All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[mogwen]

So who is going to be the most damaging and disruptive pick possible? Cotton? Cruz? Because Trump will of course go for the worst. It's his modus operandi.

[Tendrin]

So who is going to be the most damaging and disruptive pick possible? Cotton? Cruz? Because Trump will of course go for the worst. It's his modus operandi.

He's gonna pick a woman in an attempt to staunch the bleeding of suburban white support.

it won't work.

[Zauriel]

RBG had colon cancer in 1999. She should have already stepped down when the Democrats were in control of the senate. Yes she beat cancer a few times but she should also have known that cancer can strike back again and again. Cancer does return in 80% of the cancer survivors.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

So who is going to be the most damaging and disruptive pick possible? Cotton? Cruz? Because Trump will of course go for the worst. It's his modus operandi.

It doesn’t matter. They are going to lean the same way on all the big issues. Let’s be real you are hoping Gorsuch or Kavanaugh have a change of heart because Alito, Thomas, and the new one aren’t, and Roberts isn’t going to be on the losing side of obvious of 5-4’s. So you need one of those two. Probably Gorsuch is your best bet.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

So who is going to be the most damaging and disruptive pick possible? Cotton? Cruz? Because Trump will of course go for the worst. It's his modus operandi.

Since Trump loves chaos, look for Cotton to be the choice since he’s far more unhinged than Cruz. But then, Cruz has been a loyal asskisser, throwing his wife and father under the bus to suck up to Trump, so that can’t be discounted.

He's gonna pick a woman in an attempt to staunch the bleeding of suburban white support.

it won't work.

I doubt Trump would pick a woman, if but for no other reason than his innate misogyny would get in the way.

[Tendrin]

Since Trump loves chaos, look for Cotton to be the choice since he’s far more unhinged than Cruz. But then, Cruz has been a loyal asskisser, throwing his wife and father under the bus to suck up to Trump, so that can’t be discounted.



I doubt Trump would pick a woman, if but for no other reason than his innate misogyny would get in the way.

I think in other circumstances you'd be right.

[InformationGeek]

I wonder how third party voters will try to convince us (and themselves) that the Supreme Court doesn't matter this time around.

They're already trying to pass the blame with the whole "It ain't our fault she didn't retire". Also got people saying this won't change a thing or just giving up. Some real nihilistic people.


Oh hey, here's an example of someone blaming the situation on her now.

RBG had colon cancer in 1999. She should have already stepped down when the Democrats were in control of the senate. Yes she beat cancer a few times but she should also have known that cancer can strike back again and again. Cancer does return in 80% of the cancer survivors.

What's done is done. The past can't change. She decided to stay in. So how about stop blaming her and start blaming the people who are set to wreck us and make this situation completely awful?

[worstblogever]

They're already trying to pass the blame with the whole "It ain't our fault she didn't retire". Also got people saying this won't change a thing or just giving up. Some real nihilistic people.


Oh hey, here's an example of someone blaming the situation on her now.



What's done is done. The past can't change. She decided to stay in. So how about stop blaming her and start blaming the people who are set to wreck us and make this situation completely awful?

I know, right? How dare she serve for another 20 years! THE NERVE! Should've quit while she was ahead!

She treated a lifetime appointment as it should have been, and didn't rig the game with a retirement for political purposes and keeping an agenda in power.

Which is the point of being a Supreme Court Justice. You're supposed to be above the partisan s*** and just vote what what's just and good. No matter how dark things are, she still held to that.

It's the people like McConnell and Cruz, and the Federalist Society that have made the courts as perverse as they are.

Do not become the thing which you hate, and that you know is wrong.

[Kevinroc]

I know, right? How dare she serve for another 20 years! THE NERVE! Should've quit while she was ahead!

She treated a lifetime appointment as it should have been, and didn't rig the game with a retirement for political purposes and keeping an agenda in power.

Which is the point of being a Supreme Court Justice. You're supposed to be above the partisan s*** and just vote what what's just and good. No matter how dark things are, she still held to that.

It's the people like McConnell and Cruz, and the Federalist Society that have made the courts as perverse as they are.

Do not become the thing which you hate, and that you know is wrong.

And we're going to have a 6-3 Republican majority.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Republicans are treating this like a game. So Democrats need to stop the idealism with nothing to show for it. You know what it is, play to win.

Threaten to stack the courts. Threaten to impeach justices. Threaten to end the filibuster. Threaten to make DC and Puerto Rico states. Have the resolve to make good on those threats. Let them know there is a price for this.

[Mister Mets]

So who is going to be the most damaging and disruptive pick possible? Cotton? Cruz? Because Trump will of course go for the worst. It's his modus operandi.

Amy Coney Barrett is probably the favorite.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...l-views-703347

She was considered the runner-up to Kavanaugh last time, so she's been vetted. She became a conservative favorite when Democrats pressed on her Catholic faith during the Senate confirmation hearing.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Amy Coney Barrett is probably the favorite.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...l-views-703347

She was considered the runner-up to Kavanaugh last time, so she's been vetted. She became a conservative favorite when Democrats pressed on her Catholic faith during the Senate confirmation hearing.

And of the potentials it should be noted that back then she was viewed as a worse ideologue than Kavanaugh. Kav was considered the safer pick. They just didn’t know he had a scandal

[Kevinroc]

Republicans are treating this like a game. So Democrats need to stop the idealism with nothing to show for it. You know what it is, play to win.

Threaten to stack the courts. Threaten to impeach justices. Threaten to end the filibuster. Threaten to make DC and Puerto Rico states. Have the resolve to make good on those threats. Let them know there is a price for this.

This. All of this.

[Mister Mets]

You know exactly who he is, Mets, and you know exactly what he wants to do. Don't waste time insulting our intelligence.

That's different from saying he did anything wrong by mentioning facts that do not seem to be in contention, and telling Senate Republicans not to commit to anything.

I wonder how you're going to spin this when Trump nominates someone and McConnell rushes them through the Senate.

There's a really good chance that will happen.

As I said before, Trump and the Senate legally have the power to do so. Amy Coney Barrett has probably vetted well enough to be announced on Monday.

It really depends on what's in officials's best interests.

Most Republican Senators would prefer a conservative justice to whatever progressive justice Biden is likely to nominate. The way to sway them would be to show that there's some kind of alternative.

Susan Collins is according to polls the underdog in a tight race, so it would be helpful for the prospects of delaying the vote on a new justice if she decides that it's in her best interests to vote that way. Will it depress turnout with the conservative base? Would it upset potential employers (IE- right wing think tanks) in the event she loses? Will it provide her an opportunity to remind voters that she isn't a generic Republican? Other Senators up for reelection (Ernst, Gardner, Thoms, Perdue, Graham) are going to make similar calculations.

Trump could be swayed by an argument that it's in his best interests to make this an election issue, perhaps by announcing who he'll nominate, and daring Biden to do the same, rather than having a vote next month. A 6-3 conservative majority on the courts would give some Republicans reason to stay home, or vote for Biden, when the courts seem secure for the next few years.

Democrats could also consider what they have to offer. McConnell certainly wants a 6th conservative justice, and knows how to count to fifty plus Pence. If Romney, Collins and Murkowski all vote against a new nominee, he still has the votes. What do Democrats have to negotiate, and would the activist base accept that?

[C_Miller]

It doesn’t matter. They are going to lean the same way on all the big issues. Let’s be real you are hoping Gorsuch or Kavanaugh have a change of heart because Alito, Thomas, and the new one aren’t, and Roberts isn’t going to be on the losing side of obvious of 5-4’s. So you need one of those two. Probably Gorsuch is your best bet.

I actually have a lot of respect for Gorsuch. He's the type of Justice who I at least give credit for adhering to his style of Judicial Review and while we certainly would not agree on key issues, I trust him to follow his code unlike Alito or Thomas. Unfortunately, his role on the court is marred by the shady tactics that got him his seat, which will be made even more shady should another Justice get placed between now and January 4th.