U.S. Politics: Rs Stand Around While Ds Try to Rescue Them

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

7 hours ago, cock_merchant said:

Voter suppression! Yet we're currently seeing record voter turnouts especially for midterms especially in "Jim crow" Georgia. 

That’s a lovely non-sequitur.  Attempting voter suppression… doesn’t mean the attempt will be successful.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

@Stark Revenge. @cock_merchant,

Come on, please tell us all why Congress lacks the explicitly defined power to expand the size of the US Supreme Court?  Tell us all why the US Congress lacks the express power to bring both Puerto Rico and Washington DC into the US as full States?  

Further, please tell us all why the US Citizens residing in Washington DC and Puerto Rico do not deserve the full representation in the US Congress granted to other US Citizens?

We’ll wait.

[Stark Revenge]

55 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

@Stark Revenge. @cock_merchant,

Come on, please tell us all why Congress lacks the explicitly defined power to expand the size of the US Supreme Court?  Tell us all why the US Congress lacks the express power to bring both Puerto Rico and Washington DC into the US as full States?  

Further, please tell us all why the US Citizens residing in Washington DC and Puerto Rico do not deserve the full representation in the US Congress granted to other US Citizens?

We’ll wait.

You’re correct of course, there is nothing ILLEGAL in these actions. What it is is a serious breach of NORMS for a blatant power grab from the left. 

Was McConnell wrong to hold open Scalia’s seat during the end of Obama’s term? Yes, I would say so. I understand why Dems are upset, they want that seat back. But if we start responding to a violation of norms with more violations, we’re simply playing power politics and SCOTUS will become another legislative body. What’s to stop the next GOP President from stacking the Court with more justices? The answer is of course nothing. The more honest people on the Left will admit that reality and acknowledge this is all about making a power grab for power‘s sake. Anything else is a statement made in denial. 
 

Talk of eliminating the filibuster and adding DC and Puerto Rico as states stem from the same issue, the Senate. As recently as 2010, Democrats were competitive nationwide in the Senate with Obama having a supermajority. And yet, as political realignment has taken place, Dems have seen heartland seats slip away from them. Rather than attempt to appeal to these voters, Dems responded by demonizing them and doubled down on appealing to their urban coastal constituents. This has of course resulted in greater GOP advantages in the Senate. Rather than attempt to moderate their positions and win back these seats (which they held merely more than a decade ago), Dems have decided that if the system as it is is not propelling them to power, they must change the system.
 

Again none of this is illegal. This is merely a power play from the Left who seeks to cement their grip on power. I’m all for having a legitimate conversation of adding Puerto Rico as a state, if that’s what they want, they should be added. But pretending that is the sole motivating cause here is asking me to play the fool, and I will not do so. 
 

I detested Trump and his demagoguery and believe he was unfit for office from the start and was indeed a threat to democracy. But pretending that responding to the norms he shattered with more shattered norms is in the best interests of democracy is a laughable proposition. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

10 minutes ago, Stark Revenge said:

You’re correct of course, there is nothing ILLEGAL in these actions. What it is is a serious breach of NORMS for a blatant power grab from the left. 

Was McConnell wrong to hold open Scalia’s seat during the end of Obama’s term? Yes, I would say so. I understand why Dems are upset, they want that seat back. But if we start responding to a violation of norms with more violations, we’re simply playing power politics and SCOTUS will become another legislative body. What’s to stop the next GOP President from stacking the Court with more justices? The answer is of course nothing. The more honest people on the Left will admit that reality and acknowledge this is all about making a power grab for power‘s sake. Anything else is a statement made in denial. 
 

Talk of eliminating the filibuster and adding DC and Puerto Rico as states stem from the same issue, the Senate. As recently as 2010, Democrats were competitive nationwide in the Senate with Obama having a supermajority. And yet, as political realignment has taken place, Dems have seen heartland seats slip away from them. Rather than attempt to appeal to these voters, Dems responded by demonizing them and doubled down on appealing to their urban coastal constituents. This has of course resulted in greater GOP advantages in the Senate. Rather than attempt to moderate their positions and win back these seats (which they held merely more than a decade ago), Dems have decided that if the system as it is is not propelling them to power, they must change the system.
 

Again none of this is illegal. This is merely a power play from the Left who seeks to cement their grip on power. I’m all for having a legitimate conversation of adding Puerto Rico as a state, if that’s what they want, they should be added. But pretending that is the sole motivating cause here is asking me to play the fool, and I will not do so. 
 

I detested Trump and his demagoguery and believe he was unfit for office from the start and was indeed a threat to democracy. But pretending that responding to the norms he shattered with more shattered norms is in the best interests of democracy is a laughable proposition. 

Thank you for being honest about it.  I see where you are coming from even if I disagree.  I was where you are for a very long time (ask anyone around here).  The Republican Party’s complete surrender to Trump and social conservatives is what lost them my vote.

[Maithanet]

13 minutes ago, Stark Revenge said:

Was McConnell wrong to hold open Scalia’s seat during the end of Obama’s term? Yes, I would say so. I understand why Dems are upset, they want that seat back. But if we start responding to a violation of norms with more violations, we’re simply playing power politics and SCOTUS will become another legislative body. What’s to stop the next GOP President from stacking the Court with more justices? The answer is of course nothing. The more honest people on the Left will admit that reality and acknowledge this is all about making a power grab for power‘s sake. Anything else is a statement made in denial.

We are already there.  When McConnell stole Obama's SC pick, it became power politics.  The Democrats have won 5 of the last 8 WH races (and the popular vote in 7 of the last 8, if you care about that), and yet control 3 seats on the Supreme Court.  The Democrats could realistically win the WH in 2024 and 2028 and still not retake the court because Alito, Roberts,  Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh will all probably retain their seats another 10+ years. 

McConnell stole the SC seat (violating norms), and now you are asking the Democrats to just accept that norms cannot be violated. 

I fully understand that court packing sucks, and that there's a good chance if Democrats do it that Republicans will do it as well when they take power back.  But that reality, where at times the Democrats control the SC and at times the Republicans do, is vastly preferable to one where the Republicans just control the SC for rest of my lifetime, which is the future I see if the Democrats value "norms" as sacrosanct. 

[IheartIheartTesla]

While voting numbers in Georgia seem fairly robust, the opposite seems to be the case in Nevada, based on early voting data. Still too early to say is the Clark County 'firewall' is going to hold for the Democrats though.

I'm a bit confused/concerned by Georgia though. Recent polls have Walker up by a little bit, but the early voting numbers and demographics also show promise for Warnock. The only way I can reconcile those is if people who have already voted arent picking up the phone or are screened by the pollsters.

[Maithanet]

I wouldn't pay too much attention to early voting numbers.  Nevada is the only state that has had any success in being able to get real information out of the noise of early voting, and even there the picture is super messy.  The 2020 experience has changed the way the two parties look at early voting, such that 2018 and 2020 are questionable anchor points.  A huge portion of Republicans seem convinced that early/mail voting is "rigged", which was not the case in 2018.  Comparisons to 2020 are a little better, but presidential vs midterm voting patterns (and volumes) are always different, and 2020 was a weird year as well.   

Turnout being up in Georgia and down in Nevada is odd, but I can't really draw any conclusions from it.  Overall the picture in Nevada is not encouraging to me.

[Stark Revenge]

30 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Thank you for being honest about it.  I see where you are coming from even if I disagree.  I was where you are for a very long time (ask anyone around here).  The Republican Party’s complete surrender to Trump and social conservatives is what lost them my vote.

I sympathize with that. I live in NWPA and since 2016, I've seen my parents grip on reality slide, they’re big anti-vaxxers. 
 

For me at least, the unfortunate thing is, I still happen to have more in common with the GOP. I think the MTG and Tucker Carlson wing of the party is horrid, but I’m not all of a sudden in favor of MFA, a Green New Deal or the institutional reforms Dems want to enact. I vote for Reps who I generally think are sane and leave my ballot blank where there isn’t a good choice. I just have to hope the Party normalizes at some point. 

16 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

We are already there.  When McConnell stole Obama's SC pick, it became power politics.  The Democrats have won 5 of the last 8 WH races (and the popular vote in 7 of the last 8, if you care about that), and yet control 3 seats on the Supreme Court.  The Democrats could realistically win the WH in 2024 and 2028 and still not retake the court because Alito, Roberts,  Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh will all probably retain their seats another 10+ years. 

McConnell stole the SC seat (violating norms), and now you are asking the Democrats to just accept that norms cannot be violated. 

I fully understand that court packing sucks, and that there's a good chance if Democrats do it that Republicans will do it as well when they take power back.  But that reality, where at times the Democrats control the SC and at times the Republicans do, is vastly preferable to one where the Republicans just control the SC for rest of my lifetime, which is the future I see if the Democrats value "norms" as sacrosanct. 

I just don’t see how this ends in a good place if this is the route we end up going. It only increases polarization and hardens partisan divisions. If you go this route and lockout a significant fraction of the population from the levers of political influence, I think it will only increase the slide towards radicalism. 
 

One analogy that can be used is that of states that transition from dictatorships to democracies. It’s been found that the transition process is more likely to be peaceful if the exiting elites can be guaranteed safe passage out of power and won’t have their possessions stripped from them and their bodies dumped in a basement. If there are no such guarantees, they’ll fight ever more desperately to hang onto power and make things worse for everyone. 

[IheartIheartTesla]

59 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Turnout being up in Georgia and down in Nevada is odd, but I can't really draw any conclusions from it.  Overall the picture in Nevada is not encouraging to me.

I am a bit more comforted by Nevada numbers actually, since it doesnt show any significant advantage for the GoP showing up.

[Maithanet]

2 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I am a bit more comforted by Nevada numbers actually, since it doesnt show any significant advantage for the GoP showing up.

I think there is a real movement among the GOP to vote on election day rather than early.  Thus early voting being down (even when it is down for both Rs and Ds) feels like a bad thing.  I feel like if the Dems are "holding serve" then they need to be winning the early vote more convincingly than ever before, which they are not. 

[IheartIheartTesla]

That is true in general, but Nevada is special in that only ~10% of the final vote was done on election day, with 40% being in-person early voting and the rest by mail. These are 2020 numbers where, GoP won in-person early voting by 80k (raw), and in-person election day by only 10k. The Democrats won mail-in by 140k.

For other states what you say is absolutely correct. I dont think these numbers from 2020 will dramatically skew though (as in having something like 50% show up in person on election day)

[DMC]

22 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I think there is a real movement among the GOP to vote on election day rather than early.

It should be noted that even in 2020, it was Republicans who held an advantage in in-person early voting - 41.6 to 35.5 nationally, and 46.1 to 30.5 in Nevada, so I don't think we can even conclude this.

[Week]

12 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Wake up buddy. It's mainstream to undermine faith in our electoral process in Republican politics. 

It's more than mainstream, it's the cost of entry.

The party isn't normalizing. It's worst people and ideas -- MTG, Ticket, DeSantis -- are metastasizing. One cannot separate them from the future of the party with limited action. I mean, one *can* delude oneself -- as some are -- but you're just as complicit in supporting the crazies that are taking over. 

[Maithanet]

55 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

That is true in general, but Nevada is special in that only ~10% of the final vote was done on election day, with 40% being in-person early voting and the rest by mail. These are 2020 numbers where, GoP won in-person early voting by 80k (raw), and in-person election day by only 10k. The Democrats won mail-in by 140k.

For other states what you say is absolutely correct. I dont think these numbers from 2020 will dramatically skew though (as in having something like 50% show up in person on election day)

I'm quite confident the % of the vote on election day will be significantly higher in 2022 than it was in 2020.  And we simply have no way of knowing how much higher.  Could be 15% of the total vote, could be 20%, could be more.  And considering I fully expect Republicans to win the election day voting decisively, it makes reading the tea leaves on the rest of early voting extremely difficult.  Ralston will try, but this year I'm pretty doubtful that we're going to have a clear picture in Nevada based on early voting alone. 

[maarsen]

3 hours ago, Stark Revenge said:

You’re correct of course, there is nothing ILLEGAL in these actions. What it is is a serious breach of NORMS for a blatant power grab from the left. 

Was McConnell wrong to hold open Scalia’s seat during the end of Obama’s term? Yes, I would say so. I understand why Dems are upset, they want that seat back. But if we start responding to a violation of norms with more violations, we’re simply playing power politics and SCOTUS will become another legislative body. What’s to stop the next GOP President from stacking the Court with more justices? The answer is of course nothing. The more honest people on the Left will admit that reality and acknowledge this is all about making a power grab for power‘s sake. Anything else is a statement made in denial. 
 

Talk of eliminating the filibuster and adding DC and Puerto Rico as states stem from the same issue, the Senate. As recently as 2010, Democrats were competitive nationwide in the Senate with Obama having a supermajority. And yet, as political realignment has taken place, Dems have seen heartland seats slip away from them. Rather than attempt to appeal to these voters, Dems responded by demonizing them and doubled down on appealing to their urban coastal constituents. This has of course resulted in greater GOP advantages in the Senate. Rather than attempt to moderate their positions and win back these seats (which they held merely more than a decade ago), Dems have decided that if the system as it is is not propelling them to power, they must change the system.
 

