Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Killjoybear

US Politics: Ruthless ambition

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Isn't that the way these polls 'normally' were? Republicans used to always do better in LV versus RV; however, there is some modest evidence to suggest that Biden was doing not-as-bad when RV was flipped to LV (in some cases better even, based on his strength with older people).

It could be that the WaPo poll has some weird demographic make-up that explains it (too few old people maybe)

Usually that's like 1-3 points though.  For Florida it's 5 points, which is definitely one of the highest I've seen.  Particularly when Biden's Florida coalition is definitely stronger with reliable voting groups than, say, Clinton's coalition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

And when the Lochner Court strikes all these laws down for reasons?

It is harder for the SC (even a right-wing court) to strike down laws than you might imagine.  And even then they would strike down a provision rather than all of the law.  The law has its own rules which can be bent but cannot easily be broken. 

To give you an example, the Court ruled 5-4 in Rucho gerrymandering poses political questions beyond the reach of the Courts. It's a terrible decision. 

But here's what the syllabus of the decision says: "The Framers also gave Congress the power to do something about partisan gerrymandering in the Elections Clause. That avenue for reform established by the Framers, and used by Congress in the past, remains open."  [https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-422_9ol1.pdf]

You can agree or disagree that gerrymandering is a big political problem (or a big reason that Dems lose which is not exactly the same thing).  But the Court has given the green light for Congress to fix this problem.  

That's why I would readily trade a conservative SC for legislation that meaningfully fixes immigration, gun reform, climate change and broad political reform.  We will soon have a Dem president and Dem congress.  They need to act with dispatch to abolish the filibuster and fix problems this country has been grappling with for the last 30-40 years.  

Edited by Gaston de Foix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DMC said:

What was Obama supposed to do?  Launch a drone strike at her house?

He should have done what Trump did with Kennedy.  Woo, back-channel and cajole through clerks and friends.  The Dems could easily have replaced RBG in 2012-4.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

He should have done what Trump did with Kennedy.  Woo, back-channel and cajole through clerks and friends.  The Dems could easily have replaced RBG in 2012-4.   

Do we definitively know that this didn't happen? She clearly did not want to retire and forcing her out - after a lifetime of service - would not have been a good look (even if for the right reasons, hindsight being 20/20 in 2020).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

It is harder for the SC (even a right-wing court) to strike down laws than you might imagine.  And even then they would strike down a provision rather than all of the law.  The law has its own rules which can be bent but cannot easily be broken. 

To give you an example, the Court ruled 5-4 in Rucho gerrymandering poses political questions beyond the reach of the Courts. It's a terrible decision. 

But here's what the syllabus of the decision says: "The Framers also gave Congress the power to do something about partisan gerrymandering in the Elections Clause. That avenue for reform established by the Framers, and used by Congress in the past, remains open."  [https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-422_9ol1.pdf]

You can agree or disagree that gerrymandering is a big political problem (or a big reason that Dems lose which is not exactly the same thing).  But the Court has given the green light for Congress to fix this problem.  

That's why I would readily trade a conservative SC for legislation that meaningfully fixes immigration, gun reform, climate change and broad political reform.  We will soon have a Dem president and Dem congress.  They need to act with dispatch to abolish the filibuster and fix problems this country has been grappling with for the last 30-40 years.  

Gerrymandering is a moderate problem, severe in a few state cases such as Wisconsin, but it works together with various other Republican methods of stamping down democracy. There's been suggestions that Congress could limit the jurisdiction of the SC on certain types of laws, so say for health-care law as an example. Like court packing it is certain to blow up things further. Not that I'm arguing against any of these methods. It feels like we have no choice, now, or will after the new justice is seated.

And if the filibuster is not removed that is exactly the scenario where McConnel has won. That is why John Roberts is so deferential to Congress by the way. It adds legitimacy to the court's rulings, yet constantly favors conservative outcomes. And note, he was not so deferential to Congress to put a large hole in the ACA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Week said:

Do we definitively know that this didn't happen? She clearly did not want to retire and forcing her out - after a lifetime of service - would not have been a good look (even if for the right reasons, hindsight being 20/20 in 2020).

Forcing is a strong word and not one I used.  He didn't have the power to force her - but encourage, yes.  I don't know that it didn't happen (as you rightly ask) although none of the public reports about RBG's decision to say on (including ones in which her family collaborated) make no mention of any WH contact or discussions.  That's their version.

