PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
Uh-oh, Hillary is under 50 against Jeb. Guess that means she's going to lose because reasons.

Starting to think Bush will be the GOP nominee although I really haven't given it much thought. I think Clinton's winning margin will land somewhere between Obama's 08 and 12 margins. Like 5-6 points. Or it could be bigger! Or it could be smaller. The Republican could win, even!
 
Fenderputty said:
So where do we go if it gets blown up? Repubs aren't going to rush to help solidify Obama's legacy and we've got no plan in the works.

I realize they'll try and message the dismantling of the ACA as an Obama failure, even though they're dismantling it. So what play does that leave the dems with?
Click to expand...

should-supreme-court-allow-financial-assistance-to-buy-health-insurance.jpg


Replace the question with "Should congress pass the fix to allow financial assistance to buy health insurance?" and you'll probably see the same numbers, which could easily affect Republican's real world numbers if they keep doing nothing about a looming insurance death spiral that would be fixed with one paragraph.

So if the supreme court is partisan but is smart about it, they'd probably rather avoid all that negativity towards republicans and rule in favor of the government. There's plenty of reasons to be positive or negative about the outcome. I really can't pick a side for this one.

Aaron Strife said:
Uh-oh, Hillary is under 50 against Jeb. Guess that means she's going to lose because reasons.

Starting to think Bush will be the GOP nominee although I really haven't given it much thought. I think Clinton's winning margin will land somewhere between Obama's 08 and 12 margins. Like 5-6 points. Or it could be bigger! Or it could be smaller. The Republican could win, even!
Click to expand...

All he has to do is get all the undecideds to break his way, and he'll be president.

Also, Bernie has 50% of democrats putting him as a first or second choice. So even with undecideds and others in the race, he's a lock if Hillary ever decides to go home and stop running for president.
 
thepotatoman said:
Friday trash day, into a Monday apology would be exactly how a PR firm would handle subsidies going away and gay marriage being legalized.
Click to expand...

A PR firm would do this at 6 PM on Friday, not 10:00 AM.

Also, that poll above shows a huge campaign point for democrats.
 
Samarecarm said:
Has there been any speculation as to who the Dems' next Senate Majority/Minority leader is likely to be after Reid's term ends?

Durbin's kinda old-ish, not from a swing state, and doesn't really represent the demographics that Dems want to capture...
Click to expand...

Schumer.

EDIT: Huh, Amy Schumer is related to Chuck Schumer.
 
Diablos said:
This is what you're hoping.

I think the subsidies are in real trouble now. Why on earth would they pick Friday? That just seems insane. For any reason. Kill the subsidies on Friday, legalize gay marriage on Monday.

RIP Obamacare
Click to expand...

Remember that "one day please conservatives, next day please liberals" pattern that the Roberts court seems to like for the ends of its terms?

My parents might be losing their plans soon.
 
Diablos said:
This is what you're hoping.

I think the subsidies are in real trouble now. Why on earth would they pick Friday? That just seems insane. For any reason. Kill the subsidies on Friday, legalize gay marriage on Monday.

RIP Obamacare
Click to expand...

Again, a Friday news dump happens at 6 or 7 PM, not 10 AM.
 
HylianTom said:
Remember that "one day please conservatives, next day please liberals" pattern that the Roberts court seems to like for the ends of its terms?

My parents might be losing their plans soon.
Click to expand...
I didn't even think of this because I'm not aware of this pattern.
When has this happened?

Plinko said:
Again, a Friday news dump happens at 6 or 7 PM, not 10 AM.
Click to expand...
Like this really matters? Are you in denial? It's how the court operates. Day > hour.
It is their closest thing to a 'news dump'.
 
makingmusic476 said:
You guys are scaring me about the ACA.

God, we'll be so fucked if it's knocked down.
Click to expand...
It's probably over.

Honestly our best chance was a ruling last week. It didn't happen. The longer it takes the less likely it is that the subsidies survive.

