Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead at 87

[james t kirk]

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.

I'm not so sure about that.

Before Trump, I would have agreed with you. The GOP was essentially moribund. I thought that with Obama that it proved that demographics were simply not on the side of the GOP and that the Democrats would become the natural ruling party of the USA (to borrow a phrase).

But then 2 really strange things happened.

1. The Dems picked Hillary as their candidate. I mean holy fuck, could they have picked a worse possible human being than Hillary. I know everyone has baggage that they are dragging around behind them, but Hillary? Hillary is dragging a statue.

2. The GOP picked Trump. At first, I thought the GOP were out of their collective minds. But the madman won. Not only did he win, he won big. (Yes, yes, I know Hillary got X number of million more votes than the orange clown, but so what? That's not how the American system works. Based on the quaint concept of an electoral college, Trump won large. And that electoral college isn't going anywhere. You know it and I know it. Just so happens that there are a lot of liberal voters in California, but it makes no difference if you win by 1 vote, or all the votes, you win, you get all the electoral college votes, end of story.)

And here's the weird thing. Trump really isn't a Conservative is he now. Hell, he was a Democrat for most of his life. Not quite Tammany Hall Democrat, but still a Democrat. Definitely NOT a Republican. I would argue that Trump doesn't actually have an ideological bone in his body. He moves whichever way and wherever best suits him to achieve his desired outcome. He is at his core, a populist. Simple as that. Trump is not really in heart of hearts anti-abortion, nor is he a gun rights fanatic. But he figures (correctly) that he will use it to his advantage, but then does nothing to advance the cause. Nope, Trump pushes that populist mantra that appeals to a great many people in the USA. Young or old, dumb or not so dumb. America First, Make America Great Again, blah blah blah. Americans love a guy who they feel makes them stand tall. (Same as Reagan. Carter was a better man than Reagan, and so was Michael Dukakis and yet Reagan slaughtered both of them. Why, because Americans love what he was selling them. Dukakis was the champion of the working man, but the working man rejected him in favour of John Wayne.) Just like now they picked Trump and his "America First" rhetoric. He sells them what they want to hear from a politician and never have before.

"Trumpism" has given the GOP a new idea. It's brought out the whack jobs who probably have never even voted in the past, but suddenly, they've found a champion in Trump. Combine that with the your dyed in the wool Republican types (i.e. the ones who aren't fucking crazy) and you've got a recipe for a win. I expect the next leader of the GOP after Trump to seize on what worked so well for Trump (populism) and just be sane at the same time. (Something Trump is not.) In other words, Trump may fade away, but Trumpism will be here for a generation because the old Reagan / Bush styled Republicanism will not win you an election given everything you've said in your post.

 

[mandrill]

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.

Holy shit! Are you suggesting that hardcore Red states like WV, KY and MT are about to have a demographic explosion?!

You may be right!..... I understand 4 cowboys, 9 cows and 14 goats immigrated to MT last month and that practically DOUBLES the state population!

I understand that the state GOP is worried shitless about the cows and goats. If they get the right to vote, they're probably too smart to vote Republican, unlike the cowboys.

 

[mandrill]

I'm not so sure about that.

Before Trump, I would have agreed with you. The GOP was essentially moribund. I thought that with Obama that it proved that demographics were simply not on the side of the GOP and that the Democrats would become the natural ruling party of the USA (to borrow a phrase).

But then 2 really strange things happened.

1. The Dems picked Hillary as their candidate. I mean holy fuck, could they have picked a worse possible human being than Hillary. I know everyone has baggage that they are dragging around behind them, but Hillary? Hillary is dragging a statue.

2. The GOP picked Trump. At first, I thought the GOP were out of their collective minds. But the madman won. Not only did he win, he won big. (Yes, yes, I know Hillary got X number of million more votes than the orange clown, but so what? That's not how the American system works. Based on the quaint concept of an electoral college, Trump won large. And that electoral college isn't going anywhere. You know it and I know it. Just so happens that there are a lot of liberal voters in California, but it makes no difference if you win by 1 vote, or all the votes, you win, you get all the electoral college votes, end of story.)

