Maybe this rant can shut up the bipartisanship President narrative. He's so bipartisan he keeps wanting his party to end the filibuster!
probably not
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
I swear to fucking god, Kennedy.....you better vote to end gerrymandering....
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ative-supreme-court-is-wreaking-havoc-w503125
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ative-supreme-court-is-wreaking-havoc-w503125
balladofwindfishes
Member
What a terrible article.
These got stays because the SC is currently hearing cases on those two issues and without the stays, things get complicated to manage because now there's two cases about the same thing, instead of one. At least that's what was discussed last week when this happened.
What? Isn't this standard procedure for multiple cases about the same thing?
balladofwindfishes
Member
And this court's lean is the same it's been for a decade... Obama replaced liberals with liberals, Trump replaced a conservative with a conservative
Well, I feel a little better if that's truly par for the course.
But not really.....here's another article from WaPo on the same thing, citing Gorsuch's new influence as well:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1076f6d6152_story.html?utm_term=.758ec0cf563b
And as it stands right now, we COULD have had a liberal court if Garland were appointed. Right now, it mostly seems like a 4-4 court with Kennedy being the swing vote. The balance of the court is precarious at best right now. I seriously think the repercussions of Kennedy, Ginsburg, or Breyer retiring or dying before 2020 to be the single biggest threat to the US.
In my head, I seriously imagine a political cartoon where the people of the United States are hanging onto Ginsburg's legs as she holds onto a fraying rope attached to a cliff that reads "DEMOCRACY" and the pit they're about to fall into reads "FASCISM".
But not really.....here's another article from WaPo on the same thing, citing Gorsuch's new influence as well:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1076f6d6152_story.html?utm_term=.758ec0cf563b
And as it stands right now, we COULD have had a liberal court if Garland were appointed. Right now, it mostly seems like a 4-4 court with Kennedy being the swing vote. The balance of the court is precarious at best right now. I seriously think the repercussions of Kennedy, Ginsburg, or Breyer retiring or dying before 2020 to be the single biggest threat to the US.
In my head, I seriously imagine a political cartoon where the people of the United States are hanging onto Ginsburg's legs as she holds onto a fraying rope attached to a cliff that reads "DEMOCRACY" and the pit they're about to fall into reads "FASCISM".
balladofwindfishes
Member
Trump will 100% replace Kennedy within the next year or two, so buckle in.
What should be of concern to people is what happens if the Republicans continue down the path they started with Garland:
Ignore Trump for now. This is a dangerous path that I think the GOP will willfully march down, and which is more dangerous in the long-term than RBG retiring or dying. It shows a complete inability to cross the aisle when it comes to judicial branch appointments. They didn't go for Garland because of racism against Obama... They were talking about going against all Hillary's appointments because, well, Hillary. Does anyone doubt they'll obstruct a Harris or Kennedy nomination?
balladofwindfishes
Member
The precedent is set, you now need a senate majority to get a supreme court justice. This is the future McConnell has forced the country to abide by. If they take the majority in 2018, the Democrats will absolutely follow the same path.
I'm not sure a worse majority leader could have ever been picked. He shredded the integrity of the senate, and destroyed its reputation.
I'm not sure a worse majority leader could have ever been picked. He shredded the integrity of the senate, and destroyed its reputation.
AND RBG, most likely.
I don't know why I had hopes for Gorsuch, not to be liberal, but maybe a bit left of Scalia, but he's pretty much a piece of shit.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Nah, she can hold on. Health is her only concern, she has no inclinations to retire under a Republican.
Kennedy actually wants to retire under a Republican. 2019 is my guess. He doesn't want to retire in an election year.
Kennedy actually wants to retire under a Republican. 2019 is my guess. He doesn't want to retire in an election year.
If we could take the senate, it would be fine as long as he stays post mid-terms, but the chances of that happening aren't likely.
balladofwindfishes
Member
He doesn't want to make his retirement an election issue and has already started hiring clerks for the 2018 term. This Russian stuff probably doesn't sit right with a Reagan appointed justice, either.
2019 is the year to watch, imo
If you give up hope, they win. Never give up hope. Lincoln had an aggressively hostile Supreme Court against him. Marshall was replaced by Thomas. The SC changes more often than you think it does, just because it hasn't changed in awhile.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Same. At least Scalia and Ginsberg could find some common ground on search and seizure or free speech from time to time. Gorsuch doesn't even have that going for him. He's like Alito.
Oh! I didn't know that! That's good. Wouldn't retiring in 2019 also make it an election issue, especially if the Senate is Democratic? They'd probably hold off the way the GOP did now that the precedent is set. Fuck McConnell for doing this.
I'll try : ) . Maybe Clarence Thomas will croak or something. He seems like a meat and potatoes guy
I think what ballad means is that Kennedy would announce his retirement in 2019 and then leave the bench at the end of the term.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Listening to Kirsten Gillibrand on PSA, she's the real deal. First time I've heard her in an extensive interview and she's quite impressive. She sounded a lot more prepared than Harris, Warren or Booker.
Oh, gotcha. Interesting. The end of the term being end of 2019, right? I guess I just realized I don't know how SCOTUS terms work.
Of course, she isn't called Gillary for nothing!
Hm, I'll have to look into the trans issue then. I was just browsing YouTube last night looking for clips of any recent Harris interviews and stumbled across a bunch of "progressive" commentators legit tearing into her. It seems a bit early to be trying to rip apart potential 2020 Democratic candidates. You'd think they'd at least wait until a clear non-Bernie front-runner emerges in 2019.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Session's Asset Forfeiture garbage was watered down in the House, and moves to the Senate. Not even the GOP wants to touch this.
The end of the 2018-2019 term is what I meant. May/June 2019. Long after midterms and long before the 2020 election.
Here's the article about him hiring a 2018-2019 clerk already
That doesn't seem like a hire where he goes "lol never mind, I'm out, you get to work with Alito this year, have fun!!" since it's a personal hire.
The end of the 2018-2019 term is what I meant. May/June 2019. Long after midterms and long before the 2020 election.
Here's the article about him hiring a 2018-2019 clerk already
That doesn't seem like a hire where he goes "lol never mind, I'm out, you get to work with Alito this year, have fun!!" since it's a personal hire.
If he said in January 2019 "I am retiring at the end of this term" that would be June.
Highly recommend her interview on the Axe Files. I listened to that a couple months ago and went, holy shit, she's got what it takes more than anyone else in the running.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Agreed. I like her much, much more than the three you listed.
Biden/Gillibrand
Gillibrand/Biden
Gillibrand/Franken
I'd be OK with any of those. I don't want Booker/Warren/Sanders anywhere NEAR the final pairing. I'd be fine with Harris, but I think she's a bit overrated on this board.
He could but that's only if someone dies like Ginsburg, Breyer or Thomas retires.
Kennedy, then Ginsburg and Breyer seems more likely than not. They're all getting really really old
Dominican Power
Member
Jeff Sessions got played so hard by Trump.
What Ta-Nehisi Coates Gets Wrong About American Politics, by George Packer
Choice paragraphs:
I must admit, I didn't get through all of Coates's piece a few nights ago before I went to bed. I think reading both in parallel (flicking between the two at the same time, or running straight from one to the other without pause) might be very worthwhile.
Choice paragraphs:
I must admit, I didn't get through all of Coates's piece a few nights ago before I went to bed. I think reading both in parallel (flicking between the two at the same time, or running straight from one to the other without pause) might be very worthwhile.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Predicting deaths is impossible (assuming they're not hitting 100 years old). If they're not going to retire (no liberal justice will under Trump), then nobody knows how many Trump will get.
A surprise death might also push Kennedy to stay on past Trump, not wanting to upset the court further.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Hey, we're fine if these SC openings happen when Trump is in a Schumer-y mood.
RustyNails
Member
I have a feeling Graham Cassidy bill may pass, since McCain backs it and Heller's name is on it as well.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
balladofwindfishes
Member
In 15 days with no McConnell support, no CBO score, no debate, and no indication that it's even close to passing?
balladofwindfishes
Member
Mark Andrew
Member
Wonder how he got in a twitter rant this morning. Maybe Kelly is slipping.
Also the speed at which he changes the topic from terrorism to ESPN is kind of scary
Also the speed at which he changes the topic from terrorism to ESPN is kind of scary
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
RustyNails
Member
Randy is the biggest cuck in the senate. Didnt he grandstand before turtlecare too?
Only because we dont have a wildcard in McCain anymore and ex-moderate darling Heller is on it. Who else is left to peel besides Murkowski and Collins?
Basileus777
Member
The Graham bill will never even get a vote.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Right. Just last week Hatch said it doesn't have anywhere near the support it would take.
Mark Andrew
Member
Weird that McCain would support this, same with Murkowski and Collins. Its a lot of the same shit as the previous bills, and would again go against regular order. But somehow Graham has marketed this as a bipartisan bill, and everyone just bought into it. Apparently some senators did too.
balladofwindfishes
Member
They have 15 days where much more important things than this bill are being addressed. They have no help from Senate leadership to whip votes. McConnell doesn't care. Trump doesn't care. They have no CBO score. The media doesn't care.
And despite all of that, they're going to overcome all the issues the previous attempts have with this magical bill. In two weeks. With no senate leadership support.
Yep. McConnell has no interest in having this fight again.
If this thing ever gets a CBO score, those supporters will drop like flies.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
Angry right wingers are burning their MAGA hats:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...dc9e4b0edff971ac966?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...dc9e4b0edff971ac966?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked