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
"Because Democrats don’t have a rich media owning partisan hack like Murdoch on their side"
I want to add to this that Facebook shares more videos of Fox News opinion hosts than Fox News has actual viewers. Heck, just the other day Zuckerberg was telling senior staff that Facebook would do better under a Republican than a Democrat.
Meanwhile Democrats and the left have a very hard time walking in the same line. Heck, just the other day in the British Politics thread an article ostensibly about the Left and winning elections just casually refers to remarks from Biden as a "moment of lucidity" and how he stabbed Bernie in the back over Medicare for All.
I don't get why Greed and Hate seem to have an easier time working hand in hand than us, but we really need to step up our game.
Some people are very adamant of something with zero proof to show for it. Yes court packing will need to be sold to voters, but that doesn't automatically mean that it's impossible and will doom America to another 8 years of Republican domination. So I would say going with 2 more justices would be best and easily sold. The Republicans screwed Obama out of one justice by inventing up a rule, then screwed Biden out of one justice by going back on said rule, and this still keeps a conservative majority on the court so it can't even be a power grab. You just have to tie it into being to balance out Republicans cheating and playing dirty.
Because there is really no other alternative but court packing on the table here. Putting in term limits or rotating the court would both require changing the constitution which would light a fire under the Republicans to oppose, and given how State Republicans love to roll out a ton of anti-Abortion laws whenever a new conservative judge is appointed you can't just ignore the SC when making progressive laws and policies. You want a Green New Deal, Medicare for All and action on climate change? Well hope you are looking forward to the Republicans launching legal fights to drag it before the courts they spent four years packing with the purpose of stopping those policies.
On the "Liberal Fox News" idea that's just never going to work. The Republicans have a much more narrowly focused base to reach for while the Democrats have a wide base. You could never make a propaganda network that would appeal to all of them, and attempting it would alienate a number on principle.
It has to be repeated that going from recent history the Democrats win elections that have higher turnouts. Trump lost the popular vote four years ago with less total votes than Romney got before him, who in turn got less votes that Mc Cain before that. The Republican party base isn't that large, their biggest strength is that they vote more consistently whereas Democrats have to deal with voters who aren't as motivated to go out and vote on top of those who are blocked by the Republican's blatant hatred of fair elections.
Imca has said that explicitly.
In other news, Jerry Nadler (the democrat chair of the House Judiciary committee) has explicitly said that if a lame duck appointment is made democrats should expand the court.
Edited by Silasw on Sep 19th 2020 at 11:19:58 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranI’m not going to straight up commit to courtpacking, but I definitely think it should be shopped around so that they gauge public opinion on it.
Oh God! Natural light!I don't think the argument being made is that the most extreme response is always correct - it's that in these circumstances, we might have to go extreme unless we just accept things to be fucked for the next several decades.
Whether you agree with that or not is one thing, but I feel like it's obvious to see why people are contemplating things in that way.
In the subject of "liberal FOX News", the point has been made before (on this very thread I believe) that the closest equivalent would be the likes of Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, Samantha Bee and John Oliver: left-leaning comedic pundits and entertainers who are very partisan, but are differentiated by maintaining basic journalistic integrity that Fox News does not even consider having. None of them have a network war machine the level of Fox, though, or even come close. If you put them all together they're fearsome competition but they're split apart a bunch of other networks.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."Well yeah, they're the closest thing to the concept, but yeah they aren't are 1 to 1 of what that is. But I feel like any well-funded "liberal fox news" would just turn into an MSNBC, buy the nature of money and capitalism.
Edited by jjjj2 on Sep 19th 2020 at 8:03:37 AM
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 midChalk me up as someone else who was undecided about court-packing, but for whom Mc Connell's efforts to immediately force a second conservative justice onto the court. without any respect for RBG's passing whatsoever, and under similarly specious contexts as the last "stolen" justice, has forced me to view it as a viable option now considering the blatant peri-illegality of the Republicans' actions.
Here I see it less as "you should always fight fire with fire and take the most radical option from the getgo" and more that, "Mc Connell you leave us with no option, time to take the gloves off". And I hope this affects a lot of other such "undecideds" to feel the same way about this and are worried about optics.
I'm very skeptical of the idea that a huge number of Democratic voters would be outraged at the Democrats doing something to fight back against the GOP. I mean, obviously Fox News will try to spin it as fascist Democrats illegally taking over the country (even though court packing is perfectly legal), but Fox News viewers would literally rather kill themselves than vote for a Democrat. That's not an exaggeration, that's just how much they've been brainwashed. These people are unreachable, but they are a minority, and will be even more of a minority if we manage to get rid of voter suppression. And therefore we can ignore them, in terms of optics. Nothing we do will ever be good enough for them, so why bother?
Furthermore, even if some so-called moderates will be turned off by the idea, there are also huge numbers of disillusioned progressives who hate the Democratic party specifically because they never oppose the GOP in any meaningful way. Who would in fact in extremely excited and motivated by the Democrats taking strong action to secure civil rights for the future.
Edited by Clarste on Sep 19th 2020 at 5:19:16 AM
This is the biggest myth I see in this thread constantly, some exist but they don't even hold a candle to the sheer amount of moderates there are...
Sanders has lost every time he ran to a more moderate candidate for a reason... People need to quit mistaking there own personal feelings for those of the majority... and when the majority speaks they don't want the democrats to move further that direction sadly, they want them where they are.
That lefter wing of the democratic party is not in any way a meaningful number if they can't ever get there candidate through.
President names some one they want as a judge, congress holds a curtosey vote where they just rubber stamp it.
The partisianship started when they refused to let Obama's picks through.
Edited by Imca on Sep 19th 2020 at 5:26:13 AM

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.
No, I'm pretty sure that is and has been Imca's point.
Anyway, I don't see anyone saying "Democrats should go about packing the court in a way that pisses people off". Of course they should sell it to the public and do it in a way that's sellable.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang