• 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!

Trump's SCOTUS Nominee

PhDeac said:
Not really. How many Kansas liberals don't bother to vote because they don't think it is worth it? The DNC needs to find them and reach them and tell them their votes matter. There were five counties last night in which more people voted for the Dem than they did in November. That's amazing.

The DNC didn't see a chance for a win until the Republicans saw it. That's inexcusable.
Click to expand...

As a Kansas liberal, there are a fair few. I'm not in the KS 4th, but that area of KS is heavily conservative, so there are likely plenty of liberal voters, specifically young liberal voters, that would find their vote irrelevant in many places down there. It happens even up here in the more liberal NE Kansas areas.
 
RChildress107 said:
Why would they be primaried if this is an issue that a negligible part of the base really cares about?
Click to expand...

No, you misunderstand me. The part of the base that would primary them is also the part of the base that will always vote for a Dem against a Republican. There's not need to engage those voters other than self-preservation.
 
MysteryMen said:
No, you misunderstand me. The part of the base that would primary them is also the part of the base that will always vote for a Dem against a Republican. There's not need to engage those voters other than self-preservation.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? You don't think there were Bernie supporters that just decided to fuck it and stay home after he lost? The same passion that would cause a percentage of the base to primary any Dem that didn't filibuster Gorsuch would also lead to some of them staying home in November if their primary was unsuccessful.
 
Except primary challenges are overwhelmingly a GOP act. They don't happen that often with Dems.
 
i actually think the senate would have actually confirmed a liberal for a liberal, especially in years 5-7, vs letting the court shift on the unexpected death of Scalia
 
I seriously doubt that. Why settle for 5 when you can get 6 or 7 and it won't cost you anything?
 
ImTheCaptain said:
i actually think the senate would have actually confirmed a liberal for a liberal, especially in years 5-7, vs letting the court shift on the unexpected death of Scalia
Click to expand...

I'd like to believe that, but they could all campaign on delivering an iron clad majority for the court.
 
PhDeac said:
I seriously doubt that. Why settle for 5 when you can get 6 or 7 and it won't cost you anything?
Click to expand...

you seriously think they would have stalled for 3.5 years if Ginsburg had retired in Obama's first month of season 2?
 
ImTheCaptain said:
you seriously think they would have stalled for 3.5 years if Ginsburg had retired in Obama's first month of season 2?
Click to expand...

Maybe. What's the difference between one year and 3.5 years? What would they have to lose with a 5-3 majority? I'm doubt they would have stalled completely but I also doubt after hearings that they would have eventually voted to confirm.
 
Last edited:
even I'm not cynical enough to believe the GOP would have stalled forever on a swap. they may have stalled forever on a court-shifting replacement, though
 
Again, what would the damage be?
 
i just think politically it's more realistic for the congress to grudgingly approve a lib for a lib, but impossible to allow the court to shift from "balanced" to "liberal"
 
Not sure what you mean by politically more realistic.
 
PhDeac said:
Not sure what you mean by politically more realistic.
Click to expand...

it's safer for a republican senator to confirm a liberal judge when replacing a liberal judge than to replace a conservative judge with a liberal judge
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top