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
No it's the inevitable conclusion if we DO, we lost the court numbers battle, hell we lost it in 2016...
Its time to reposition the front and focus on other ways to accomplish our goals, commiting to an already lost battle does no good... especialy not when as trump has demonstrated you can just kind of ignore the court any way, and that a lot of things people see there as being no workaround too there is plenty.
Democrats rely heavily on moderates whi do care.
Edited by Imca on Sep 19th 2020 at 2:55:32 AM
Then explain how you intend to protect said rights with a 6-3 Republican Supreme Court majority, women’s right were already only protected this year because Roberts didn’t want to be blatantly partisan.
Again, any change to how the court seats are filled that means there won’t be a 6-3 Republican majority is court packing.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranYou're blaming the Trump win on Obamacare?
Not the fact that Obama was disappointingly milquetoast for someone who ran on "Hope" and "Change", and HRC basically promised more of the same?
"...in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach."@silsaw: It's not a bad compromise, but it would be inevitably painted as "stealth court packing" by the Right-Wing media.
Unless the Democrats at least try to counter that narrative in a meaningful way (something that never quite happened during Obamacare due to conflicts with the right-wing of the party) the Democrats are going to be portrayed as "trying to steal the court", so either way it's still a risky commitment.
![]()
![]()
Performing some electoral reform could make them less reliant on centrist, but that would still require confronting the issue of the Supreme Court refusing any expansion of voting rights.
Edited by Mio on Sep 19th 2020 at 5:58:40 AM
(uh, @Silas W, this convo is moving fast) Of course they should not abandon those rights, but at the same time they still have to be sure they have their voters behind them. It's not just selling the idea to the public, Democratic politicians also need to be sure that this is what their base is standing behind.
And a big problem these days is that there is so much misinformation going around that it can become difficult for Democrats to the the message across. You really have to be an outstanding politician to go up against that.
Edited by Redmess on Sep 19th 2020 at 11:58:43 AM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesI am blame the loss of senate on the ACHA. Not trump, though trump is in a way the rights reaction to Obama.
It needs to be clear that any thing we do, they will meet with a retaliation of there own, and no we cant just stop them it doesn't work like that... not when they have so many people supporting there bullshit.
TBH that's something the left needs to work on actualy, desperately... the right has fox news, and while I moraly hate them so very much... there is no denying there effectivenss...
The left needs it's own propaganda network.
Edited by Imca on Sep 19th 2020 at 3:01:57 AM
Any court appointments will be declared court packing by the Right-Wing media, they’re beyond hope or rationality.
What we should care about is the centrist media (AKA the media outside of Fox), if changing the rules to three appointments over a term (which is what Trump has had) can be sold to the likes of CNN as Democrats building government institutions and reducing political drama then it should work.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran![]()
Nope, just changing existing laws. Unless you wanted to remove the lifetime appointment bit.
I suspect this means Mitch has the votes without her.
Edited by Silasw on Sep 19th 2020 at 10:07:04 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran@silsaw: Unfortunately the Right-Wing media is the leading media in the country, so even the mainstream media will be forced to platform their narratives and lend them at least token credence.
Unless the Democrats work with the media to pushback on the narrative the Republicans are always going to have an advantage in that department.
I'm not so sure about that. Her political situation in Maine is somewhat precarious, if she had done what she did Kavanaugh and Trump impeachment she might have truly doomed herself.
You can only write so much in your forum signature. It's not fair that I want to write a piece of writing yet it will cut me off in the midWe need 4 defections, as Pence can break a 50-50 split.
Because Democrats don’t have a rich media owning partisan hack like Murdoch on their side.
Edited by Silasw on Sep 19th 2020 at 10:24:15 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranAlso, I don't think we want a Democrat Fox News. Fox News is awful, and not just because they are right wing.
/What, do you really want a liberal Fox News that spreads propaganda and liberal conspiracies about Republicans? That spreads lies and misinformation? No thanks. That's exactly what we don't need right now.
![]()
![]()
Bloomberg?
I sure hope Democrats would vehemently reject such a monstrosity. One Fox News is already too much.
Edited by Redmess on Sep 19th 2020 at 12:42:16 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesThe problem with a Democratic Fox News is basically, it'd create an echo-chamber that would be very bad for self-awareness.
A big part of why Republicans are the way they are is because organizations like Fox News go with partisanship over truth or reason, which creates a very self-destructive mentality.
Leviticus 19:34The bad optics argument rests on the assumption that Dem voters would react badly enough to the Dems in office putting their collective foot down and accomplishing something that they'd take their vote elsewhere. And I just kinda don't see that happening.
Again, when your opponent is stabbing you with a knife, you don't worry about kicking them in the balls not exactly being sportsmanlike. We don't have the luxury of the most powerful country in the world's main progressive (just) party trying to fight off climate disaster and actual fascism with an arm tied behind their back.
Yeah, it really needs to be emphasized that "court packing will gurantee electoral defeat" has no evidence supporting it. Could it? I don't know, I'm not a genie. But doing nothing is not an option. So maybe Democrats should do their job and sell it to the public.
When even Schumer recognizes that it may be necessary then you know it's really necessary.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangWas a Republican until 2009, was considering running as a independent in 2016 and will have only become a democrat between then and now.
He’s far from a partisan democrat, he’s naturally a Republican but has been forced out as they’ve moved to the right.
Edited by Silasw on Sep 19th 2020 at 10:50:05 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran![]()
No one said court packing guarantees electoral defeat. The point being made was that overzealous court packing that Democrats could not sell to their base would backfire on them in the following election.
It was just a joke at the expense of Bloomberg, not a serious suggestion.
Edited by Redmess on Sep 19th 2020 at 12:52:51 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest times

"Whenever "bad optics" come up, I seriously wonder how good the optics of "we could do something to prevent harm from coming to you, but we won't" is supposed to look by comparison."
This just makes me think of the ACA, where the Democrats did something blatantly good and prevented harm to millions of people and were rewarded by getting trounced in the next election.
Republicans screamed about government appointed doctors and death panels for grandma, while Democrats scrambled around on the defensive. The optics weren't in our favor. That not because Democrats didn't have an argument to make, they just made it badly. And I'll grant Republicans have a built in media advantage, but that still means we need to run our message better and smarter and more often through any means available and create new means whenever possible. Imagine all the good that could have been done if we'd kept the House back then.