Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

I can't agree. I think they will. They're afraid if Hillary gets in and the Dems take over the Senate she'll nominate a true liberal. Obama was going for super legacy by naming Garland.

I think they'll try to confirm him after they lose, and hopefully Hillary has already worked out whatever deal is necessary for Obama to withdraw Garland so she can nominate somebody under 35 recommended by Stephen Reinhardt.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

I think they'll try to confirm him after they lose, and hopefully Hillary has already worked out whatever deal is necessary for Obama to withdraw Garland so she can nominate somebody under 35 recommended by Stephen Reinhardt.

Do you think Obama will withdraw? It's his legacy. I doubt he will. That would be a huge gamble still. McConnell is probably stupid enough to try it.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Do you think Obama will withdraw? It's his legacy. I doubt he will. That would be a huge gamble still. McConnell is probably stupid enough to try it.

McConnell has no choice but to wait. He can't signal that he has given up on the election -- he'd end up as turtle soup.

Obama would have to get something very sweet in exchange for withdrawing Garland. He does want to be seen as the president who rescued the Court from the orcs. Just think of the kudos for him selflessly withdrawing his nominee so that Hillary could name the judge who then proceeds to reverse every Scalia decision? People would long remember that gesture.

Clinton could promise to nominate him for CJ if Roberts leaves the Court during her administration.

[St. Clown]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

I think they'll try to confirm him after they lose, and hopefully Hillary has already worked out whatever deal is necessary for Obama to withdraw Garland so she can nominate somebody under 35 recommended by Stephen Reinhardt.

I think it'll be sometime in July, perhaps early August if they wait until after the conventions. Once they see the continuous results of polling numbers come in from likely voters, and Drumpf keeps getting smacked around on the electoral college counts, they'll go through the confirmation process so as to avoid giving even the shadow of a hint of a victory to the Shrill One before her term even starts.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

I think it'll be sometime in July, perhaps early August if they wait until after the conventions. Once they see the continuous results of polling numbers come in from likely voters, and Drumpf keeps getting smacked around on the electoral college counts, they'll go through the confirmation process so as to avoid giving even the shadow of a hint of a victory to the Shrill One before her term even starts.

Thing is, I think the polls are probably as wide now as they'll ever be. Hillary isn't going to win by 13 points -- the country is still somewhere between 50/50 and 55/45, and third term fatigue is a real thing.

Party going for 3rd or more term:

2008: L
2000: L
1992: L
1988: W
1976: L
1968: L
1960: L

I see a pattern.

With the race "tightening," nobody on the GOP side will want to do anything that can later be blamed for a loss.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Bernie was consistently running 6 points better than Clinton against Drumpf, so you may be right.

Doesn't matter, though. Contrafactuals are fun but you go to the election with the candidate you have, not the candidate you wish you had. Hillary will be fine. This is an election where nobody is going to be a "leaner." The sides are set in theological concrete, and either candidate could murder a puppy on live TV and not lose a voter.

While I don't think there's much question that Sanders is more likeable. In a run up, he'd have his own problems. He would be painted as an outright communist...and that's a message I bet that would stick much more than crooked. The country largely knows Hillary...much of the middle would be introduced to Sanders as a communist by a Donald Trump, someone they know. While Trump might be starting further back...running against radical 'Commie' Sanders, Trump could potentially pull all this off.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

While I don't think there's much question that Sanders is more likeable. In a run up, he'd have his own problems. He would be painted as an outright communist...and that's a message I bet that would stick much more than crooked. The country largely knows Hillary...much of the middle would be introduced to Sanders as a communist by a Donald Trump, someone they know. While Trump might be starting further back...running against radical 'Commie' Sanders, Trump could potentially pull all this off.

Probably, though the GOP has a Chicken Little problem there. They call every Democrat a communist, so why should anybody not already in their cult listen this time?

[busterman62]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

McConnell has no choice but to wait. He can't signal that he has given up on the election -- he'd end up as turtle soup.

Obama would have to get something very sweet in exchange for withdrawing Garland. He does want to be seen as the president who rescued the Court from the orcs. Just think of the kudos for him selflessly withdrawing his nominee so that Hillary could name the judge who then proceeds to reverse every Scalia decision? People would long remember that gesture.

Clinton could promise to nominate him for CJ if Roberts leaves the Court during her administration.

Even Obama's biggest critics know he is too intelligent to believe anything Claire Underwood might promise.

[rufus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

'Commie' Sanders

Doesn't he sell chicken?

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Even Obama's biggest critics know he is too intelligent to believe anything Claire Underwood might promise.

He'd need collateral. Maybe a photo of Vince Foster's final moments.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Doesn't he sell chicken?

Because the internet is Borges' Library of Babel.

[St. Clown]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Thing is, I think the polls are probably as wide now as they'll ever be. Hillary isn't going to win by 13 points -- the country is still somewhere between 50/50 and 55/45, and third term fatigue is a real thing.

Party going for 3rd or more term:

2008: L
2000: L
1992: L
1988: W
1976: L
1968: L
1960: L

I see a pattern.

With the race "tightening," nobody on the GOP side will want to do anything that can later be blamed for a loss.

I'm not calling a landslide in terms of overall voter split 56-43, etc., rather in electoral vote count. People know these two people's names. They're not being introduced to the public at their conventions.

If push came to shove, I see Drumpf losing ground by the time the convention rolls around. He's made some truly polarizing statements, ones he already starting to somewhat change. The problem for him is that his most polarizing statements are where he's getting the most support with his base bloc. He'll pivot off those, trying to capture the middle and even the social conservative Republicans who are turned off by him, and his current base will become disenfranchised and skip the election. He'll have such an exodus of support due to painting himself into an extremely high profile corner that he simply won't be able to recover.

This election will basically come down to which party has fewer base voters staying home that day. Shrillary has, at the very least, kept her campaign's message fairly consistent, and won't have to pivot much to capture the moderates this year, unlike Drumpf. That'll give her the appearance of being more stable (probably true), and less toxic (questionably true).

[unofan]

Clinton could promise to nominate him for CJ if Roberts leaves the Court during her administration.

The odds of Roberts leaving the Court voluntarily in the next 20 years is akin to none.

The next ones gone, absent any deaths, will be RBG, Kennedy, and Breyer.

Alito, Roberts, Kagan, and Sotomayor will all outlast the next president and the one after that, too. Maybe even the one after that.

[SJHovey]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Maize, is that physician quote a real quote?

Before you get too worked up, read the article and get the context.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

The odds of Roberts leaving the Court voluntarily in the next 20 years is akin to none.

You never know. Justices used to leave the Court for reasons others than a pine box. Roberts was made CJ of a Court that he would be writing the majority opinion for. He may be about to be in the minority for the rest of his career. We may well have a 6-3 liberal majority by 2020, with all 6 liberals being fairly young. He may not want that; he may even think that it's not a good thing for the CJ to be diametrically opposed to the Court's main line of thinking.