balladofwindfishes
Member
Roberts has suffered from epileptic seizures, maybe Trump gets to replace 5 justices, including the chief justice.
Or maybe Trump is a crazy person
Or maybe Trump is a crazy person
-
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
Aaron Strife
Banned
Dont tell alt-right trolls, theyll try and put flashing ads in front of Roberts on Twitter if he even uses it.
aspiegamer
Member
It's always super depressing to see people outing themselves as literal Nazis. On the gaming side of GAF, no less! An advert for a Nazi-killing game that reads "If you are a Nazi, GTFO" is too controversial for some people, apparently.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Slate had an odds calculator for justices dieing based on death rates for age, gender, and race from a year and a half ago. I'd assume the odds are only lower because there's less time to 2021 now and these justices should generally have higher life expectancies.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...s_of_another_supreme_court_justice_dying.html
56% chance of at least one liberal justice dieing.
13% chance of at least two liberal justices dieing.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...s_of_another_supreme_court_justice_dying.html
56% chance of at least one liberal justice dieing.
13% chance of at least two liberal justices dieing.
Trump has made it abundantly clear that he only cares about States that voted for him
That is the sad part. She is probably wishing she could just live out the rest of her days peacefully. Thanks to Trump she'll probably be there until she dies.
Of course, I think it would have been smarter for Ginsburg and Breyer to step down before the 2014 midterms. I know they're judges and not politicians but given the absurdity of the many cases and often decisions from the SCOTUS over the past decade or so, they should have had enough common sense to realize they needed to get replaced by other liberals who would ensure at least a couple more decades of the same ideology, not knowing for sure how 2016 would end but damn well knowing how extreme the GOP has become. I do however remember Ginsburg inaccurately predicting that Democrats should be safe in Presidential elections and that midterms should be their only worry. Wonder how she feels about that...
Aaron Strife
Banned
Really if the four liberals can make it through Trumps presidency the court is probably pretty salvageable. If Kennedy waits, even better.
balladofwindfishes
Member
I think Ruth legitimately likes being a force for good in the country.
8 years of a Democrat after 2020 would put Thomas' seat in the crosshairs. Maybe Roberts if he wants to retire a little early.
8 years of a Democrat after 2020 would put Thomas' seat in the crosshairs. Maybe Roberts if he wants to retire a little early.
Needless to say, 2020 is going to be huge.
It's all the shitty parts of politico without the occasional good long-form article.
Even Alito's in his 60s.
If Ginsburg holds out the disaster can be averted and reversed and we end up with only Gorsuch and Kennedy's replacement (because you know it's going to happen) as the only Trump appointees.
UF violated its own policies to allow NPI to handle ticket sales rather than the UF box office precisely to try and stop protesters from denying tickets to Nazis.
Between this, instructing students to not protest at the event, and allowing their private security full control over event security, UF sure is bending over backwards to accommodate avowed supporters of ethnic cleansing in the United States.
Aaron Strife
Banned
2020:
Dont worry, Trump wont be able to appoint anyone any worse than what Corporate Bitch Kamala would because of Congressional gridlock, encourage all your friends in Pennsylvania to vote for Still Jill Stein
Fake news etc.
How Congress allied with drug company lobbyists to derail the DEA's war on opioids
This investigative piece from the WaPo is incredible. It covers all the things you'd expect, gov't corruption, regulatory capture, revolving doors between public and private sectors. Just wide scale failure all around. And the result of all this is that while the DEA has all the latitude in the world to attack "illicit" drug dealers, in the Opioid crisis they have effectively been rendered toothless.
This investigative piece from the WaPo is incredible. It covers all the things you'd expect, gov't corruption, regulatory capture, revolving doors between public and private sectors. Just wide scale failure all around. And the result of all this is that while the DEA has all the latitude in the world to attack "illicit" drug dealers, in the Opioid crisis they have effectively been rendered toothless.
Randolph Freelander
Member
The EIC was recently interviewed on Pod Save America.
His head is too far up his own... site... to listen to any constructive criticism. After about 10 minutes, I had to just fast forward to the end.
This was on 60 Minutes tonight too. Crazy shit.
What's striking about this to me is that, according to a lot of the social media progressies, we need a more progressive agenda aimed at winning back the Trump voter. That has always seemed a bit foolish to me.
A progressive agenda whose aim is to excite and motivate the left (and fuck what the right thinks), is something I think everyone could get behind.
shinra-bansho
Member
Define a more progressive agenda.
Assuming this includes things that benefit black people, reconcile this with a 50 state strategy.
May be a false assumption.
Assuming this includes things that benefit black people, reconcile this with a 50 state strategy.
May be a false assumption.
If the Ds can pull off a miracle and take the senate back in 2018, they could prevent any new justices until 2020.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Imagine the irony if dems were able to block multiple SCJ picks because of the example set by McConnel LOL
Aaron Strife
Banned
No but its different now! Now were the ones not benefiting!
Mark Andrew
Member
How can anyone take him seriously after he went on a tear about John Podesta cooking with semen.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Probably some dumb bullshit related to Weinstein that will somehow be "NEWS" even though it's probably publicly available.
If it's a Hilary thing, I'm just gonna laugh and laugh.
EDIT: It is a Hilary thing? Damn does Russia wish Hilary was still politically potent.
Yeah, the "McConnell Rule" precedent is now the sitting President doesn't get their Justices confirmed unless his or her party controls the Senate. I would fully expect Republicans to cite that to block any future appointments by a Democratic President.
neurosisxeno
Member
Didn't they already nuke the filibuster for SC nominees so they could get Gorsuch through?
Amibguous Cad
Member
If we take back the Senate in 2018 before any of the liberal justices die...
You remember feeling a bit uneasy when you first discovered those shitty flash games where you torture Osama Bin Laden in increasingly excruciating ways?
It's kind of like that.
Mark Andrew
Member
And when republicans have the oppprtunity to replace a justice in the last year of the administration, theyll find a way around it. Probably by saying Trump has a mandate, Obama got 2 so they get 2, etc.
He meant by just never giving them an up or down vote when the opposite party holds the senate.
But yes he also did that.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
If salvageable means having Roberts be the moderate swing vote for 5-10 years, sure, but that's still pretty terrifying. I guess that's at least that's better than 20+ years of needing two or three hard conservative votes to swing anything.
Honestly, I can't imagine liberals being able to stand a 6 hard conservative court without feeling forced to pack the courts. That threat would probably be the sole remaining moderating force.
I hope to god Kennedy waits until at least Democrats can win the senate, if not the presidency.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
As someone who cares about the constitution and is a patriot, I just can't justify letting a president with this big of a disappoval rating and a cloud of treason over his administration making another SCOTUS appointment. Wish it didn't have to be this way.
let that swirl in your mouths for as long as necessary. Trump gets NOTHING for the remainder of his term no matter what.
whyamihere
Banned
I bet you could convince Trump to nominate Garland if Dems somehow took back the Senate in 2018.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Can't wait for actual proof of collusion and/or embezzlement to come out and for talking heads to still blame Democrats for not giving him a chance.
I actually agree with this take.
Chuck & Nancy: "Obama couldn't get it done, that would really piss him off"
"Derrr ok I'll do it!"
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
this seems of questionable value in a post-Gorsuch age, why not just wait until there's a Democratic president and then appoint a much more partisan and younger judge?
I guess it depends on how fragile the senate majority and Trump both look going into 2020.
whyamihere
Banned
If Dems have 51 and we're not sure if Trump is going to win again and Kennedy retired but we're holding his nomination up, why not?
Aaron Strife
Banned
Frankly, I'd appreciate it as a way to break the precedent because that ("President only gets to make a SCOTUS pick when their party controls the Senate") really shouldn't be a precedent.
Basileus777
Member
Lol @ Trump ever nominating a judge Obama wanted when his entire Presidency has been about screwing over Obama.
Let that be the end of that hypothetical. Trump would rather find his own "moderate" than pick someone Obama wanted.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
this is a dumb self-imposed rule like the suggestions of reinstating the filibuster, Republicans aren't going to change their mind post-Gorsuch about whether they should allow Democrats to have SCOTUS picks when they control the Senate because the Democrats tried to reinstate the norm. If Democrats want the norm to be that the president always has to have his nominee considered, they should codify that into law.
Ginsburg is one of my favorite people, period, but yeah I am still upset that she didn't step down before November 2014. I actually remember right after Obama's reelection in 2012, talking to another politics weirdo like myself, and we were both like "phew okay well now Ruth can step down and we can get a new 40 year old in there!"
Of course if she hangs in there until next year (+ dem wave) or 2020 (...+dem wave) then it's all good in the end, but obviously impossible to predict. And yes I think it's gross to talk about a person's life like this but that's where our government is lol!
Of course if she hangs in there until next year (+ dem wave) or 2020 (...+dem wave) then it's all good in the end, but obviously impossible to predict. And yes I think it's gross to talk about a person's life like this but that's where our government is lol!
Yup its this. The norms are gone and they arent coming back until Gorsuch resigns, which will probably not happen
VendettaRed07
Member
If dems win the senate say to Trump, if he is still in office, it's Garland or no one.
You Know Nothing
Member
She couldn't just fade into relative obscurity. She has to continue being actively evil.
In news from across the pond, tankies got a platform.
whyamihere
Banned
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked