• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has Died

centerdeac, you're trying to make a contrived "both sides" point that's been rebuked several times now.
 
Mitch and Chuck would use naked politics to push their position and if they had a majority and the Presidency. Claiming otherwise is bullshit.

There are individual Senators who would push back. I agree with them, and wouldn't vote for a nominee until after the election.

This shouldn't be so hard to understand.
 
This is the system we should have:

Supreme Court of 12 justices. Each justice serves a 24 year term. A justice rolls off and the president nominates a new justice in the 1st and 3rd year of every presidential term.
- Terms are long enough that justices are still insulated from the politics of the day (to the extent that you believe they ever are or can be)
- Terms are short enough that you can nominate a 50 year old justice and decent odds they'll make it through their term
- New justices are appointed on a regular cycle so that the political makeup of the court reflects the results of the presidential elections (rather than the randomness of how many happen to die in a particular 4 year period)
 
I do think we're reaching a point at which some kind of major reform is going to have to be made in how we choose federal and SC judges, or it's going to completely wreck the Court's legitimacy and effectiveness as an institution. If most Americans simply see the federal courts (and Supreme Court) as little more than extreme partisan instruments for imposing the will of one party on everyone else, you're eventually going to have violence and mass refusals to obey decisions, with all the ugliness that entails. A great many other once-venerated and respected institutions have already fallen into disgrace and disrepute, and it appears the SC may be about to join them. It has already taken several hits, of course, but this could be the event that finally ends for good the notion that it has become anything other than a mere political instrument for enacting a hard-right social and economic agenda that is at odds with an increasing majority of Americans.
 
Roberts has done an excellent job keeping the Supreme Court as an independent institution.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Everything the republicans do is because they know they have shitty positions. Rammed through the last pick because they feared that they would lose the election, just happened to actually win. This time ram through a pick because they fear that they will lose an election. I mean hell this time voting has already fucking started it’s not during an election year it’s during the actual election. If you held that you were popular, your positions were popular, and it’s what the people wanted you would welcome the reaffirming an open, fair election with as many people possible voting, and throw in ranked choice and popular vote as determinates for a cherry on top.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. 2-3 hour lines to early vote across Virginia while RBG was breathing her last breaths.
 
avalon said:
always always projecting
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Democrats have never had the cutthroat perspective the GOP does.

No they wouldn’t shove somebody through. Right or wrong they’d talk about the institutional norms and sit on the seat without expediting the process.
 
Like when FDR tried to pack the Court?

Seriously, do any of you read any history?
 
Very sorry to hear of her death.

RIP.



















The fallout is just going add to the shit show that we’ve become.
 
Collins
Murkowski
Romney
Grassley

Those four are most likely to be the four Republicans who won't agree to let Trump make an appointment unless he is re-elected.
 
centerdeac said:
Like when FDR tried to pack the Court?

Seriously, do any of you read any history?
Click to expand...

Yes Democrats, 85 years ago, tried to play politics with the court. But there was a strongly democrat senate, 74 seats I believe, and they had just overwhelmingly won re-election and it wasn’t an election year. So it must have been ok then. Seriously, do you read history?
 
centerdeac said:
Like when FDR tried to pack the Court?

Seriously, do any of you read any history?
Click to expand...

Sure GOT ME! That’s my mistake for using an absolute - I was referring to recent history. Do you feel good that sailor jumped on to immediately agree with you? Give you the warm tinglies?

Obviously FDR threatened to pack the Supreme Court to make sure his policies got through.
 
Deaconblue said:
Collins
Murkowski
Romney
Grassley

Those four are most likely to be the four Republicans who won't agree to let Trump make an appointment unless he is re-elected.
Click to expand...

At least until after the election. Regardless of her outcome, Collins can continue to enable Trump after the election without repercussions.
 
The “control the Senate and the Presidency” argument is do dumb because, despite the fact that the Republicans have six more seats, they represent 15 million fewer voters (in 2018, for example, Republicans lost 54% to 46% across all Senate races and picked up two seats)

and of course we all know that Trump lost the popular election

so the argument rests on a severely unequal system of representation
 
Yep

Shocking, it’s not about the voice of the people.




Then...what is it about....?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top