SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

[Jimjamesak]

I thought I read in 2 years the map is favorable to the Dems to hold the Senate. I could be way off though I am reading way too much about this stuff lately.

Speaking of which...Conservative Twitter is now saying that if the Dems add PR and DC their plan will be to add American Samoa and then split Florida and Texas. I wholeheartedly endorse this plan!

So the State of Miami and the State of Dallas and Austin?

 

[sagard]

The Dems aren't competent enough to make DC and PR states. They will get tied up in court and lose power.

 

[Handyman]

The Dems aren't competent enough to make DC and PR states. They will get tied up in court and lose power.

How would it get tied up in court?

 

[Handyman]

So the State of Miami and the State of Dallas and Austin?

That is how i kind of figured it would work...

 

[Deleted member 3166]

How would it get tied up in court?

I was wondering the same thing.

 

[unofan]

but Democrats abolished the filibuster on judicial nominees first,

Stop repeating this GOP talking point as though it's Gospel unless you can tell me what Harry Reid should've done instead. Because this absolves McConnell of weaponizing the filibuster and preventing any of Obama's judicial nominees from being appointed. It also ignores the fact that McConnell would've done it anyway, and that he's since broken far more norms than Reid ever did.

 

[sagard]

How would it get tied up in court?

The Dems wouldn't be competent enough to write something simple that couldn't be challenged. In two years the propo machine would have retrained enough people to believe people in DC and PR don't actually deserve senate representation. Plus the Dems will settle for "trying", thinking not being able to muster 60 senate votes will help them in future elections.

In 10 years we hopefully will still be having this conversation, but not a single Dem wishlist item will have come to pass. Despite probably winning the presidency at some point.

 

[unofan]

How would it get tied up in court?

PR wouldn't. DC could if they screw it up because DC is established by the constitution as a federal district. The workaround is to just define the constitutionally mandated part as the national mall and immediate surrounding area and turn the remainder into its own state.

 

[unofan]

The Dems wouldn't be competent enough to write something simple that couldn't be challenged. In two years the propo machine would have retrained enough people to believe people in DC and PR don't actually deserve senate representation. Plus the Dems will settle for "trying", thinking not being able to muster 60 senate votes will help them in future elections.

In 10 years we hopefully will still be having this conversation, but not a single Dem wishlist item will have come to pass. Despite probably winning the presidency at some point.

Oh. And here I thought you were making a serious point. Instead you're just being a slightly more intelligent troll than Chuck. My mistake.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Interesting phrasing Romney used in his scotus announcement

 

[Handyman]

PR wouldn't. DC could if they screw it up because DC is established by the constitution as a federal district. The workaround is to just define the constitutionally mandated part as the national mall and immediate surrounding area and turn the remainder into its own state.

Thanks for the info. I guess I didn't put the pieces together for DC. PR I was pretty sure would never be a court issue.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Oh. And here I thought you were making a serious point. Instead you're just being a slightly more intelligent troll than Chuck. My mistake.

Tells you a lot about a person when they say things like that. I’d say it’s not much better than CM

 

[ericredaxe]

I thought I read in 2 years the map is favorable to the Dems to hold the Senate. I could be way off though I am reading way too much about this stuff lately.

Speaking of which...Conservative Twitter is now saying that if the Dems add PR and DC their plan will be to add American Samoa and then split Florida and Texas. I wholeheartedly endorse this plan!

In 2022 the Dems are defending 12 seats and Republicans defending 22.... plus whatever happens in the AZ and GA special elections this year.

if you look at the map though, I’m not sure how many races are flip opportunities for either party. Maybe NH for republicans and Fl for the dems? Maybe a couple of others?

 

[Jimjamesak]

In 2022 the Dems are defending 12 seats and Republicans defending 22.... plus whatever happens in the AZ and GA special elections this year.

if you look at the map though, I’m not sure how many races are flip opportunities for either party. Maybe NH for republicans and Fl for the dems? Maybe a couple of others?

The massive clusterf- that will be Murkowski’s race.

 

[unofan]

Thanks for the info. I guess I didn't put the pieces together for DC. PR I was pretty sure would never be a court issue.

Actually, the interaction of DC statehood and the 23rd Amendment is interesting.

The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

So say you take the part of DC with people and make it a state with full congressional representation. You still have the remaining federal district getting 3 electoral votes to be appointed "in such manner as the Congress may direct." That kind of discretion could lead to lots of shenanigans. Congress could simply tie it to the electoral vote of the newly formed state, in which case it would essentially get a bonus 3 electoral votes over other states. Congress could give it to the only remaining residents, aka whoever's in the White House, essentially giving the incumbant party 3 votes off the top. The fairest thing would probably be tying it to the national popular vote and splitting it proportionately 2-1 in favor of the party that comes out on top (assuming elections stay within a 60-40 band either way).

 

[mookie1995]

A pregnant woman only gets one share because the fetus gets the money -- it could be a male. The incubator doesn't; it can always be replaced with a newer model.

With tax reform why didn’t tD allow baby seeds to fall under the child tax credit?

 

[psych]

Stop repeating this GOP talking point as though it's Gospel unless you can tell me what Harry Reid should've done instead. Because this absolves McConnell of weaponizing the filibuster and preventing any of Obama's judicial nominees from being appointed. It also ignores the fact that McConnell would've done it anyway, and that he's since broken far more norms than Reid ever did.

Stop repeating myself? Who are you talking to? I’ve said it once. If by GOP talking point, you mean history, as in Democrats had sole power to abolish the filibuster or not, and chose to do it, then yes, I “repeated” a GOP talking point. Democrats have reaped the rewards and suffered the consequences of that action in 2013. Like I’ve said, the filibuster is a joke that needs to go away under all circumstances. Reid was right to abolish it. McConnell didn’t need Reid’s abolishing of judicial nominees to abolish the filibuster of SC nominees- but he was right to abolish it. Of course his true motives and reasons had nothing to do with Reid abolishing judicial nominees first- that was just a convenient excuse McConnell could point to for justifying his actions. Of course he conveniently ignored his own role in everything. Most (all?) of us can’t stand McConnell’s hypocrisy, deceitfulness, and naked displays of maintaining power. Nowhere did I say that I think McConnell is absolved of his history-making obstruction because Reid did something first. Nowhere did I say I didn’t think McConnell wouldn’t have abolished said filibusters down the road anyways. Of course he would have, when the timing was right. I’d suggest you work on your condescension and jumping to conclusions, but no doubt that’s part of your charm on this board.

 

[Kepler]

Let us all hang together or assuredly we shall all hang separately. All of us have a job to do between now and the election, and that includes being supportive of each other. Even if we disagree on tactics or ideas we are all here to do one thing: kill Nazis. Once that is done we can have our spats again.

 

[psych]

Let us all hang together or assuredly we shall all hang separately. All of us have a job to do between now and the election, and that includes being supportive of each other. Even if we disagree on tactics or ideas we are all here to do one thing: kill Nazis. Once that is done we can have our spats again.

I think all of us on here will do our part and vote. I support unofan going to the polls and voting D in what is quickly becoming a potential pickup opportunity for Biden, not to mention whichever D candidate/incumbent needs help in his district. Most of us here are all on the same team. It’s fairly obvious who isn’t.
What I don’t appreciate is condescension, whether it’s coming from a Democrat, Republican, or Ralph Nader. I won’t take s-it from someone who assumes to know what my post is conveying, and then gets it all wrong. If it wasn’t clear, ask to clarify, or ignore my post entirely. Seems easy enough to me. Now, back to the regularly scheduled topic at hand.
I’ll add that unofan has the unique opportunity on this board of voting Joni Ernst, squealy McDonothingsquealer, out of office. I mean, I suppose if I had to choose between his condescension and voting for Greenfield vs. being nice on here and staying home (a half-vote for Ernst, as he always rightly points out), I’d choose the former in a heartbeat. Carry on.

 

[unofan]

Stop repeating myself? Who are you talking to? I’ve said it once. If by GOP talking point, you mean history, as in Democrats had sole power to abolish the filibuster or not, and chose to do it, then yes, I “repeated” a GOP talking point. Democrats have reaped the rewards and suffered the consequences of that action in 2013. Like I’ve said, the filibuster is a joke that needs to go away under all circumstances. Reid was right to abolish it. McConnell didn’t need Reid’s abolishing of judicial nominees to abolish the filibuster of SC nominees- but he was right to abolish it. Of course his true motives and reasons had nothing to do with Reid abolishing judicial nominees first- that was just a convenient excuse McConnell could point to for justifying his actions. Of course he conveniently ignored his own role in everything. Most (all?) of us can’t stand McConnell’s hypocrisy, deceitfulness, and naked displays of maintaining power. Nowhere did I say that I think McConnell is absolved of his history-making obstruction because Reid did something first. Nowhere did I say I didn’t think McConnell wouldn’t have abolished said filibusters down the road anyways. Of course he would have, when the timing was right. I’d suggest you work on your condescension and jumping to conclusions, but no doubt that’s part of your charm on this board.

Because when you say it paved the way for McConnell to kill it for SCOTUS nominees and effectively gave him an excuse for doing so, it's bullshiat spin that the GOP and Murdoch media empire threw out there and somehow got to stick even though it's bullshiat. It's the political equivalent of an abusive spouse blaming the victim for making them mad and forcing them to be abusive.

Reid's actions had exactly zero import to McConnell. McConnell's actions would not have changed one bit regardless of what Reid did or did not do. It didn't pave the way for anything. All it did was allow Obama to get a few more judges appointed.