Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I was kind of ambivalent on court packing, but like others have already said, the veneer of non-partisanship in the Supreme Court is basically gone now anyway.
So long as actually qualified people who aren't independently scum are appointed, I doubt I'd have an issue with it.
Edited by LSBK on Oct 6th 2018 at 4:03:51 AM
FDR never actually packed the courts, but when they got to the point of trying to wholesale block the New Deal it was "get out of the way or the courts do get packed".
The point of checks and balances is not that the court can completely dictate legislative and executive action—since those two bodies have authority over its appointments (and unexpected removals)
Yeah, you're right. I'm sorry. I was just really upset about today's news; it was like everything we exposed about Kavanaugh in the past month didn't even make a difference. At times I just feel like I'm shouting at a hurricane.
But it's wrong, I shouldn't do it, and I won't do it anymore.
No beer?! But if there's no beer, then there's no beef or beans!Heh I know exactly what you mean, as an XCOM player I see 72% and think "oh god my soldier's going to miss". Thankfully reality doesn't run on XCOM or D&D logic
Yeah, one silver lining to Kavanaugh's appointment is that Republicans are likely to see their control of the Government and the Court and decide that they don't need to vote. This could cause their turnout to deflate, which is exactly what we need.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 6th 2018 at 5:13:19 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangYou're completely right.
After all it's not like:
-An election is coming up.
-Impeachment is possible
-Court packing is possible
-We can just ignore any Supreme Court decision that involves him a la Andrew Jackson.
Oh wait, all of those things are true! So maybe let's not say that nothing matters ok?
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangThat would be absolutely amazing if it happened. But by the same token, we need to remind our Democratic colleagues that they do need to vote. We've already incurred enough damage from two years of an unchecked Trump administration; another two is unthinkable.
Like, I still have friends who claim that they're "apolitical" or that they "don't follow politics", and... no. You can't afford to be either of those things when so much is at stake.
I think I'm just going to post this
◊ on my Facebook wall every day leading up to the election.
Edited by TyeDyeWildebeest on Oct 6th 2018 at 5:20:17 AM
No beer?! But if there's no beer, then there's no beef or beans!RE: Murkowski's vote - she voted "Present" instead so she wouldn't cause her colleague, Sen. Daines, wouldn't have to fly back from his daughter's wedding just to off-set her vote
.
Kind of.
It's about power.
To put it simplistically. The power of Congress is the money they have, the power of the President is the military that obeys them, but the power of the Supreme Court is just their legitimacy.
So if the legitimacy is harmed (which it is by default from Kavanaugh ascending) then Congress just ignoring their power is possible. Hence why I referenced Andrew Jackson, that's more or less what he did when he clashed with the Supreme Court.
So we could totally say "Brett Kavanaugh has made his decision and let him enforce it" and ignore everything the rapist decides to rule.
Ah but don't confuse a failure of imagination on your part with reality, all of the things I mentioned are possible. Gerrymandering just makes it slightly harder to achieve the kind of power we need to do that, but slightly harder is not impossible.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 6th 2018 at 5:28:33 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang

Edited by sgamer82 on Oct 6th 2018 at 2:59:01 AM