And here's the weird thing. Trump really isn't a Conservative is he now. Hell, he was a Democrat for most of his life. Not quite Tammany Hall Democrat, but still a Democrat. Definitely NOT a Republican. I would argue that Trump doesn't actually have an ideological bone in his body. He moves whichever way and wherever best suits him to achieve his desired outcome. He is at his core, a populist. Simple as that. Trump is not really in heart of hearts anti-abortion, nor is he a gun rights fanatic. But he figures (correctly) that he will use it to his advantage, but then does nothing to advance the cause. Nope, Trump pushes that populist mantra that appeals to a great many people in the USA. Young or old, dumb or not so dumb. America First, Make America Great Again, blah blah blah. Americans love a guy who they feel makes them stand tall. (Same as Reagan. Carter was a better man than Reagan, and so was Michael Dukakis and yet Reagan slaughtered both of them. Why, because Americans love what he was selling them. Dukakis was the champion of the working man, but the working man rejected him in favour of John Wayne.) Just like now they picked Trump and his "America First" rhetoric. He sells them what they want to hear from a politician and never have before.

"Trumpism" has given the GOP a new idea. It's brought out the whack jobs who probably have never even voted in the past, but suddenly, they've found a champion in Trump. Combine that with the your dyed in the wool Republican types (i.e. the ones who aren't fucking crazy) and you've got a recipe for a win. I expect the next leader of the GOP after Trump to seize on what worked so well for Trump (populism) and just be sane at the same time. (Something Trump is not.) In other words, Trump may fade away, but Trumpism will be here for a generation because the old Reagan / Bush styled Republicanism will not win you an election given everything you've said in your post.

Forcing the GOP to the wacko right isn't a recipe for a win though. The GOP is still strong and weak in the same geographical and demographic areas.

And it loses them the sane centre who might have voted for say Romney vs Biden.

 

[Dutch Oven]

Holy shit! Are you suggesting that hardcore Red states like WV, KY and MT are about to have a demographic explosion?!

You may be right!..... I understand 4 cowboys, 9 cows and 14 goats immigrated to MT last month and that practically DOUBLES the state population!

I understand that the state GOP is worried shitless about the cows and goats. If they get the right to vote, they're probably too smart to vote Republican, unlike the cowboys.

Here's a bit of background on people leaving California: https://abc7news.com/californians-moving-to-texas-california-exodus-leaving-florida/6177157/

Looks like Texas and Arizona are the preferred relocation states for Californians.

New York City: https://www.foxbusiness.com/real-estate/nyc-move-outs-surge-pandemic

Seems New Yorkers are moving to Florida.

So, no boom for WV, KY or MT.

Lots more information available on this.

 

[Valcazar]

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!

Twenty-five straight days of debate on the Senate floor weren't enough?
That's after all the committees, mark ups, amendments, etc?
That bill was debated for over a year as it was drawn up.

 

[mandrill]

Here's a bit of background on people leaving California: https://abc7news.com/californians-moving-to-texas-california-exodus-leaving-florida/6177157/

Looks like Texas and Arizona are the preferred relocation states for Californians.

New York City: https://www.foxbusiness.com/real-estate/nyc-move-outs-surge-pandemic

Seems New Yorkers are moving to Florida.

So, no boom for WV, KY or MT.

Lots more information available on this.

Duvven, TX is turning a light red-purple and will soon be a swing state if trends continue and it's precisely the new immigrants to large centres like D-FW and Houston who are causing this. AZ is already blue-purple.

So, no.....

 

[Frankfooter]

I'm not so sure about that.

Before Trump, I would have agreed with you. The GOP was essentially moribund. I thought that with Obama that it proved that demographics were simply not on the side of the GOP and that the Democrats would become the natural ruling party of the USA (to borrow a phrase).

