Jump to content
A Horse Named Stranger

US Politics: A Sinematic view on voting rights and the filibuster

Recommended Posts

Since the grand turtle of the senate has announced Republican resistance to the aforemanchined proposals on voting rights (surprise!), let's see how this plays out. I'd think Manchin would be ok with an exception to his filibuster stance there, let's see what Sinema does.

Also, wanted to be the first to have a Sinema themed title. And old thread was past page 20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to the holiday issue, I tend to agree with Fury Resurrected and Mlle. Zabzie that it would be much better to increase general vacation time than create new holidays.

And in regard to having a holiday for 9/11 -- that is just creepy to me. Please note that even though Memorial Day celebrates the sacrifices of military personnel, it quite deliberately is NOT linked to the date of a specific battle or other military event. And we celebrate MLK day on his birthday, not the day of his assassination. The original Lincoln holiday (now folded into "President's Day") was also specifically put on his birthday, not the day of his death.  If we're going to have a holiday celebrated with parties, fireworks, or other fesitivities, it shouldn't be deliberately linked to the date of some horrible tragedy, IMHO.  It's very appropriate to celebrate the end of slavery with a holiday like Juneteenth. It is NOT appropriate to "celebrate" 9/11. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yeah "celebrating" 9/11 feels wrong I think a holiday is the wrong way to go for that. If we are going to add a holliday it should defintitley be election day. We really do need election day as a federal holiday.

Edited by Darzin
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Darzin said:

Yeah "celebrating" 9/11 feels wrong I think a holiday is the wrong way to gor for that. We do really need election day as a federal holiday.

9/11 should be treated similarly to 12/7. Not a holiday, but a day of remembrance. 

I agree Election Day should be a national holiday. The day after the Superb Owl should be a holiday before 9/11. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I'd think Manchin would be ok with an exception to his filibuster stance there, let's see what Sinema does.

This is an interesting question, but I'd still lean towards Manchin being the tougher get to support an exception for a voting rights bill.  On the one hand, it is true that Sinema has been even more resolute and absolutist in retaining the filibuster publicly - to the point she advocates reinstating it for nominations.  OTOH, Sinema actually is a cosponser of S1 (Manchin is the only Democrat that's not) and never has required a "compromise" to gain her vote like Manchin is doing now.  Moreover, the leadership has a lot more power to persuade Sinema to comply compared to Manchin, both in the form of carrots and sticks.  Most people agree that Manchin is just about the only Democrat left that can win in West Virginia, meaning there's little to no leverage to get him to comply.  This is certainly not the case when it comes to Sinema and Arizona.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roberts, Kavanaugh and Barrett have seized the Supreme Court for now

Quote

An overriding question going into the session that began last October was whether Roberts would still wield significant control, after former President Donald Trump appointed Barrett to succeed the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and created a 6-3 conservative-liberal bench.

But the latest developments suggest a possible 3-3-3 pattern, with Roberts, Barrett and Kavanaugh at the center-right, putting a check on their more conservative brethren who regularly push to overturn precedent.

The trio were part of majorities that rejected yet another challenge to the 2010 Affordable Care Act and took only a small step -- over complaints from other conservatives -- in favor of a religious entities that would discriminate against LGBTQ individuals.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch on Thursday in the Philadelphia case argued for reconsideration of a 1990 Supreme Court case so that religious believers might more readily win exemptions from anti-discrimination mandates and other government regulations.

I think the blocs are more fluid than that account suggests, but still.  If you asked someone a couple years ago - or even when Barrett was confirmed - who was going to vote with Roberts and who was going to vote with Alito/Thomas, most would have it backwards.  Barrett with Alito/Thomas, Gorsuch with Roberts, and Kavanaugh somewhere in between.

The other interesting thing is Alito has emerged as basically the leader of the competing bloc with Roberts (Thomas remains particularly..eclectic to be described as the leader).  Considering they came on the court virtually as a package deal, that's really quite fascinating.  If only the Senate Dems rallied around Harriet Miers before the conservatives revolted against her, we would be spared of Alito.  Ah, to have a time machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DMC said:

The other interesting thing is Alito has emerged as basically the leader of the competing bloc with Roberts (Thomas remains particularly..eclectic to be described as the leader).  Considering they came on the court virtually as a package deal, that's really quite fascinating.  If only the Senate Dems rallied around Harriet Miers before the conservatives revolted against her, we would be spared of Alito.  Ah, to have a time machine.

I'd thought you'd use that to talk to Hugo Chavez to fix the 2016 election, not the one in 2020. :D

Share this post


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

The original Lincoln holiday (now folded into "President's Day")

Preisdent’s day? What’s that?

Oh! You mean Washington’s Birthday :P

Share this post


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

This is an interesting question, but I'd still lean towards Manchin being the tougher get to support an exception for a voting rights bill.  On the one hand, it is true that Sinema has been even more resolute and absolutist in retaining the filibuster publicly - to the point she advocates reinstating it for nominations.  OTOH, Sinema actually is a cosponser of S1 (Manchin is the only Democrat that's not) and never has required a "compromise" to gain her vote like Manchin is doing now.  Moreover, the leadership has a lot more power to persuade Sinema to comply compared to Manchin, both in the form of carrots and sticks.  Most people agree that Manchin is just about the only Democrat left that can win in West Virginia, meaning there's little to no leverage to get him to comply.  This is certainly not the case when it comes to Sinema and Arizona.

Ryan Grim's theory is Manchin wants to run for governor of WV in 2024.  He can win if there are no progressive candidates running third party against him out of spite for not ending the filibuster.  So that's the stick.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko5Ywins23Q

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SpaceChampion said:

Ryan Grim's theory is Manchin wants to run for governor of WV in 2024. 

I'm not sure I buy that premise simply based on the fact he's already left being governor once to be senator.  He could run for either in 2024, why not senator?  Of course, it doesn't really matter if he wants to run for senator or governor.  The key difference in his behavior is whether he wants to run again in 2024 or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DMC said:

I'm not sure I buy that premise simply based on the fact he's already left being governor once to be senator.  He could run for either in 2024, why not senator?  Of course, it doesn't really matter if he wants to run for senator or governor.  The key difference in his behavior is whether he wants to run again in 2024 or not.

Right but the speculation is not baseless, because he's actually telling people he hates the Senate and loved being Governor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SpaceChampion said:

Right but the speculation is not baseless, because he's actually telling people he hates the Senate and loved being Governor.

I dunno.  Most people in the Senate say they hate the Senate.  When in actuality, he's rather clearly enjoying the attention of being the pivotal vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

RIP Champ Biden.

"Died peacefully of old age"?!  What's the real story???  Did he know too much?  Did he walk in on Bill Gates and Hillary Clinton eating a child?  These are the questions we are all asking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the early voting today for the city's mayoral primary.  Lordessa is it a zoo the blocks around the polling place, all these enthusiastic kids.  I love seeing them doing political involvement work.  Some were a leetle too aggressive; even when I told them I'd made up my mind, had my cheat sheet in my hand ... a poll worker was on the lookout for this, and walked me away from them to the doors.  Never have I seen this here before!  On one hand, I quite like it, that people (at least in this spot) are taking the primary seriously.  But why hadn't the other District Council aspirants, or any of the candidates for every one of the offices on the ballot, ever bothered to come down here and personally reach out?  The guy I was totally all in for even prior to this flurry, he was here in person, seeking the signatures to get on the ballot, and other times, to campaign after he got on the ballot.  The big law and order and give more to the cops, make public school 400 kids per class and do it by zoom guy -- the only contact I had was with an idiot who couldn't articulate a thing about him, and that was at the end of last week only.  Not that I'd ever vote for him, or for Andrew Yang either, for anything, anytime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

"Died peacefully of old age"?!  What's the real story???  Did he know too much?  Did he walk in on Bill Gates and Hillary Clinton eating a child?  These are the questions we are all asking!

The Secretary of Transportation took him out to a farm in the rural tier of Prince George's County.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ewww boy this ugly.

https://news.yahoo.com/nina-simone-family-blame-kamala-201907915.html

Apparently there is some very bad blood between the Simone family and Kamala's actions as a Prosecutor in dealings with  how the estate was being administered by Nina's surviving family members.

It sounds murky, but the fact that there's no division within the family, they all feel Harris screwed them over, is a bit disconcerting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Ewww boy this ugly.

https://news.yahoo.com/nina-simone-family-blame-kamala-201907915.html

Apparently there is some very bad blood between the Simone family and Kamala's actions as a Prosecutor in dealings with  how the estate was being administered by Nina's surviving family members.

It sounds murky, but the fact that there's no division within the family, they all feel Harris screwed them over, is a bit disconcerting.

This sounds like much to do about nothing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

This sounds like much to do about nothing. 

I wouldn't call it "much to do", I hadn't even heard about it previously.

As for "about nothing" I suppose it depends on whether one had stakes in the outcome. Her family clearly feels they've been injured.

I find it interesting because both Nina and Kamala are kind of a big deal to a lot of people. 

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...