Again none of this is illegal. This is merely a power play from the Left who seeks to cement their grip on power. I’m all for having a legitimate conversation of adding Puerto Rico as a state, if that’s what they want, they should be added. But pretending that is the sole motivating cause here is asking me to play the fool, and I will not do so. 
 

I detested Trump and his demagoguery and believe he was unfit for office from the start and was indeed a threat to democracy. But pretending that responding to the norms he shattered with more shattered norms is in the best interests of democracy is a laughable proposition. 

Violating norms by creating new states? Can you count past 13? 

[DMC]

3 hours ago, Stark Revenge said:

What it is is a serious breach of NORMS for a blatant power grab from the left. 

While Dems certainly have a self-interest in both expanding the court and DC/PR statehood, what you seem to elide is each is also the right thing to do.  The court needs to be expanded both for pragmatic reasons and to ensure it is more representative, while the normative reasons for statehood are self-evident. 

And abolishing the filibuster is not so much "breaking norms," but rather the GOP (and frankly both parties at this point) weaponizing it to the point that the only way to get anything significant through the Senate is through reconciliation and/or the budget.  McConnell and the GOP were the first to "break the norms" of the filibuster. 

So as mentioned above, you're asking the Dems to not do the right thing AND play by the rules when their opponent hasn't for decades.

[Martell Spy]

It's not just that Democrats are being held up to impossible standards in regards to breaking norms, it's not a possible goal to stop norms from being broken. In the Garland case it's not just that the norm was broken, but that it's forever broken. There's no chance a political party will again hold back Senate rules for maximum political benefit in regards to the SC ever again. Yes, leading to polarization. And it's all McConnell's fault.

I think what some people want to see is Democrats only break norms after the Republicans have already done so and taken the political benefits.

Also, packing the Supreme Court is not violating a norm. It's been done multiple times. Unlike say, the storming of Congress. I believe that is a genuine first.

 

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

It's been done multiple times.

Also, historically, changes in the number of SC justices often (albeit not always) were enacted to align with the number of US Courts of Appeal.  We have now had 11 circuit courts for forty years (not counting the Federal and DC circuits).

[Varysblackfyre321]

5 hours ago, Stark Revenge said:

You’re correct of course, there is nothing ILLEGAL in these actions. What it is is a serious breach of NORMS for a blatant power grab from the left. 

If the US citizens of PR and DC hold a referendum to become states by what moral case would you deny them statehood?

[Stark Revenge]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

While Dems certainly have a self-interest in both expanding the court and DC/PR statehood, what you seem to elide is each is also the right thing to do.  The court needs to be expanded both for pragmatic reasons and to ensure it is more representative, while the normative reasons for statehood are self-evident. 

And abolishing the filibuster is not so much "breaking norms," but rather the GOP (and frankly both parties at this point) weaponizing it to the point that the only way to get anything significant through the Senate is through reconciliation and/or the budget.  McConnell and the GOP were the first to "break the norms" of the filibuster. 

So as mentioned above, you're asking the Dems to not do the right thing AND play by the rules when their opponent hasn't for decades.

Puerto Rico has a good case for statehood, DC not so much. The seat of the federal government should not gaining any additional powers than it already holds. If the argument is about representation, then the size of DC should be reduced to the core administrative buildings and Maryland should absorb the rest of the district. 

The Court has no reason to be representative of anyone. They are jurists, not representatives. 

The GOP is not blameless in creating the tension that surrounds the filibuster, but it was Harry Reid that first nuked it for lower court judicial appointments that kicked off this mess. Pointing fingers and trying to find an original sin for justification is a pointless endeavor because it only leads to the system writ large unraveling.

As for the “weaponization” of the filibuster, I don’t think it’s a weaponization at all, but the Senate acting to safeguard its institution power. If a bill can’t reach 60 votes, then it has not mustered enough nationwide support to become law and should not become law. Bills with far reaching implications in a country of 330 million plus citizens should not be lightly passed with a narrow 50+1 majority. The parties would be better off watering down their goals and bills and focusing on finding legislative solutions that can achieve broad nationwide support. The filibuster exists to promote consensus and is the system working as intended.