We will have to wait for the second volume of Obama's memoirs to be know for certain.  But I doubt he did anything because I would expect some form of public report at least now.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Gerrymandering is a moderate problem, severe in a few state cases such as Wisconsin, but it works together with various other Republican methods of stamping down democracy. There's been suggestions that Congress could limit the jurisdiction of the SC on certain types of laws, so say for health-care law as an example. Like court packing it is certain to blow up things further. Not that I'm arguing against any of these methods. It feels like we have no choice, now, or will after the new justice is seated.

And if the filibuster is not removed that is exactly the scenario where McConnel has won. That is why John Roberts is so deferential to Congress by the way. It adds legitimacy to the court's rulings, yet constantly favors conservative outcomes. And note, he was not so deferential to Congress to put a large hole in the ACA.

The best long-term mechanism to curb the SC is pro-democracy reforms and a mandatory retirement age for federal judges. 

The best weapon the conservative judges have to overturn national legislation is federalism.  But where Congress is granted power under the Constitution it is very hard to make a federalism argument.  

Edited by Gaston de Foix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, S John said:

Just saw on Fox that recent Iowa and Georgia polls have the candidates tied. Considering that Trump won Iowa by 9 points and Georgia by 5, that’s like, bad news if you are Trump right?

I was taking to my dad about this last weekend. I am sure there is still a path for Trump to cobble together a win here, I wouldn’t be all shocked by that. But I just feel in my gut that he has not won over many n00bs during his presidency and that he’s going to lose more voters than he gains vs. 2016. My dad, who gets ALL of his info from FOX believes in a hidden cache of Trump voters, that the polls are biased, that people are not being honest in them, and that Trump will enjoy a blowout victory. I guess some of that might be true, but talking purely gut level here - I really don’t see it.  I might be blinded by my distaste for Trump, but I cannot picture these hordes of the converted who did not already vote for him the first time. The fact that he’s tied in a place that he won by 9 and outright losing in several other 2016 states that he won should serve as evidence that this is true, but since 2016 it’s now impossible to convince a conservative person of anything using a poll.

Very anecdotal stuff below:

I am incredibly encouraged by the fact that I have seen TWO - only two - Trump/Pence signs in ATL, and one of them was on a highway median, so I’m not sure if that one even counts. Contrast that to 2016, when the damn things were like herpes.

However, a drive down West Paces Ferry in Atlanta (one of Atlanta’s wealthiest neighborhoods) had two large Biden signs and numerous signs supporting Jen Jordan (a state Senator - D). And 2016, most of it was Trump/Pence. I don’t think the $5 million homes have new owners, I think this bespeaks enthusiasm on the part of the Democrats who live there and a lack of Republican enthusiasm. There was one Kelly Loeffler sign, so pretty sure that it hasn’t been every home sale was to a Democrat. Just the fact of the one Loeffler sign, no Perdue signs, and no Trump/Pence signs says a lot in that neighborhood.

I was also really pleased to see the level of support for Jen Jordan - she’s been focused on practical local issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gaston de Foix said:

He should have done what Trump did with Kennedy.  Woo, back-channel and cajole through clerks and friends.  

Like Week said, you have no way to know that he didn't try to encourage her privately.  Now, we all know he's not gonna be aggressive as Trump simply based on one has respect for the court and the constitution and the other does not.  And in Obama's case, he'd want to keep any efforts to influence Ginsburg private (as would she and her family, btw).  Permanently.  We're not finding out through his memoirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw an article in the Guardian where Beto talks about the efforts being made in Texas (specifically the Rio Grande valley). One thing that sticks out is how little enthusiasm there is among Texas latinos for Biden, and yet he managed to be competitive there. Seems like a lost opportunity a bit.

Since his race against the zodiac killer 2 years ago, there have been 2m new registered voters in Texas, presumably driving some of Biden;'s gains combined with Covid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, DMC said:

If your assertion is that the US is descending into authoritarianism because of the stupidity of the American electorate, your unit of analysis should include governments that are authoritarian.  Limiting your sample to the most democratic countries is just circular logic.  Regardless, even if you were just to compare the US to western European companies, the US is still far from unique in the rise of authoritarian sentiment among electorates over the past quarter century.

Hum, I can see how Citizens United slowly crawls into your political thinking. But no, companies are not part of the EU electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gaston de Foix said:

a mandatory retirement age for federal judges. 

The Dems might be able to get away with this for lower courts, but the SC would undoubtedly strike down any attempt to put a retirement age on their own tenure simple by citing Article III Section 1.  Even a liberal court would strike it down.

5 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Hum, I can see how Citizens United slowly crawls into your political thinking. But no, companies are not part of the EU electorate.

:P.  As a real American and true capitalist I often conflate countries and companies.  After all, the former are merely a tool for the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched a nice interchange between Dr. Fauci responding to Sen. Rand’s bullshit. Rand attacked Fauci for praising NY, “NY has the world’s highest death rate”. Fauci said “you always do this, NY got hit hard first and made some mistakes but right now they are managing extremely well and have a very low rate of infection”. Rand: probably because in addition to the people who got Covid-19, 33% of the population has immunity because they have caught coronavirus colds and N.Y. has herd immunity. Fauci: there is no immunity to Covid-19 from catching a coronavirus cold and the rate of infection in NY is 22.2% and if you think herd immunity is achieved with 22.2% you are alone in that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Very anecdotal stuff below:

I am incredibly encouraged by the fact that I have seen TWO - only two - Trump/Pence signs in ATL, and one of them was on a highway median, so I’m not sure if that one even counts. Contrast that to 2016, when the damn things were like herpes.

However, a drive down West Paces Ferry in Atlanta (one of Atlanta’s wealthiest neighborhoods) had two large Biden signs and numerous signs supporting Jen Jordan (a state Senator - D). And 2016, most of it was Trump/Pence. I don’t think the $5 million homes have new owners, I think this bespeaks enthusiasm on the part of the Democrats who live there and a lack of Republican enthusiasm. There was one Kelly Loeffler sign, so pretty sure that it hasn’t been every home sale was to a Democrat. Just the fact of the one Loeffler sign, no Perdue signs, and no Trump/Pence signs says a lot in that neighborhood.

I was also really pleased to see the level of support for Jen Jordan - she’s been focused on practical local issues.

I guess the urban / rural divide is the most obvious factor. I live in a small town in Virginia that seems pretty Biden friendly, but I do not have to go far out of town before it is Trump sign central. And lots and lots of them too, not just a few. Back in the day Raidne described Virginia (paraphrasing here) as NOVA surrounded by Jason Stackhouse (if a True Blood reference doesn’t date that comment I don’t know what will!) 

Thats a little bit of an oversimplification but it’s largely true. The urban parts of Virginia are blue, the rural parts are solidly red. The ONLY reason Virginia is blue is the weight of the DC suburbs has finally overwhelmed the conservative nature of most of the rest of the state. This is the dynamic at play everywhere, Virginia just was one of the first to flip. The same thing is going on in Georgia, North Carolina, Texas, and Arizona. The growing urban areas are steadily gaining ground on the traditionally conservative areas. I think this also goes a long way towards explaining the no holds barred approach the Republicans have been taking in recent times. Clock’s ticking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

The Breonna Taylor Grand Jury decision will come out any moment from now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In contrast to the terrible WaPo polls of FL and AZ, Marquette (another good firm) did a national poll and came out with Biden 50, Trump 40, third party 5, undecided 5.  Biden +10 is always good to see, and Biden's lead in national polls is back up to +7 in the 538 average after falling down a bit below that this past week.

Obviously, it's a national poll and those are increasingly irrelevant as the election gets closer.  But still, if the race stabilizes at Biden +7 (or even Biden +6) nationally, then he has a lot of paths to victory.  If it falls down to Biden +5 or less, then Trump's ability to steal the election one way or another goes up dramatically. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anecdotally, NE IL and Southern WI are awash with Trump signs. Granted it seems there are far fewer Trump signs than in 2016 but I see almost no Biden signs. The Trump voters I interact with are the very opposite of the supposedly "shy Trump voter," they are loud and proud about it, so the Biden voters could just be keeping their heads down about their preference.

I know I personally would not openly flaunt my preference for Biden, not in this contentious atmosphere at least. Does that make me a coward? Yeah probably, but I really don't think signs, flags, or bumper stickers convince anyone to vote or switch their preferences, especially at the presidential level. Donations do a better job IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...