A Friday decision is basically trolling at this point.
 
Diablos said:
It's probably over.

Honestly our best chance was a ruling last week. It didn't happen. The longer it takes the less likely it is that the subsidies survive.

A Friday decision is basically trolling at this point.
Click to expand...

Which is why I don't think it's Friday. If we were going to get a bad ruling it would be the very last day so the court could leave town right after.
 
Diablos said:
It's probably over.

Honestly our best chance was a ruling last week. It didn't happen. The longer it takes the less likely it is that the subsidies survive.

A Friday decision is basically trolling at this point.
Click to expand...

Wat

How does this make any sense whatsoever?
 
Diablos said:
It's probably over.

Honestly our best chance was a ruling last week. It didn't happen. The longer it takes the less likely it is that the subsidies survive.

A Friday decision is basically trolling at this point.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I always thought King and Obergefell would come out the same time, no matter the former's ruling.

Assuming gay marriage is legalized, because I don't really see how that doesn't happen, it makes sense for Roberts to hide upholding the gov't in King with that case. That case will get 10% the coverage as legalized gay marriage. Social Conservatives are going to give a shit about that and subsidies on the back burner.

Why give King an entire week of media play?

And for the record, I believe they would do this even if they ruled against the government. Roberts/SCOTUS does not want this to be a big news deal regardless of their choice, so hide it around gay marriage.

Don't overanalyze this stuff. It was always going to be released close to Obergefell and that's exactly what's happening.
 
just want to chime in on something.

I know it would be hilarious to see the GOP candidates squirm around with the question of the confederate flag and stuff, but I'm glad (and amazed) and how swiftly the movement has been so far to remove it. We'll see if it gets done, but if it does, good fucking riddance. I'd much rather this shit go away that be a thing to lol about. That flag is a disgrace and has always been such and the sooner it's gone the better.
 
The Roberts Court's Surprising Move Leftward (NYTimes)


The Supreme Court under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has been a conservative court. But even conservative courts have liberal terms – and the current term is leaning left as it enters its final two weeks.

The court has issued liberal decisions in 54 percent of the cases in which it had announced decisions as of June 22, according to the Supreme Court Database, using a widely accepted standard developed by political scientists. If that trend holds, the final percentage could rival the highest since the era of the notably liberal court of the 1950s and 1960s led by Chief Justice Earl Warren. The closest contenders are the previous term and the one that started in 2004 and ended with the announcement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement.

Of course, the justices have yet to rule on seven cases, including the two most closely watched of the term: on same-sex marriage and President Obama's health care law. Most court watchers think a liberal ruling on marriage is coming and are less certain about the health care case.

The court's leftward movement is modest, and it remains well to the right of where it was in the Warren court years, when the percentage of liberal decisions routinely topped 70 percent. Yet the recent numbers do seem suggestive of a shift.
Click to expand...

WHk5Ta0.png


KovHSJS.png


cmKIjG3.png
 
People trying to read the tea leaves on SCOTUS decisions is just darling. "Insiders" can't even tell us when they will be announced but y'all think you can guess the actual verdict.
 
Diablos said:
It's probably over.

Honestly our best chance was a ruling last week. It didn't happen. The longer it takes the less likely it is that the subsidies survive.

A Friday decision is basically trolling at this point.
Click to expand...
Do you remember the previous Obamacare case? It was released on the last day of the term.
 
Diablos said:
I didn't even think of this because I'm not aware of this pattern.
When has this happened?
Click to expand...

It's a weak pattern (and sometimes it's not the next day), but in 2013 we saw the Voting Rights Act ruling, followed by the gay marriage ruling. In 2010 we saw a gun rights case decided by a conservative wing, followed by a first amendment case decided by the liberal wing.

(I had to do a quick lookup, and was reminded of how much more of a swing voter Souter was back in the day. Sotomayor was quite a hop to the left.)

Crisco said:
People trying to read the tea leaves on SCOTUS decisions is just darling. "Insiders" can't even tell us when they will be announced but y'all think you can guess the actual verdict.
Click to expand...
I think it's funny as hell. Definitely one of my favorite times of the year.
 
Black Mamba said:
Honestly, I always thought King and Obergefell would come out the same time, no matter the former's ruling.

Assuming gay marriage is legalized, because I don't really see how that doesn't happen, it makes sense for Roberts to hide upholding the gov't in King with that case. That case will get 10% the coverage as legalized gay marriage. Social Conservatives are going to give a shit about that and subsidies on the back burner.

Why give King an entire week of media play?

And for the record, I believe they would do this even if they ruled against the government. Roberts/SCOTUS does not want this to be a big news deal regardless of their choice, so hide it around gay marriage.

Don't overanalyze this stuff. It was always going to be released close to Obergefell and that's exactly what's happening.
Click to expand...
I think this will happen even if the subsidies are knocked down and gay marriage is legalized. The Obamacare case is too nuanced to claim it as a major victory - Obama will probably get Congress to pass some sort of fix even if it's shitty and compromises something else out of it. It wouldn't mean the end of the law as a whole.

Gay marriage though? Whoa Nelly. If it gets legalized by SCOTUS there's nothing conservatives can do about that except throw the most epic tantrum of their lives. This has been the defining social issue in American politics for over a decade.
 
Plinko said:
Wat

How does this make any sense whatsoever?
Click to expand...

We saw Metanalysis's smart point about an early decision being good for the government, and then probably made the illogical jump to it meaning absolutely terrible news if it doesn't show up early.

Sometimes good news not happening isn't a bad thing, just a neutral thing.

And I'm a little sorry I ever brought up the Friday trash day thing. I stand behind that reasoning if that rumor about the timing ends up being true, but we don't even know if that rumor is accurate.
 
Aaron Strife said:
Gay marriage though? Whoa Nelly. If it gets legalized by SCOTUS there's nothing conservatives can do about that except throw the most epic tantrum of their lives. This has been the defining social issue in American politics for over a decade.
Click to expand...

You ain't kiddin'. If we do indeed get a ruling for marriage (yup.. I'm still couching this in conditionals. Superstitious me.), there's a solid portion of the populace who currently is convinced that such a thing was impossible. Fireworks. Tears. Cats & dogs.

I'm wondering how long it'd take to go into effect here in Louisiana. Obergefell day might be a day for just watching reactions..
 
I realize law doesn't work this way, but I just can't see all of the big cases going the same way. Gay marriage is a lock, Imo, but everything's by else is a toss-up to me.

If you think they'll split the baby, then I think lethal injection is the next likely liberal ruling. After the VRA, Arizona's redistribution my coulf go either way, and of course ACA scares me to death because it gives them a chance (and political cover) to reverse themselves. I take solace only in how absurd the argument is on its face. Which s immediately countered by how ridiculous it was the guy had standing.

Anyway, my non-prediction prediction is no sweeps, gay marriage for all, and my god have mercy on my soul.
 
Morning Joe:

Joe Scarborugh: "Jeb is going to win FL, OH(with Kasich) and I'm sorry but Jebs going to win VA. With the Hispanic states out west if he wins(the election) NM, CO and NV will go for him."

He is delusional.

CIMIvyqWcAEi6KN.png
 
NeoXChaos said:
Morning Joe:

Joe Scarborugh: "Jeb is going to win FL, OH(with Kasich) and I'm sorry but Jebs going to win VA. With the Hispanic states out west if he wins(the election) NM, CO and NV will go for him."

He is delusional.

CIMIvyqWcAEi6KN.png
Click to expand...
I saw that. The look on Mika's face while he was going through this scenario was priceless. You could see her biting her tongue.
 
