People that you've never heard of, people that are in the dark shadows -- US Politics September 2020

Pack the senate. It doesn’t have an obvious escalatory response and statehood for dc is extremely popular.

Say hello to North, South, East and West Kentucky then

FDR once met with a group of activists who sought his support for bold legislation. He listened to their arguments for some time and then said, "You've convinced me. Now go out and make me do it."

Pack the senate. It doesn’t have an obvious escalatory response and statehood for dc is extremely popular.

do both imo. senate packing won't help the SC situation (not until thomas or alito dies), and republicans will (continue to) disproportionately escalate no matter what democrats do.

since i can predict the future, i'll go ahead and note that the democrats will NOT make it clear, now, that they will respond by packing the courts if/when the GOP installs a new justice. that would not be in character for them. as a result, we will be living with a strong republican majority on the SC for the foreseeable future. (i think)

FDR quote is 100% myth, i've read

but i support the sentiment

the RBG news and the shameless push to nominate new SC justice has punctured the fragile baloon of hope I'd concocted for November. Is this gloom justified? I honestly feel like I've been the sole voice of "No, hang on, it's going to be okay, honest" among my cohort. It's ebbing away today.

I’m not saying it’s perfect but court packing is extremely unpopular based on all the polling I’ve seen (not without reason tbh).

Dc statehood is more popular with lamestream norms democrats, less unpopular than court packing, and more effective in the long run for allowing democrats to govern that doing something feeble like adding two seats to the court (which gets us back to where we were yesterday, assuming trumps nomination goes through).

As you can see here they are blocking the entrance to the voting site. #EarlyVoting #VA #FairFax pic.twitter.com/KJ6fbLdP3G

— Anthony Tilghman (@AnthonyTilghman) September 19, 2020

Court packing might become more popular depending on how hard Biden and the Senate Dems push.

First of all, stop using the phrase "court packing" because it sounds like you're stuffing people into a phone booth or something. It has negative connotations. Start using the phrase "growing the Supreme Court" or something similar.

Picked a bad morning to catch up on my New Yorker reading with this article about Florida voting from a few issues ago, not a mood lifter to be sure.

I hate the phrase "court packing" by the way. Nothing constitutional about the number of justices.

ha!

xpost

XxXpost later tweets suggested the MAGA cocks scampered away like weak bitches when extra security finally showed the fuck up

Statehood is more popular than whatever you call growing the judicial branch, it has a less obvious escalatory response, it solves a ton of governance problems for democrats by beginning to fix the senate, and gives representation to 4m Americans.

It doesn’t have to be either/or, but I have no idea why court packing should be the first move here.

“Not necessarily court expansion, but court expansion if necessary.”

Anyone who donated to or shared Lincoln Project stuff: you’re a useful idiot to republicans who will 100% support whoever trump nominates.

xps caek

i think court packing embellishing is the first move here because it's in response to something (RBG's replacement being hypocritically and unfairly selected by republicans). it would make sense to suddenly add it to the democratic campaign and run on it.

like i mentioned upthread, i think in order for it to actually work, i think biden actually DOES have to run on it (he won't).

i think that's true with statehood issues, too. it needs to be on the campaign platform - make it an election issue, and then demonstrate that a majority of the country wants leadership that will do it. then, in the first legislative sessions of a new congress, implement it. (they're definitely not adding this at a campaign promise at this point)

fwiw i also think that's true of many things that absolutely need to happen, ie election reform

it’s not “unfair” for the president to nominate a supreme court justice and the senate to confirm them iirc

i mean........... sorry but that’s how it works??!

do you think what happened to merrick garland was unfair?

i mean, the predictable course of that line of reasoning, i think, is that yes, what happened to garland was unfair. two rights do not make a wrong, why do the unfair thing to trump now? and then we can get into whether there is in fact a clear calendar date which delineates between a "fair" and "unfair", when a SC judge dies during an election year. if they die before july they should be replaced, afterward not? or maybe it's any time up to inauguration day, since at any time, technically the administration has the authority to nominate someone, and congress has the authority to vote on it (or not, in the case of garland).

so, bad question on my part, because the main point is that republicans are not playing the same game. or rather, democrats are still busy trying to follow the rules while republicans are busy rewriting them.

I interpret Tracer's comment literally. If one party controls the Senate and executive branch, then, yeah, obv the nominated justice will likely be seated (there have been many exceptions, though).

Dems gettin' together to work as a gang of assholes for once, however, is another question.

obvious rebranding for court packing should be "court reform" imo

i mean, the predictable course of that line of reasoning, i think, is that yes, what happened to garland was unfair. two rights do not make a wrong, why do the unfair thing to trump now?

yeah I've already seen a few people trot out the "lets not stoop to their level, let's just crush them at the voting booth" thing to which I say we already do crush them at the voting booth but it doesn't fucking matter cuz the GOP's willingness to play dirty has rewarded them with eternal minority rule and no amount of "doing the right thing" is gonna reverse that

It's almost like we live in a failed state or something

Collins now says vacancy should not be filled until 11/3.

That's three (Romney, Murk, Collins), but I know full well any of them can be "won back home" fairly easily.

Plus still need 1-3 more (1 for VP tiebreaker, at least 2 more to cushion any Manchins)

saw that fundraising for Dem Senate races beat all sorts of records yesterday, anyone know if there was a corresponding bump for the GOP?

Be sure to cushion your manchins

Xp

xpost hopefully corresponding bumps on their foreheads after people took a mallet to them

y'know what's really gonna be 'fun', is if Biden does win, and then COVID is finally contained, and everybody looks forward to finally feeling peace but instead, the PTSD starts to kick in for hundreds of millions of people

Bryan Cranston being brought in for questioning

https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2020/09/19/report-package-containing-ricin-addressed-to-white-house-seized-by-authorities/

People should care more about court packing and statehood and stuff, and those threats should be made, and they should be done, but this is the right approach to the election itself imo:

NEW: The Biden campaign strategy to deal with the passing of RBG and a Supreme Court vacancy: Focus on health care and defending Obamacare

A 2018 midterms playbook redux.

W/ the @katieglueck @thomaskaplan @GlennThrush @jmartNYT squadhttps://t.co/pyjoJLsQEu

— Shane Goldmacher (@ShaneGoldmacher) September 19, 2020

Biden campaign strategy to deal with the passing of RBG and a Supreme Court vacancy: Focus on health care and defending Obamacare

Hmmm. Seems to me that if The Federalist Society picks the next SC justice and the Senate Republicans seat the nominee on the court before Jan. 2021, then it is certain that the ACA will be firmly in place on Election Day 2020. With all current benefits in place there won't be much tangible backlash against the Republicans from voters on that issue. Then, the newly-degraded SCOTUS can kill the ACA later on and act as a political heat shield for the Republicans, by absorbing the public's anger.

Well possibly but I don’t think there’s a better option before the election.

It's one thing to run on "they want to sell you out if you let them, so don't let them" and another to run on "well, you don't feel it yet, and your vote today can't prevent anything bad, but trust me, they have already sold you out, so don't vote for them."

i barely understand your point, which may be correct, but i think you're overestimating the average voter

We need a feel-good story:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09/18/metro/how-transsexual-satanist-anarchist-trolled-new-hampshire-voters/

This was smart to say

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/09/20/trump-threatens-to-issue-executive-order-preventing-biden-from-being-elected-president/amp/?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/09/20/trump-threatens-to-issue-executive-order-preventing-biden-from-being-elected-president/

Susan Collins might scowl and offer a strong rebuttal to that kind of talk!

The people wigging out over it are wasting their breath. He routinely says he might do things at rallies that he knows he can't cos his voters like it. Then he doesn't do anything.

Most of the harmful shit he's done hasn't been telegraphed like this

I’m Joe Biden and I approve this message. pic.twitter.com/TuRZXPE5xK

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) September 20, 2020

That's good! More of that, Joe.

whoa

that right there is one of the best political ads in US history

Just a little ... schadenfreude? Perspective? I don't know, but I stumbled on this and while I in no way agree it's nice to be reminded that the other side feels the same way.

https://www.facebook.com/dan.bongino/posts/3553283938097675

The New York Post reports:

New York City was among three cities labeled “anarchist jurisdictions” by the Justice Department on Sunday and targeted to lose federal money for failing to control protesters and defunding cops, The Post has learned.

Portland, Ore., and Seattle, Wash., were the other two cities on the list, which was approved by US Attorney General William Barr.

“When state and local leaders impede their own law-enforcement officers and agencies from doing their jobs, it endangers innocent citizens who deserve to be protected, including those who are trying to peacefully assemble and protest,” Barr said in a statement set to be released Monday.