TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#335126: Oct 24th 2020 at 1:19:03 PM

Rather than packing the courts, the Democrats have proposed 18 year term limits.

Which would throw out a lot of conservative Justices.

That's a nonstarter, as it would require a Constitutional amendment. The relevant section says that SCOTUS justices shall hold offices "during good behavior", with no provision for term limits. This has generally taken to mean lifetime appointments, but they can be impeached, and there's plenty of precedent backing that up, so any law passed to the contrary would almost certainly be struck down as unconstitutional... by the SCOTUS, actually.

Edited by NativeJovian on Oct 24th 2020 at 4:20:33 AM

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#335127: Oct 24th 2020 at 1:25:13 PM

[up] Kavanaugh and Thomas should definitely be investigated over their Sexual Harassment allegations.

Otherwise, the only real way to fix the Supreme Court is to pack it. You can also re-make the entire Federal Court system to wipe that clean of Trumpeteers as well.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#335128: Oct 24th 2020 at 1:29:39 PM

Term limits are good, but they're not a solution to our current problem. 18 years for the Conservative supermajority to fuck everything up is not acceptable. Court-packing will be necessary, hopefully, Dems are strong enough to recognize it and if we're fortunate the public can be convinced.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Memers Since: Aug, 2013
#335129: Oct 24th 2020 at 1:33:04 PM

Any Amendment that actually affects anything is a straight up non-starter period in the modern US... Like the ERA disaster was proof of that.

Falrinn Since: Dec, 2014
#335130: Oct 24th 2020 at 1:48:18 PM

I think any meaningful change to the structure of the Supreme Court is going to require the Supreme Court to actually make a horrifically unpopular ruling.

Currently there's a perception that conservative justices "don't legislate from the bench", which is a relatively popular idea on the surface. The problem is of course is that people don't necessarily agree on what that actually means in practice, or exactly how restrained justices should be when it comes to actively striking down laws they deem out of line with the Constitution.

In order to change the court for the explicit purpose of curbing the power of the conservative wing of the Supreme Court, this perception would have to be shattered. And this could only happen if the Court were to heavily intervene in the election after the fact, or if they do something on the level of striking down Medicare.

And this might never happened. Partly because enough of the conservative justices (Roberts and, oddly enough, both of Trump's appointees) recognize that overreach on their part could result in retaliation, and partly because there's a nonzero chance someone from the conservative wing won't outlast Biden's first term anyways.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#335131: Oct 24th 2020 at 1:59:40 PM

The real issue with the system as it stands is that it's wildly undemocratic. Since 1969, Democrats have held the presidency for 5 terms and appointed only 4 SCOTUS justices (Carter got none in his single term, Clinton and Obama each had two terms and appointed two justices), while Republicans have had 8 terms as president but appointed 15 justices (Nixon had four in his one term and change, Ford had one in his not-quite two terms, Reagan had four in two terms, Bush Sr. had two in one term, Bush Jr. had two in two terms, and Trump has had two in his one term so far).

I haven't looked deeply enough into things to see if this is just straight luck of the draw or conservative justices are retiring during Republican administrations (which would result in a domino effect where more and more seats are essentially always appointed by Republicans), but either way, it's a problem with the system that has caused the SCOTUS to skew far more conservative than one would expect if the timing of nominees was essentially random, as was intended.

If Trump gets a third nomination through (which looks likely), then Republicans will have gotten four times as many appointments as Democrats despite only having 60% more time in office.

Edited by NativeJovian on Oct 24th 2020 at 5:04:02 AM

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#335132: Oct 24th 2020 at 2:02:24 PM

I think any meaningful change to the structure of the Supreme Court is going to require the Supreme Court to actually make a horrifically unpopular ruling.

Currently there's a perception that conservative justices "don't legislate from the bench", which is a relatively popular idea on the surface. The problem is of course is that people don't necessarily agree on what that actually means in practice, or exactly how restrained justices should be when it comes to actively striking down laws they deem out of line with the Constitution.

Of course, the Supreme Court would need to cause a legitimacy crisis for restructuring to become viable.

I don't think that's anywhere close to impossible, it's not like the Supreme Court hasn't stood against the popular will/elite will in the past. With predictably bad results for the Court. And with the Conservative supermajority, Roberts' vote would be less powerful which could lead to significantly more incautious rulings.

It's probably not inevitable, but I wouldn't assume that it's anywhere close to implausible.

(none of this is really meant to contradict you, just respond to your point and expand it)

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
jjjj2 from Arrakis Since: Jul, 2015
#335133: Oct 24th 2020 at 2:25:10 PM

Roberts will still have a fair amount of power. He gets to decide how the law is interpreted when he is in the majority. Still, he won't have as much...