HylianTom said:
I saw that. The look on Mika's face while he was going through this scenario was priceless. You could see her biting her tongue.
Click to expand...

no one except Mika challenged him. Mike Barnacle who I thought was neutral was nodding his head in agreement while Geist quipped his usual "above the fray" scripted answers.
 
AnotherNils said:
I realize law doesn't work this way, but I just can't see all of the big cases going the same way. Gay marriage is a lock, Imo, but everything's by else is a toss-up to me.

If you think they'll split the baby, then I think lethal injection is the next likely liberal ruling. After the VRA, Arizona's redistribution my coulf go either way, and of course ACA scares me to death because it gives them a chance (and political cover) to reverse themselves. I take solace only in how absurd the argument is on its face. Which s immediately countered by how ridiculous it was the guy had standing.

Anyway, my non-prediction prediction is no sweeps, gay marriage for all, and my god have mercy on my soul.
Click to expand...

If our Supreme Court is working under the idea of, "Well, the last case went left, so this one should go right," we are absolutely screwed as a country.
 
Plinko said:
If our Supreme Court is working under the idea of, "Well, the last case went left, so this one should go right," we are absolutely screwed as a country.
Click to expand...
Well, some people do think Roberts decision in the first ACA case was motivated by giving by the court political legitimacy after being perceived as having turned into a conservative institutions after citizens United.

I'm not arguing they barter the actual cases, but I am arguing they consider the shitstorm that will ensue when they release the decisions.
 
AnotherNils said:
Well, some people do think Roberts decision in the first ACA case was motivated by giving by the court political legitimacy after being perceived as having turned into a conservative institutions after citizens United.

I'm not arguing they barter the actual cases, but I am arguing they consider the shitstorm that will ensue when they release the decisions.
Click to expand...

There's empirical proof that, no matter the decision, they're more likely to release their bigger opinions at the very end of the term.
 
PhoenixDark said:
TAA going down big time in the House. Good. Is Obama capable of effectively selling anything lol?
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/24/us/politics/senate-vote-on-trade-bill.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=0

WASHINGTON — The Senate narrowly voted Tuesday to end debate on legislation granting President Obama enhanced negotiating powers to complete a major Pacific trade accord, virtually assuring final passage Wednesday of Mr. Obama’s top legislative priority in his final years in office.

The procedural vote, 60 to 37, reached the minimum threshold needed, but final passage will require only 51 votes. It was the second time the Senate blocked a filibuster of so-called trade promotion authority, but this time the bill was shorn of a separate measure to offer enhanced retraining and education assistance to workers displaced by international trade accords. That measure faces a crucial procedural vote on Wednesday as well.

Passage of a stand-alone trade promotion bill will put pressure on House Democrats, who this month brought down the worker aid provision when it was linked to the fast-track legislation, a strategic move they hoped would torpedo the entire trade package.

Representative Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House, criticized the Republicans’ approach, saying it would hinder the ability to address climate change and its connection to commerce through the broader trade bill.

But Republican leaders — with support from the White House — found a parliamentary way to corner the Democrats, by separating the two pieces of the bill. By Wednesday evening, legislation will almost certainly be on the president’s desk giving him the power to complete the trade deal, the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership, knowing Congress cannot amend or filibuster the final accord. He can sign it whether or not the House passes worker dislocation assistance when it is scheduled to come to a vote on Friday.
Click to expand...

The Senate on Wednesday is set to give final approval to trade promotion authority, then vote to end debate on a separate bill that attaches worker dislocation assistance to a broadly popular bill extending a longstanding trade agreement with Africa. That provision would then be voted on Thursday, and if approved as expected, it would go to the House on Friday.

This time, if Democrats bring it down, they will effectively be killing a worker education and retraining program that Democrats created in the Kennedy administration and have nurtured ever since — but will still watch Mr. Obama sign into law a “fast-track” trade negotiations bill that will extend well into the next presidency.

At the same time, House and Senate negotiators will begin hashing out differences over a separate bill enhancing enforcement measures to police trade agreements. The measures will include a newly added provision speeding up action to combat foreign competitors who “dump” steel and other products on the United States market at artificially low prices to put domestic manufacturers out of business.

Opponents of fast track hoped trade promotion authority without worker assistance would run into trouble in the Senate. And some Democrats did try to stoke fears that Congress could give the president the power to complete major trade deals without any assistance to workers who might be hurt by those agreements.
Click to expand...
 
ivysaur12 said:
There's empirical proof that, no matter the decision, they're more likely to release their bigger opinions at the very end of the term.
Click to expand...
I'm not goi g to pretend I'm being completely rational here. There's a definitely an element of statistical superstition in my belief that the court is unlikely to go 4-0, liberal, on the four big remaining cases.

But I also don't think you guys would any less stunned than me if that did happen.
 
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-obamacare-and-the-supreme-court/

As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to issue a ruling that could impact the Affordable Care Act, 47 percent of Americans now approve of the health care law, the highest in CBS News and New York Times polling (although support is still short of a majority). For the first time, more Americans now approve than disapprove of the ACA, but by a narrow margin.

Most Republicans (72 percent) continue to oppose the law, while most Democrats (70 percent) support it. Independents are split. Still, few Americans (just 9 percent) think the health care law is working well and should be kept as it is, and 31 percent want the law repealed entirely. Most - 55 percent - think that there are some good things in the law, though changes are needed to make it work better.
Click to expand...

views-of-the-health-care-law.jpg


what-should-happen-to-the-health-care-law.jpg
 
Eh, it's not that surprising. Both sides are capable of irrational opposition to practical legislation. Trade deals have been a bugaboo for Democrats since NAFTA, many have hinged their political careers on opposition to them, so it makes sense that the ever pragmatic Obama would turn to the GOP to get this passed. Politically, it was the only way, at least until Reid steps down.
 
I just. I. I dunno.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...l-has-jeb-bush-first-and-donald-trump-second/

Jeb Bush, who is struggling in the polls in Iowa, may find his salvation in New Hampshire. Yet another poll of New Hampshire voters shows him leading the passel of nearly 20 Republican candidates for the 2016 presidential nomination.

Mr. Bush, the former governor of Florida who has family ties to New England, was backed by 14 percent of respondents in a Suffolk University poll released Tuesday; the surprise was that his nearest competitor was Donald J. Trump, the real estate mogul-TV personality who announced his candidacy last week and who captured the support of nearly 11 percent of those surveyed.
Click to expand...
 
Rubio seems like the clear choice if the GOP decides that another Bush just isn't electable. Maybe Walker but he's gonna have trouble answering for his shit hole of a state.
 
With 7 cases left to decide (Tex. DHCA, AZ. Leg, Burwell, Utility Air, Johnson, Obergefell, Glossip), here are the amount of opinions written by each justice this term:

Roberts: 6
Scalia: 7
Kennedy: 4
Ginsburg: 6
Breyer: 8
Alito: 7
Sotomayor: 7
Kagan: 7

Tex. DHCA is a January case. AZ. Leg and Burwell are February. Utility Air is March. Johnson, Obergefell, and Glossip are April.

Kennedy has not written any opinions (yet) from January. Roberts, Kennedy, and Ginsburg have not written any February opinions. Scalia has not written any March opinions. Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Alito, and Sotomayor have not written any April opinions.

My guess is that Kennedy gets at least three opinions. Kennedy will probably write Tex. DHCA, AZ. Leg, and Obergefell. Roberts looks more and more likely to write Burwell (which seemed inevitable, but still).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sports betting |OT|
7
10K
Hideous Snake replied
ItalianGAF |OT| - Italia
3
941
Azzurri replied
Food |OT| GAFeteria
2
77
17K
SLoWMoTIoN replied
  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
254K
firehawk12 replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom