Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead at 87

[Valcazar]

LOL. The biggest complaint among the Republican voters in the old, pre Trump era was the failure of the Republican elites and the "conservative leaders" to fight back. That goes 30 years back and it has always been on the front burner among the Republican rank and file. All noise and no action. Well, it's over.

I agree. The base wanted one thing and the leadership wanted another. (Some of the leadership.)
It has become clear that one of the things the base wanted was an end to democracy and the rule of law, because it prevented them getting what they wanted.
As jcpro said, that's over.

That bill won't pass. It would take 2/3 majority of the Senate. Ain't gonna happen. Pipe dream.

Simple majority. Doesn't take 2/3 of the Senate at all.
The filibuster isn't going to survive this session and the filibuster is 60 votes anyway, not 2/3.

What's with Dakota anyway? They don't need two states and four senators. They barely have a population for one stated combined.

The Republicans wanted more senators and electoral college votes. There was a deal to make 4 new states: New Mexico, Montana, Washington, and Dakota - first 2 would be Democratic, the second 2 Republican. But the Republicans won big so they scrapped the deal to admit New Mexico and then split Dakota into 2 so they could get more power. (3 Republican states vs 1 Democratic).

 

[Dutch Oven]

You have the power and you will use it.

I think that's at the core what I said. It's just missing the part about Obama and the Democrats NOT having the same mandate and power in 2016, thus the two circumstances are not comparable.

You were so close to getting this one!

 

[Valcazar]

Simply and unequivocally stated that the Senate SCOTUS appointment confirmation process cannot occur during an election year.

Which was always nonsense. At least some of the conservative commentators are being honest and saying "we blocked it in 2016 because we had the power to do so and are doing it now because we have the power to do so"

The problem w splitting CA and NY is that you're likely to make the smaller states politically competitive thereby. Upstate NY could go red. Ditto Northern CA.

Yes, but there is no permanent demographic shift anyway. Over time parties will fight for people in those states.
You just start by breaking them off in specific ways that favor you.
Each borough in New York has the population of many states, so just split them into 5 new states (tie long island to staten island to blunt the conservatives there).

The idea is to make a bunch of Democratic states quickly to get enough votes to then make real changes that would be rational and fair long term.

What they should really get to do is to combine WY, MT, UT, ID, ND and SD into 1 normal sized state, instead of tiny political entities with clout ludicrously disproportionate to their small size.

The Dakotas re-merging would make sense at the very least. (Maybe the Virginias as well). I could see an argument for a bunch of the plains states being combined.

 

[Dutch Oven]

Simply and unequivocally stated that the Senate SCOTUS appointment confirmation process cannot occur during an election year.

There was no need to explain the nuance at the time, or draw a comparison to future circumstances that hadn't happened yet.

The Democrats (and RBG herself, for good measure), of course, said it was necessary to seek to fill the vacancy in 2016. Was there some unarticulated nuance in their position a the time?

 

[Valcazar]

But if Mitch slams it through, unless they can get the SC to rule that Trump is king forever, if Biden is elected and the dems have house and senate they can just add more SC judges.
There would be no reason not to add enough to give them the majority for years.

This is true.

 

[Dutch Oven]

This is true.

This is true?!!! LOL! I didn't think you were at the Frank level of crazy. Watch how fast the Dems are relegated to dust heap of history if they attempt to create a practice of adding to the SCOTUS bench any time they don't like its composition. The people have their limits. Let's see if Biden wants to openly campaign on that promise! I'm hoping for a question on this during the debates.

If you want to be mad at anyone, be angry with RBG for foolishly continuing to sit on the bench for probably 7 years too long.

Appointing members of the court based on ideology is certainly acknowledging that law is really nothing more than a specific manifestation of politics, but at least it's just up to the luck of the draw who is in power when the opportunities arise. Lesson of story? Don't appoint physically frail, old judges (or Presidents, for that matter!).

 

[mandrill]

Which was always nonsense. At least some of the conservative commentators are being honest and saying "we blocked it in 2016 because we had the power to do so and are doing it now because we have the power to do so"

Yes, but there is no permanent demographic shift anyway. Over time parties will fight for people in those states.
You just start by breaking them off in specific ways that favor you.
Each borough in New York has the population of many states, so just split them into 5 new states (tie long island to staten island to blunt the conservatives there).

The idea is to make a bunch of Democratic states quickly to get enough votes to then make real changes that would be rational and fair long term.

The Dakotas re-merging would make sense at the very least. (Maybe the Virginias as well). I could see an argument for a bunch of the plains states being combined.

VA is populous and now solidly blue. And it's got nothing in common w WV.

You can't split NYC into states. History and common sense is against you.

Here is what I would propose. Create regions within the USA and assign a certain # of Senate seats to each based on demographics and without reference to statehood or state government. So New E, Great Lakes, Mid Atlantic, South Atlantic, Gulf Coast, TX, South Midwest, North Midwest, Mountain, CA, Northwest, Desert, etc all are regions and they get Senate seats based on population.

Better still, abolish the fucking Senate and have a logical unicameral legislature like a sane country.

And yeah, the GOP blocked it in 2016 because they hold the Senate based on an iron grip on 15 different Western States with a population of 37 cowboys and a goat each while CA, IL and NY get fucked in the ass over and over. They just made up a reason as a fancy way of saying "fuck you!"

 

[toguy5252]

I think that's at the core what I said. It's just missing the part about Obama and the Democrats NOT having the same mandate and power in 2016, thus the two circumstances are not comparable.

You were so close to getting this one!

You mean I left off the silly part.

 

[Valcazar]

This is true?!!! LOL! I didn't think you were at the Frank level of crazy. Watch how fast the Dems are relegated to dust heap of history if they attempt to create a practice of adding to the SCOTUS bench any time they don't like its composition. The people have their limits. Let's see if Biden wants to openly campaign on that promise! I'm hoping for a question on this during the debates.

He will say he wouldn't want it to come to that.
There is nothing in the constitution saying there needs to be 9 judges.
Escalating the size of the court may be the only way to get real court reform both sides will agree to since both sides know constantly expanding it is a terrible idea.

If you want to be mad at anyone, be angry with RBG for foolishly continuing to sit on the bench for probably 7 years too long.

I am. She should have stepped down in 2013 and I've said it more than once. (Probably not here.)
I understand she wanted to pretend the court wasn't political but it is and she should have stepped down. (Same with Breyer.)
Kennedy understood this and Thomas will step down if Trump gets another term. (He was probably considering it before Ginsburg died.)

Appointing members of the court based on ideology is certainly acknowledging that law is really nothing more than a specific manifestation of politics, but at least it's just up to the luck of the draw who is in power when the opportunities arise. Lesson of story? Don't appoint physically frail, old judges (or Presidents, for that matter!).

The fact that it is up to chance is stupid. It's a very bad system and should be reformed.
Easiest way to do that is the next time the Democrats have a trifecta, expand the court to 12 and then get everyone to agree that we need a new system because this is stupid.

 

[mandrill]

This is true?!!! LOL! I didn't think you were at the Frank level of crazy. Watch how fast the Dems are relegated to dust heap of history if they attempt to create a practice of adding to the SCOTUS bench any time they don't like its composition. The people have their limits. Let's see if Biden wants to openly campaign on that promise! I'm hoping for a question on this during the debates.

If you want to be mad at anyone, be angry with RBG for foolishly continuing to sit on the bench for probably 7 years too long.

Appointing members of the court based on ideology is certainly acknowledging that law is really nothing more than a specific manifestation of politics, but at least it's just up to the luck of the draw who is in power when the opportunities arise. Lesson of story? Don't appoint physically frail, old judges (or Presidents, for that matter!).

The GOP is going into the garbage pooper of history a lot faster and that as soon as Dallas and Houston and SA and Austin blue up enough to swamp rural TX and that massive mega-state sails off to join CO, AZ and VA in the blue camp forever and ever. The GOP can't kill off its moderates and go ultra hard right without provoking a backlash to which it will eventually lose as younger voters, urban and suburban voters and more educated voters - all major demographic trends - kill it off. If the GOP is going to force feed anti abortion, pro gun judges on an America which is sick of that shit, then the backlash and the Dems stacking the court w moderates is going to be a popular move.

 

[Valcazar]

VA is populous and now solidly blue. And it's got nothing in common w WV.

I agree. But at the very least change the name. North and South Carolina need to merge and/or get renamed too.
These sectional names are dumb.

You can't split NYC into states. History and common sense is against you.

Neither of which matters.
The only rule is that you can't split a state without the state agreeing to it.
If you can convince Brooklyn it will have more power as its own state, I think they would go for it.
New York city as a whole would happily ditch the rest of the state, I'm pretty sure.

Here is what I would propose. Create regions within the USA and assign a certain # of Senate seats to each based on demographics and without reference to statehood or state government. So New E, Great Lakes, Mid Atlantic, South Atlantic, Gulf Coast, TX, South Midwest, North Midwest, Mountain, CA, Northwest, Desert, etc all are regions and they get Senate seats based on population.

Can't be done except by amendment.
My plan only requires congressional majorities.

If you must have a bicameral system, then something like you are suggesting is sensible, I agree.

Better still, abolish the fucking Senate and have a logical unicameral legislature like a sane country.

If you can do your first plan, you can do your second. Your second makes more sense.
(I can argue for a bicameral legislature but it needs a clearer separation of powers.)

And yeah, the GOP blocked it in 2016 because they hold the Senate based on an iron grip on 15 different Western States with a population of 37 cowboys and a goat each while CA, IL and NY get fucked in the ass over and over. They just made up a reason as a fancy way of saying "fuck you!"

Yes.

 

[toguy5252]

The GOP is going into the garbage pooper of history a lot faster and that as soon as Dallas and Houston and SA and Austin blue up enough to swamp rural TX and that massive mega-state sails off to join CO, AZ and VA in the blue camp forever and ever. The GOP can't kill off its moderates and go ultra hard right without provoking a backlash to which it will eventually lose as younger voters, urban and suburban voters and more educated voters - all major demographic trends - kill it off. If the GOP is going to force feed anti abortion, pro gun judges on an America which is sick of that shit, then the backlash and the Dems stacking the court w moderates is going to be a popular move.

Demographics and demographic trends certainly favor the Dems. that is why the GOP must rely upon suppression and other means of disenfranchising voters.

 

[mandrill]

I agree. But at the very least change the name. North and South Carolina need to merge and/or get renamed to.
These sectional names are dumb.

Yes.

You could go with "Former Redneckia" and "Still Redneckia", I guess. I know more about SC than I am comfortable admitting.

 

[Frankfooter]

This is true?!!! LOL! I didn't think you were at the Frank level of crazy. Watch how fast the Dems are relegated to dust heap of history if they attempt to create a practice of adding to the SCOTUS bench any time they don't like its composition. The people have their limits. Let's see if Biden wants to openly campaign on that promise! I'm hoping for a question on this during the debates.

If you want to be mad at anyone, be angry with RBG for foolishly continuing to sit on the bench for probably 7 years too long.

Appointing members of the court based on ideology is certainly acknowledging that law is really nothing more than a specific manifestation of politics, but at least it's just up to the luck of the draw who is in power when the opportunities arise. Lesson of story? Don't appoint physically frail, old judges (or Presidents, for that matter!).

If the dems get the house, senate and presidency they can do whatever they want.
After Trump there will be no recourse, no dem will respond to a subpoena as Trump has shown you don't have to.
Impeaching doesn't matter.
All you need to do is appoint AOC or someone like her as the AG and then you've got a very angry and mobilized DOJ behind you.

Like butler, the country is prepped for drastic change and drastic change is needed to get through this pandemic and looming depression.

All they need to do is win in a big enough landslide that Trump can't declare he won and lock the doors at the SC.

 

[Dutch Oven]

The GOP is going into the garbage pooper of history a lot faster and that as soon as Dallas and Houston and SA and Austin blue up enough to swamp rural TX and that massive mega-state sails off to join CO, AZ and VA in the blue camp forever and ever. The GOP can't kill off its moderates and go ultra hard right without provoking a backlash to which it will eventually lose as younger voters, urban and suburban voters and more educated voters - all major demographic trends - kill it off. If the GOP is going to force feed anti abortion, pro gun judges on an America which is sick of that shit, then the backlash and the Dems stacking the court w moderates is going to be a popular move.

Nothing restores GOP popularity more than the occasional taste of DEM rule. Unfortunately, it's a very expensive form of public education. Those who live where the pendulum can't swing back to Red generally move out of state, as evidenced by the California exodus, and the nascent New York City exodus that is underway.

 

[Dutch Oven]

If the dems get the house, senate and presidency they can do whatever they want.
After Trump there will be no recourse, no dem will respond to a subpoena as Trump has shown you don't have to.
Impeaching doesn't matter.
All you need to do is appoint AOC or someone like her as the AG and then you've got a very angry and mobilized DOJ behind you.

Like butler, the country is prepped for drastic change and drastic change is needed to get through this pandemic and looming depression.

All they need to do is win in a big enough landslide that Trump can't declare he won and lock the doors at the SC.

If you control all 3, of course you can lawfully do what you want (subject to the the courts/constitution). However, it's political suicide when you approach things that way. That's what happened after Obama and the Dems (controlling both House and Senate) forced Obamacare down the throats of the States.

Your proposed political strategy on governance is exactly why Trump won. Are you secretly a GOP?Trump supporter?

I can't quite take you seriously when you are promoting a bartender as AG.

 

[Frankfooter]

If you control all 3, of course you can lawfully do what you want (subject to the the courts/constitution). However, it's political suicide when you approach things that way. That's what happened after Obama and the Dems (controlling both House and Senate) forced Obamacare down the throats of the States.

Are you admitting its political suicide for McConnell and Trump to try to jam in a replacement for RBG?

I can't quite take you seriously when you are promoting a bartender as AG.

AOC really triggers the Trumptards, doesn't she?

 

[Valcazar]

If you control all 3, of course you can lawfully do what you want (subject to the the courts/constitution). However, it's political suicide when you approach things that way. That's what happened after Obama and the Dems (controlling both House and Senate) forced Obamacare down the throats of the States.

How dastardly of Obama and the Democrats to openly campaign on something, win, and then pass it with a majority in the house and a supermajority in the Senate.
So devious!!!

 

[Dutch Oven]

How dastardly of Obama and the Democrats to openly campaign on something, win, and then pass it with a majority in the house and a supermajority in the Senate.
So devious!!!

As you know, the devil was in the details, which didn't emerge during the campaign. In fact, they didn't emerge during the legislative process either. Representatives were asked to vote on a bill they hadn't read!

 

[Dutch Oven]

Are you admitting its political suicide for McConnell and Trump to try to jam in a replacement for RBG?

No. They won't lose any votes that would have ever been cast for them by putting a respected "originalist" judge on the bench, and there are no State interests to trod on in appointing federal judges.

AOC really triggers the Trumptards, doesn't she?

There's always real danger in handing an incompetent irrational ideologue any kind of power. Kind of like if you were made a mod here!