But then 2 really strange things happened.

1. The Dems picked Hillary as their candidate. I mean holy fuck, could they have picked a worse possible human being than Hillary. I know everyone has baggage that they are dragging around behind them, but Hillary? Hillary is dragging a statue.

2. The GOP picked Trump. At first, I thought the GOP were out of their collective minds. But the madman won. Not only did he win, he won big. (Yes, yes, I know Hillary got X number of million more votes than the orange clown, but so what? That's not how the American system works. Based on the quaint concept of an electoral college, Trump won large. And that electoral college isn't going anywhere. You know it and I know it. Just so happens that there are a lot of liberal voters in California, but it makes no difference if you win by 1 vote, or all the votes, you win, you get all the electoral college votes, end of story.)

And here's the weird thing. Trump really isn't a Conservative is he now. Hell, he was a Democrat for most of his life. Not quite Tammany Hall Democrat, but still a Democrat. Definitely NOT a Republican. I would argue that Trump doesn't actually have an ideological bone in his body. He moves whichever way and wherever best suits him to achieve his desired outcome. He is at his core, a populist. Simple as that. Trump is not really in heart of hearts anti-abortion, nor is he a gun rights fanatic. But he figures (correctly) that he will use it to his advantage, but then does nothing to advance the cause. Nope, Trump pushes that populist mantra that appeals to a great many people in the USA. Young or old, dumb or not so dumb. America First, Make America Great Again, blah blah blah. Americans love a guy who they feel makes them stand tall. (Same as Reagan. Carter was a better man than Reagan, and so was Michael Dukakis and yet Reagan slaughtered both of them. Why, because Americans love what he was selling them. Dukakis was the champion of the working man, but the working man rejected him in favour of John Wayne.) Just like now they picked Trump and his "America First" rhetoric. He sells them what they want to hear from a politician and never have before.

"Trumpism" has given the GOP a new idea. It's brought out the whack jobs who probably have never even voted in the past, but suddenly, they've found a champion in Trump. Combine that with the your dyed in the wool Republican types (i.e. the ones who aren't fucking crazy) and you've got a recipe for a win. I expect the next leader of the GOP after Trump to seize on what worked so well for Trump (populism) and just be sane at the same time. (Something Trump is not.) In other words, Trump may fade away, but Trumpism will be here for a generation because the old Reagan / Bush styled Republicanism will not win you an election given everything you've said in your post.

Trumpism may stay but its already maxed out at 43%.
His numbers move between 41-43%.
That's it and that's enough to guarantee the dems the government for the near future.

As Trump said yesterday.
″[Obama] didn’t get a lot of judges through because you know why? He didn’t have the Senate,” he said. “So again, that’s an election of a different kind. We had the Senate and the Senate didn’t want to do that, and Mitch didn’t want to do that.”

“So there’s a difference. When you have the Senate, when you have the votes, you can sort of do what you want as long as you have it,” Trump continued. “So now we have the presidency and we have the Senate, and we have every right to do it, and we have plenty of time.”

 

[Dutch Oven]

Twenty-five straight days of debate on the Senate floor weren't enough?
That's after all the committees, mark ups, amendments, etc?
That bill was debated for over a year as it was drawn up.

The details included: 1) no guarantee of keeping your doctor, 2) an enormous rise in premiums and deductibles, and 3) fines for opting out. Americans didn't vote for any of that.

All the debates accomplished was setting the stage for Dems to lose to the House and the Senate, and then ultimately the Presidency, and now for the courts to roll it all back.

 

[Valcazar]

I'm not so sure about that.
[...]
And here's the weird thing. Trump really isn't a Conservative is he now.

This depends a lot on what you think is meant by "Conservative". Íf you talk about the ideological movement that claimed to be about balanced budgets, personal responsibility, and so on, then no.
But that isn't really what Conservatism is about, at least not as understood and practiced by most people who claim to be conservatives. (Or rather, their voters.)

