

[Fez]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm not sure it really matters at this point. There will be a 6-3 SC unless a few people do the right thing, which they probably won't. And if Biden wins and Dems hold both chambers, welcome to a brave new world my friend. 

But what good is a 6-3 court if it only lasts a few months and then there's a 6-5 court with Roberts as swing again; or a 6-7 court even? I think the biggest priority for McConnell right now is trying to ensure that Trump wins and/or Republicans keep the Senate. And if that means delaying the nomination to the lame duck, I think that's what happens; and, stemming from that, if Biden wins and Democrats take the senate, I could see him trying to strike a deal. Giving up the seat in exchange for no filibuster reform or court packing; which is a deal that, unfortunately, I could see at least some senate Democrats going along with.

And in related news,

Selzer's the best. And an incumbent at 42% at in mid-September is a real bad spot to be. Especially with the crazy amount of cash that Greenfield, and every other Democrat, has raised the past 22 hours. 

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

This is something city people often aren't aware of and it's important to keep in mind when trying to guess who will do what. It's not as simple as calculating whether they'll win, lose, or retire. This is actually not a new phenomena at all (goes back as far as I can remember) though it has gotten worse. About Lamar Alexander's absurdly reasoned argument for not convicting in impeachment despite retiring...

City people?  Really?  If you're referring to my mentioning of Lamar Alexander, I was just trying to throw out one name and thought of him as someone who was retiring AND has shown some semblance of reasonableness - albeit not for quite a long time.  I don't actually think he'd flip.

2 minutes ago, Fez said:

But what good is a 6-3 court if it only lasts a few months and then there's a 6-5 court with Roberts as swing again; or a 6-7 court even? I think the biggest priority for McConnell right now is trying to ensure that Trump wins and/or Republicans keep the Senate. And if that means delaying the nomination to the lame duck, I think that's what happens; and, stemming from that, if Biden wins and Democrats take the senate, I could see him trying to strike a deal. Giving up the seat in exchange for no filibuster reform or court packing; which is a deal that, unfortunately, I could see at least some senate Democrats going along with.

And in related news,

I think you're vastly underestimating the myopic opportunism that informs not only Trump, but especially McConnell.  He will take the 6-3 majority and hope it helps ensure Trump stays in office by any means.  Also, if he was really committed to protecting his vulnerable incumbents, he wouldn't sabotaging any chances at a stimulus deal - let alone funding the fucking government.  

Great news for Greenfield, that's encouraging.

[Lollygag]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

City people?  Really?  If you're referring to my mentioning of Lamar Alexander, I was just trying to throw out one name and thought of him as someone who was retiring AND has shown some semblance of reasonableness - albeit not for quite a long time.  I don't actually think he'd flip.

 

 

I haven't seen that post.

[Fez]

11 minutes ago, DMC said:

I think you're vastly underestimating the myopic opportunism that informs not only Trump, but especially McConnell.  He will take the 6-3 majority and hope it helps ensure Trump stays in office by any means.  Also, if he was really committed to protecting his vulnerable incumbents, he wouldn't sabotaging any chances at a stimulus deal - let alone funding the fucking government.  

Look, I hope you're right. I think a confirmation before the election helps Democrats, and I think it guarantees retribution in January if Democrats win.

That's why I think the smarter move for McConnell is to push it to the lame-duck to try to protect his caucus and use the seat as a carrot to dangle to conservative voters. It also keeps his options open, if Republicans win in November, they can safely do whatever; and if they lose, he can consider a deal like I said (or have the vote anyway and hope Democrats can't Manchin/King/etc. on board with anything).

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

36 minutes ago, Fez said:

But what good is a 6-3 court if it only lasts a few months and then there's a 6-5 court with Roberts as swing again; or a 6-7 court even?

No, you tell them enjoy the 9-6 court. And the expansion of every court in the entire federal judiciary. With new courts too. 

All that's left is dismantling laws designed to suppress the vote and the Republican party is dead. 

[DMC]

41 minutes ago, Fez said:

use the seat as a carrot to dangle to conservative voters

I still don't see this as a credible premise - at least why it'd be superior in turnout than simply banking the seat. 

Overall, I don't think McConnell cares what Dems may do if they win.  Exhibit A:  The Garland gambit.  Most people - almost certainly McConnell - expected Hillary to win.  But he was still willing to risk the adverse consequences of  and Dem reaction to hijacking Obama's constitutional power in the hopes that he and Trump would get to fill the seat.  It's not his MO to take the risk-averse approach you're suggesting.  I also think he definitely has zero interest in engaging in any type of deal like you described.  Not even sure how such a deal would work in practice.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Nevermind I got deepfaked

[Fez]

41 minutes ago, DMC said:

I still don't see this as a credible premise - at least why it'd be superior in turnout than simply banking the seat. 

Overall, I don't think McConnell cares what Dems may do if they win.  Exhibit A:  The Garland gambit.  Most people - almost certainly McConnell - expected Hillary to win.  But he was still willing to risk the adverse consequences of  and Dem reaction to hijacking Obama's constitutional power in the hopes that he and Trump would get to fill the seat.  It's not his MO to take the risk-averse approach you're suggesting.  I also think he definitely has zero interest in engaging in any type of deal like you described.  Not even sure how such a deal would work in practice.

Well, a 6-3 court maybe causes some abortion-only voters to decide they don't need Trump any longer. Probably not many of them, but I don't know the data. At the same time, I do think the hypocrisy of having the vote before the election does cause some additional independents to swing to Democrats.

As for Garland, it was the smart play for McConnell. I'm sure he expected Clinton to win, but if that happened he'd be no worse off than if Garland got the seat. And there was always the chance that Trump would win, in which case the rewards would be so great. There also the exit polls showing just how many voters back in 2016 had the Supreme Court as their top priority, and Trump won them. So McConnell holding the seat may have directly helped Republicans in the election. But the calculus is different this time.

As for any deal, obviously it would be handshake only. But the filibuster itself is essentially just a handshake deal too; they can still exist. You're right that McConnell probably wouldn't go for a deal, since it risks splitting the Republicans for the 2022 midterm. But the point is that waiting until after the election lets him keep his options open; and it probably helps for the election itself.

Like I said, I hope McConnell doesn't think this way; but there is the danger he does. Its all about the election for me, and anything that helps Democrats is what I want at this point. And that's a hasty, rammed through nomination that they can attack.

[Zorral]

Far more concerned about this, which somebody here said couldn't happen, because you know law and cops and stuff.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/19/us/politics/trump-supporters-early-voting-virginia.html

People with guns doing this, very soon:

Quote

A group waving Trump flags and chanting “four more years” created a commotion at a polling location in Fairfax, Va. A county official said some voters and staff members felt intimidated.

.... In an unnerved electorate, where concerns about voting rights and safely voting amid the coronavirus pandemic are at a fever pitch, the demonstration outside of a polling place served as preview of a likely contentious election season, and how groups may be utilizing tactics that rattle or even deter voters over the next six weeks.

The disruption came as President Trump has repeatedly sought to undermine confidence in the upcoming election, spreading falsehoods about voting by mail and declaring the election “rigged” before any votes have even been cast.

The demonstration originated from a “Trump Train” parade that began in nearby Prince William County and featured Tommy Hicks Jr., the current Republican National Committee co-chairman. The event was set to end in the parking lot of the government center, which was also serving as the polling location on Saturday. Some of the people who attended the parade walked over to vote. Others gathered outside and began chanting, “four more years, four more years!”

Sean Rastatter, a vice chair at the Fairfax County Republican Committee who was at the polling location, said that he did not think any actions came close to voter intimidation, and that many of the discussions from members of the group were with journalists....

 

[DireWolfSpirit]

Any notions that McConnell would delay a confirmation one moment longer than possible are waaaay over thinking it.

They will ram a new justice on that court as quickly as possible.

[DMC]

21 minutes ago, Fez said:

Its all about the election for me, and anything that helps Democrats is what I want at this point. And that's a hasty, rammed through nomination that they can attack.

I think you're kidding yourself if if you think much of anybody is going to be motivated to vote Biden because the GOP rammed through a confirmation before the election.  The people that would mobilize are already thoroughly mobilized against Trump.  By the same token, btw, I don't think it's going to move the needle much one way or another for potential Trump voters on if he confirms a nominee before or after the election.  Almost everybody has already made up their minds.  And the people that haven't are very likely to be low information voters which mean the SC is not going to be a high salience issue for them.  This is why you ram through the confirmation now when you still have leverage with at-risk GOP incumbents rather than rolling the dice on what they'll decide in the lameduck session if they lose reelection.

12 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Far more concerned about this, which somebody here said couldn't happen, because you know law and cops and stuff.

Uh, no, I never said that couldn't happen.  Typical complete mischaracterization coming from you.  What I said was fantastical is armed militia seizing and/or destroying ballots, not voter intimidation at precincts.  The GOP, or the white supremacists that compose the current GOP, have literally been doing the latter since the 15th amendment was ratified.

[Fury Resurrected]

3 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Just a reminder for anyone who wasn't aware.

SCOTUS will be hearing oral arguments (In a matter of only weeks from present) from a group of red state's, in their case seeking to strike down The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).

It's likely to presume just days after the election.

And there is now ONE LESS JUSTICE to block the evil conservatives from throwing tens of millions off their healthcare after they lose the health insurance marketplace and lose the protections to millions with preexisting conditions.

We have come to a very dangerous place.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/21446256/ruth-bader-ginsburg-death-supreme-court-obamacare-case

This is not entirely accurate-

the lawsuit doesn’t go after the entire ACA, it targets the individual mandate specifically.

also, while they begin hearing arguments, they will not be ruling until next year on this case.

 

Not that this isn’t still an important moment and the composition of the court is of terrible importance- but this case will not strike down the ACA and whether Republicans fast track a nomination or not we will have a new justice ruling on that case

[Fez]

18 minutes ago, DMC said:

I think you're kidding yourself if if you think much of anybody is going to be motivated to vote Biden because the GOP rammed through a confirmation before the election.  The people that would mobilize are already thoroughly mobilized against Trump.  By the same token, btw, I don't think it's going to move the needle much one way or another for potential Trump voters on if he confirms a nominee before or after the election.  Almost everybody has already made up their minds.  And the people that haven't are very likely to be low information voters which mean the SC is not going to be a high salience issue for them.  This is why you ram through the confirmation now when you still have leverage with at-risk GOP incumbents rather than rolling the dice on what they'll decide in the lameduck session if they lose reelection.

All on the margins. I'd take a thousand extra voters in PA if that's all its worth. Every bit counts. I think it's more than that though. Not from the hypocrisy angle, but from the "Republicans just confirmed the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade" angle. It's no longer a hypothetical, it happened. I could see that netting some extra votes from women who were going to go third-party or sit out the election.

 

In other news, I finally got around to checking my mail, and my ballot arrived. Mailed on Wednesday, showed up on Saturday. Pretty good actually. So I voted today. Feeling pretty excited about that. Now I just need to make sure the ballot safely gets back to the election board.

Voted against a state redistricting amendment that sounds all good government but would really just strip redistricting power from the state legislature now that Democrats finally have unified control. Voted for a vehicle property tax break for disabled veterans. And voted for 6 different county bond issues. Plus for all the Democratic nominees of course.

The only part I didn't love is that while the instructions clearly say that you can ignore the witness requirement if you don't feel its safe to have one (which I don't), the envelopes are the regular ones that say multiple times that you must have a witness present. I hope it doesn't confuse anyone and prevent anyone from voting. Now granted, there are no restrictions on witnesses; it can be a spouse, family member, roommate, anyone. It's just single folks like me who live alone that run into an issue during these pandemic times. 

[karaddin]

I feel like this person and a whole bunch of the replies are living in a reality almost as far from mine as the hardcore Trumpists and Qs.

Appreciation for Biden's campaign is one thing, individual tastes vary of course, but the overweening pride and certainty of victory combined with contempt for people that are fearful of an authorization seizing power is really a different story.

Not sure how these types account for the potential impact of those intimidation crowds that will pop up everywhere now the first ones are getting attention. Like Zorral I'm sure the guns will follow.