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 mid
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#335134: Oct 24th 2020 at 3:00:52 PM

One possible reform is the court expanding each presidential term, so having each presidential term come with a fixed number of appointments to the Supreme Court either via expansion or via vacancies, vacancies occurring beyond the term’s appointment limit result in temporary court shrinkage.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#335135: Oct 24th 2020 at 3:09:26 PM

Maine’s high court rules absentee ballots must be received by Election Day

Apparently there was an attempt to extend the deadline until the 13th, but the courts have upheld the requirement that all ballots must be received on election day.

Apparently, both North Carolina and Wisconsin are also in a limbo of whether they'll have extended dates or only count ballots received on election day. The Supreme Court is to decide on that soon...

Edited by LSBK on Oct 24th 2020 at 5:11:32 AM

Codafett Knows-Many-Things Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: Waiting for you *wink*
Knows-Many-Things
#335136: Oct 24th 2020 at 3:11:25 PM

You know what's funny is I bet the idea used to be that death by natural causes was the term limit. It's just that people with authority live so long now.

Just Having Fun
Memers Since: Aug, 2013
#335137: Oct 24th 2020 at 3:25:27 PM

It’s really stupid that they just can’t all be postmarked by the 3rd, especially with the mail dragging its feet.

Imca (Veteran)
#335138: Oct 24th 2020 at 3:46:09 PM

Its not stupid its intended, Democrats aren't voting in person, so the Republicians are doing every thing in there power to make sure that only inperson votes count.

If you really care about making sure your vote counts you kinda have to just force yourself to do it in person even with the risks at this point, vote early if you can and minimize the line... because bluntly I have no faith that a large majority of mail in ballots won't be rendered invalid through every method they have at there disposal.

Edited by Imca on Oct 24th 2020 at 3:46:56 AM

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#335139: Oct 24th 2020 at 4:01:06 PM

Mail-in voting should be reliable as long as you do it early. Like, now. If you wait much longer than the chances of it not making it through the system or not having time to correct any problems before election day go way up. Some states/counties also have ways for you to track your ballot (to see if it's been received/accepted), which you can also take advantage of.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#335140: Oct 24th 2020 at 4:16:19 PM

They let you check the status of your ballot in many states, FYI.

https://vrsws.sos.ky.gov/vic/

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Oct 24th 2020 at 4:17:11 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Steven (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
#335141: Oct 24th 2020 at 4:46:53 PM

Just got notice that my ballot was both received and valid.

Remember, these idiots drive, fuck, and vote. Not always in that order.
FluffyMcChicken My Hair Provides Affordable Healthcare from where the floating lights gleam Since: Jun, 2014 Relationship Status: In another castle
My Hair Provides Affordable Healthcare
#335142: Oct 24th 2020 at 4:48:15 PM

[up][up] If you're feeling anxious about the postal system, you could also just mark up and seal your ballot and just drop it off at a voting center on Election Day.

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#335143: Oct 24th 2020 at 5:36:34 PM

The irony is that the only constitutional way to address the Supreme Court makeup is to pack it, because that requires nobody doing anything that they don't already have the power to do or fiddling with the constitution or asking people to retire pretty please.

ShinyCottonCandy Everyone's friend Malamar from Lumiose City (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Everyone's friend Malamar
#335144: Oct 24th 2020 at 6:00:45 PM

[up]Isn’t impeachment of some of the justices also an option? Or is there some barrier that I’m missing?

My musician page
nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#335145: Oct 24th 2020 at 6:01:59 PM

As far as the Supreme Court goes: something I learned recently is that while FDR might have backed down on court-packing, after his attempt one of the conservative justices "mysteriously" suddenly started voting to uphold New Deal legislation that was pretty much identical to stuff he'd previously voted to strike down. So it's not entirely unresponsive to "soft" pressure.

On a less positive note, though: it really looks like the polls are tightening again. It's somewhat to be expected, AFAIK, but still, I don't see anybody talking about this anywhere, and it's giving me that whistling past the graveyard feeling again.

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#335146: Oct 24th 2020 at 6:03:24 PM

If you know it's to be expected, then what is your point?

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#335147: Oct 24th 2020 at 6:18:49 PM

[up][up][up] Only if they did something actually criminal. Impeaching a justice just for being Republican would almost certainly lead to a constitutional crisis, including possible impeachment of Biden in turn. It would be a very bad idea.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#335148: Oct 24th 2020 at 6:20:27 PM

It takes two thirds of the senate to impeach, so no there’s no realistic world in which they can be impeached.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
ShinyCottonCandy Everyone's friend Malamar from Lumiose City (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Everyone's friend Malamar
#335149: Oct 24th 2020 at 6:20:33 PM

[up][up]Both Thomas and Kavanaugh are at least suspected of criminal actions.

[up]Is that two-thirds rigid, or can a fifty percent +1 majority decide to adjust it?

Edited by ShinyCottonCandy on Oct 24th 2020 at 9:21:37 AM

My musician page
Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#335150: Oct 24th 2020 at 6:22:27 PM

You'd have to prove that, though. Perhaps it is possible if Biden pushed an investigation, but there would be enormous pushback, probably not just from Republicans either.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times

Total posts: 417,856
Top