Hell, he was a Democrat for most of his life.

He lived in New York City and wanted in with that crowd, which identifies as Democrat. It's like being in Rhode Island - you call yourself a Democrat if you want to get anywhere politically, regardless of your actual ideology or policy preferences.

Not quite Tammany Hall Democrat, but still a Democrat. Definitely NOT a Republican.

In what way? (Other than he wasn't registered as one.)

I would argue that Trump doesn't actually have an ideological bone in his body.

Not really true. He doesn't care about most things, but he is very consistent about a few ideological points.
* White supremacy.
* Rich people are better and should get everything.
* Authoritarianism is the only legitimate form of government.

He moves whichever way and wherever best suits him to achieve his desired outcome. He is at his core, a populist. Simple as that.

You are going to have define what you mean by populist here.

Trump is not really in heart of hearts anti-abortion, nor is he a gun rights fanatic. But he figures (correctly) that he will use it to his advantage, but then does nothing to advance the cause.

Wait. You think he has done nothing to advance anti-abortion policy? That he's done nothing pro-gun?

Nope, Trump pushes that populist mantra that appeals to a great many people in the USA. Young or old, dumb or not so dumb. America First, Make America Great Again, blah blah blah.

What makes you think that is popular? His popularity rating is shit, his approval numbers are shit. What populist mantras do you think poll well? (And again, define populist.)

Americans love a guy who they feel makes them stand tall. (Same as Reagan.)

He has been consistently the most unpopular president ever since we've had measures. (Others have dipped lower at points, but no one has remained consistently underwater like he has.)

Just like now they picked Trump and his "America First" rhetoric. He sells them what they want to hear from a politician and never have before.

Leaving aside the popularity question - what do you think he is selling that they have never heard from a politician before?

"Trumpism" has given the GOP a new idea. It's brought out the whack jobs who probably have never even voted in the past, but suddenly, they've found a champion in Trump. Combine that with the your dyed in the wool Republican types (i.e. the ones who aren't fucking crazy) and you've got a recipe for a win. I expect the next leader of the GOP after Trump to seize on what worked so well for Trump (populism) and just be sane at the same time. (Something Trump is not.) In other words, Trump may fade away, but Trumpism will be here for a generation because the old Reagan / Bush styled Republicanism will not win you an election given everything you've said in your post.

So what is Trumpism here? What mix of policies and rhetoric do you think he has tapped into?
I actually agree with you that he was a symptom not a cause and none of what he has mobilized goes away when he is gone. I am just curious what you think that actually is.

 

[Valcazar]

The details included: 1) no guarantee of keeping your doctor, 2) an enormous rise in premiums and deductibles, and 3) fines for opting out. Americans didn't vote for any of that.

All the debates accomplished was setting the stage for Dems to lose to the House and the Senate, and then ultimately the Presidency, and now for the courts to roll it all back.

You said the reps had to vote for something they didn't read.
You are backing off of that now?

 

[Dutch Oven]

You said the reps had to vote for something they didn't read.
You are backing off of that now?

No, I thought you we were moving on to another point - what was accomplished by the debates.

Here's the background on rushing the bill through without providing members adequate time to read it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/06/25/lets-recall-why-the-affordable-care-act-is-so-messed-up/

Here's the salient quote: " Few people, including Senators and their staffs, had time to read the whole 2,700 page bill, much less note any possible weaknesses, flaws, or ambiguities. "

This is old news.

 

[Charlemagne]

Ginsburg’s death puts Roe v. Wade on the ballot in Novembe

Ginsburg’s death puts Roe v. Wade on the ballot in November

It’s been a throwaway line in presidential campaigns for years: Roe v. Wade is on the ballot.

www.sltrib.com

 

[Dutch Oven]

Ginsburg’s death puts Roe v. Wade on the ballot in Novembe

Ginsburg’s death puts Roe v. Wade on the ballot in November

It’s been a throwaway line in presidential campaigns for years: Roe v. Wade is on the ballot.

www.sltrib.com

The effect of repealing Roe vs. Wade would be to leave it up to States to determine their policies towards state funded abortions. In other words, the states that vote Dem would continue state funded abortions, and some states that vote Red would not.

As a result, this issue may get people all riled up, but it would not flip a single state.

 

[Frankfooter]

Ginsburg’s death puts Roe v. Wade on the ballot in Novembe

Ginsburg’s death puts Roe v. Wade on the ballot in November

It’s been a throwaway line in presidential campaigns for years: Roe v. Wade is on the ballot.

www.sltrib.com

With Trump on the wrong side according to voters.
He can rile up a few of his base with this but anger all the moderates at the same time.
Even Kathleen doesn't support this one.

 

[jcpro]

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.



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.



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).

Right. LOL! Elected representatives fulfilling the election pledges is the end of democracy. You should speak the words as you type them to hear how ridiculous you sound.

 

[Frankfooter]

Right. LOL! Elected representatives fulfilling the election pledges is the end of democracy. You should speak the words as you type them to hear how ridiculous you sound.

Glad to hear that you'll also support all the dem changes when they take the senate and the presidency
So many changes coming....

 

[mandrill]

This depends a lot on what you think is meant by "Conservative". Íf you talk about the ideological movement that claimed to be about balanced budgets, personal responsibility, and so on, then no.
But that isn't really what Conservatism is about, at least not as understood and practiced by most people who claim to be conservatives. (Or rather, their voters.)



He lived in New York City and wanted in with that crowd, which identifies as Democrat. It's like being in Rhode Island - you call yourself a Democrat if you want to get anywhere politically, regardless of your actual ideology or policy preferences.



In what way? (Other than he wasn't registered as one.)

Not really true. He doesn't care about most things, but he is very consistent about a few ideological points.
* White supremacy.
* Rich people are better and should get everything.
* Authoritarianism is the only legitimate form of government.

You are going to have define what you mean by populist here.

Wait. You think he has done nothing to advance anti-abortion policy? That he's done nothing pro-gun?

What makes you think that is popular? His popularity rating is shit, his approval numbers are shit. What populist mantras do you think poll well? (And again, define populist.)

He has been consistently the most unpopular president ever since we've had measures. (Others have dipped lower at points, but no one has remained consistently underwater like he has.)

Leaving aside the popularity question - what do you think he is selling that they have never heard from a politician before?
So what is Trumpism here? What mix of policies and rhetoric do you think he has tapped into?
I actually agree with you that he was a symptom not a cause and none of what he has mobilized goes away when he is gone. I am just curious what you think that actually is.

I agree with my learned friend, the Captain on these points. Trump marks a clear break from the policies that the "patrician republican" establishment espoused and ran with. Romney, McCain and even Bush were traditional conservatives. Trump relies on sloganeering, racism and anti-immigrant rhetoric and a thinly veiled approval of armed vigilante groups. This always lurked in the shadows with GOP politics, but no leading politician espoused them. Trump's GOP is anti immigrant, anti Black, anti Hispanic, anti urban and caters to the lunatic fringe. This DOES bring a new element into politics. It also loses Trump the centre and I disagree with JTK that it's a winning strategy beyond 2016.

There is little of substance in Trump's politics. He throws bones to whatever group will support him, including evangelicals and the rich. There is no long-term philosophy of government, national or international strategy or any intent beyond remaining in power as long as he can and - I would guess - letting his kids milk it in terms of business deals while the going's good.

The problem for Trump is that there just aren't enough bigots and nutjobs, even in the USA to quite sustain him in office. And the downside is not only that he loses the political centre, but he scares it so much that it will remain mobilized for the foreseeable future. That's likely to fuck the GOP in the short term and demographics will take care of fucking it in the long term.

 

[james t kirk]

You are going to have define what you mean by populist here.

Populism does not mean popular.

Populism:


noun

1. a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.
   "the question is whether he will tone down his fiery populism now that he has joined the political establishment"
   • support for populist politicians or policies.
     "the government came to power on a wave of populism"
   • the quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people.
     "art museums did not gain bigger audiences through a new populism"

Article in the BBC on populism.

Really interesting article in the Atlantic.

In my life, in US (or Canadian) federal politics, I cannot think of a politician to which I would apply the the "populist" label. Trump is the first. (You could argue Doug Ford since he often speaks of "elites".)

 

[Charlemagne]

Front Runner For Trump’s Supreme Court Pick Is A Catholic Who Opposes Abortion

Front Runner For Trump's Supreme Court Pick Is A Catholic Who Opposes Abortion

Judge Amy Coney Barrett would replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is best-known for fighting for women’s rights and equality.

m.huffpost.com

Judge Amy Coney Barrett would replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is best-known for fighting for women’s rights and equality.

 

[james t kirk]

He lived in New York City and wanted in with that crowd, which identifies as Democrat. It's like being in Rhode Island - you call yourself a Democrat if you want to get anywhere politically, regardless of your actual ideology or policy preferences.



In what way? (Other than he wasn't registered as one.)



Not really true. He doesn't care about most things, but he is very consistent about a few ideological points.
* White supremacy.
* Rich people are better and should get everything.
* Authoritarianism is the only legitimate form of government.

Yes, I agree with you that Trump was a Democrat because he was from NYC. But me saying he wasn't "Tammany Hall" agrees with you, he was never a card carrying Democrat as far as I'm aware. He never went all in on being a Democrat, nor was he ever a true Republican. Hence me saying, "he doesn't have an ideological bone in his body". He really doesn't. He picked the GOP banner to run under because he never had a shot in a million years with the Dems. The GOP tends to attract the "lunatic fringe" of American society. Famously recall the way John McCain reacted at one of his own rallies when some whacky old lady called Obama an Arab. (She meant to say, "he's a Muslim", but she caught herself.) Trump picked the GOP simply because they would let him run.

And no, I do not recall him doing ANYTHING to restrict abortion access. I don't think he personally gives a fuck. Same with guns. He has not enacted any legislation to either promote or regulate gun ownership. Again, I don't think he gives a fuck either way. He just uses it to appeal to social conservatives (which are the ones who support him and they DO care about abortion and guns.)

As to:

* White supremacy = arguable.
* Rich people are better and should get everything = Definitely.
* Authoritarianism is the only legitimate form of government = Definitely, but that gets back to the concept of populism and how it ties into nationalism..

So what is Trumpism here? What mix of policies and rhetoric do you think he has tapped into?
I actually agree with you that he was a symptom not a cause and none of what he has mobilized goes away when he is gone. I am just curious what you think that actually is.

..

Trumpism is my own label of that type of right wing populism that DT has created largely by himself that propelled him into the white house under the GOP banner. As I originally stated that before Trump came along, the GOP was moribund and I have 0 doubt that if the GOP had of nominated one of the traditional candidates like Ted Cruise or Marco Rubio or even Jeb Bush, all of the aforementioned men would have lost to Hillary because a huge number of people that voted for Trump would have just stayed at home figuring that it was just more of the same old same old. Trump introduced his own form of crazy that appealed to a lot of people (his so called "base").

Michael Moore in 2016 recognized the anger of the disenfranchised American working man (and woman) and that Trump had tapped into that anger and it gave him very real concern. Watch this BRILLIANT summation by Michael Moore (other than the whacky parody shit thing at the end) because it was pure prophecy on Moore's part and it explains how Trump parlayed that anger right into the White House. This anger was something that the Democrats had no fucking clue even existed. Hillary was too worried about bathroom rights and identity politics and social justice bullshit to even be able to identify with the working man. As a result, she got her ass handed to her by the kind folks of Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania.