1. #39316
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    14,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hypestyle View Post
    Someone from this list needs to be nominated. and confirmed. There's no time for excuses. Chuck Schumer needs to fast track this, regardless of the "optics" to conservatives and even some "middle of the road" moderates and "let's be fair" liberals.
    Everyone knows the manipulations that Mitch McConnell engaged in to block Pres. Obama's picks and to fast-track Trump's. He needs to get a firm commitment from every Democratic senator to vote yes. I simply don't care about any "objections" from the conservative culture, which will inevitably be about nonsense. the late, brilliant law professor Lani Guinere was torpedoed when nominated for a federal court by Bill Clinton in the early 1990s. That scenario can't happen again under Biden. Black voters are watching this.
    Every single senator who votes against the nominee needs to be called out relentlessly, including in campaign attack ads in their home districts. All the Senate seats up for grabs in the mid terms, Democratic candidates need to pay attention to this and call it out.
    It seems absurd to insist on a firm commitment before a candidate is vetted.

    It's going to be a standard nomination. Democrats have a narrow majority, and there's no filibuster for Supreme Court candidates.

    Breyer is expected to stick around until the end of the term in June, and by all accounts he doesn't seem happy that the news leaked.

    https://theweek.com/supreme-court/10...s-leaked-today

    Quote Originally Posted by Xheight View Post
    If you are worried about borders counties could vote to secede as there were motions in say Maryland or Oregon recently to join nearby states. Of Course this wouldn't be easy but one borders were declare people could vote with their feet and apply for membership/resident status, those already there would be grandfathered in. Parties would be dissolved or held on to during a rewrite of local constitutions if they even choose to have such. Complicated is fine but people should be free to disassociate as much as associate. Anthropologist Timothy Earle points to mobility as being one of the check on power structures becoming rigid and stratified.
    If counties secede, that can lead to even more trouble, because it's no longer about the borders between states, but borders between counties.

    Most counties are not going to be able to produce everything they need, which is going to lead to a lot of problems (IE- dependence on another county for power/ water production) to say nothing of the federal government taking its property back.

    Quote Originally Posted by CSTowle View Post
    While I'd like to see it as I think she's a hindrance rather than an asset to the Biden Administration and the Party in general and would likely do less harm as a center-left Justice, I agree with almost all of what you said except for her Presidential ambitions being a serious consideration. Short of the greatest 180 in political history and a rapid development of excitement and enthusiasm and perception of competence I don't see her gathering any kind of a following. If Biden were to die in office and Trump were to seriously run again I could see people voting against Trump and her benefiting by default, but short of that I think she has zero shot.
    I think Harris is a weak contender, but has a very strong hand to run for President.

    It would be tough for any Democrat to beat Harris in a primary, considering the institutional advantages of sitting Vice Presidents, the optics of running against the first woman of color elected to national office, and the punishing delegate math given the strength of African-American Democratic primary voters.

    I suspect she would be a weaker general election candidate than someone like Klobuchar, but she would still have a shot at winning.

    But there doesn't seem to be anyone positioned to beat her in a primary. Buttigieg's main problem last time around was a lack of appeal to minority voters, which will remain a problem if he’s running against the first African-American Vice President. None of the squad have yet to win a statewide primary. Elizabeth Warren finished third in her home state, and seems to have outsized support among some corners of the media.

    The biggest risk for Harris is someone new emerging, like if someone wins a big statewide race in Georgia, Florida or Texas, or if someone does something really big (Letitia James convicting Donald Trump within the next year and a half) but even then, anyone running against her will be a major underdog.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  2. #39317
    Incredible Member Zauriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    It seems absurd to insist on a firm commitment before a candidate is vetted.



    I think Harris is a weak contender, but has a very strong hand to run for President.

    It would be tough for any Democrat to beat Harris in a primary, considering the institutional advantages of sitting Vice Presidents, the optics of running against the first woman of color elected to national office, and the punishing delegate math given the strength of African-American Democratic primary voters.

    I suspect she would be a weaker general election candidate than someone like Klobuchar, but she would still have a shot at winning.

    But there doesn't seem to be anyone positioned to beat her in a primary. Buttigieg's main problem last time around was a lack of appeal to minority voters, which will remain a problem if he’s running against the first African-American Vice President. None of the squad have yet to win a statewide primary. Elizabeth Warren finished third in her home state, and seems to have outsized support among some corners of the media.

    The biggest risk for Harris is someone new emerging, like if someone wins a big statewide race in Georgia, Florida or Texas, or if someone does something really big (Letitia James convicting Donald Trump within the next year and a half) but even then, anyone running against her will be a major underdog.
    Even if Harris wins the Democratic presidential nomination in 2024, there is no way to be certain she will win the election unless the economy is strong again before the 2024 elections. Besides, Just because she is the vice-president, doesn't mean she will win. Vice-President Al Gore lost to George Bush. Vice-President Walter Mondiale lost to Ronald Reagan.


    EDIT: the incumbent vice president Hubert Humphrey lost to Richard Nixon.
    Last edited by Zauriel; 01-26-2022 at 10:16 PM.

  3. #39318
    Loony Scott Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Running Springs, California
    Posts
    7,947

    Default

    Harris is really just a home run away from being able to win it. Mondale and Gore were both saddled with lurch-like charisma.
    Every day is a gift, not a given right.

  4. #39319
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    It seems absurd to insist on a firm commitment before a candidate is vetted.

    It's going to be a standard nomination. Democrats have a narrow majority, and there's no filibuster for Supreme Court candidates.
    Imagine Joe Biden puts forward a candidate for Supreme Court, and that candidate doesn’t get on the Court because a couple of Democrats vote against that rec.

    Then why would it be absurd to make the defectors life difficult??

    In UK there is no exact equivalent…but in general terms all the main UK parties take disciplinary action against members that vote against the party line on an important issue.

    Isn’t that (imposing party discipline) a standard feature of US politics? It certainly is in UK!
    Last edited by JackDaw; 01-26-2022 at 11:21 PM.

  5. #39320
    Ultimate Member Robotman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    10,026

    Default

    Joe Rogan: ‘Very Strange’ to Call People Black Unless They’re From ‘Darkest Place’ of Africa

    Unfortunately, he’s still one of the most influential people in America.
    Last edited by Robotman; 01-27-2022 at 12:30 AM.

  6. #39321
    Ultimate Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robotman View Post
    Joe Rogan: ‘Very Strange’ to Call People Black Unless They’re From ‘Darkest Place’ of Africa

    Unfortunately, he’s still one of the most influential people in America.
    I think Rogan's influence has peaked but he'll have a slow decline and do considerable damage along the way.

  7. #39322
    Old school comic book fan WestPhillyPunisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    27,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robotman View Post
    Joe Rogan: ‘Very Strange’ to Call People Black Unless They’re From ‘Darkest Place’ of Africa

    Unfortunately, he’s still one of the most influential people in America.
    Maybe I don't get out enough, but I never heard of him. What makes Rogan so influential?
    Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!

  8. #39323
    Ultimate Member Robotman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    10,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WestPhillyPunisher View Post
    Maybe I don't get out enough, but I never heard of him. What makes Rogan so influential?
    Standard moronic reasons. “He tells it like it is”, “he doesn’t bow to the woke mob”, etc. etc.

    Also, he doesn’t need to listen to scientists when it comes to COVID and vaccines because he can do his own research. Which means he’s been propagating lots of misinformation.

    He’s a UFC commentator and caters to that type of toxic masculinity crowd.

    What the Joe Rogan podcast controversy says about the online misinformation ecosystem
    Last edited by Robotman; 01-27-2022 at 04:02 AM.

  9. #39324
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    14,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    Imagine Joe Biden puts forward a candidate for Supreme Court, and that candidate doesn’t get on the Court because a couple of Democrats vote against that rec.

    Then why would it be absurd to make the defectors life difficult??

    In UK there is no exact equivalent…but in general terms all the main UK parties take disciplinary action against members that vote against the party line on an important issue.

    Isn’t that (imposing party discipline) a standard feature of US politics? It certainly is in UK!
    Party discipline is a bit different in the US due to the primary system.

    But these are also different scenarios. Insisting that Senators vote in favor of a candidate who hasn't been chosen or vetted is different from going after a member who torpedoes a reasonable, qualified and scandal-free nominee.

    Sinema and Manchin's main apostacy is that they won't break the filibuster for massive legislation. They're generally supportive of Biden's nominees.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zauriel View Post
    Even if Harris wins the Democratic presidential nomination in 2024, there is no way to be certain she will win the election unless the economy is strong again before the 2024 elections. Besides, Just because she is the vice-president, doesn't mean she will win. Vice-President Al Gore lost to George Bush. Vice-President Walter Mondiale lost to Ronald Reagan.


    EDIT: the incumbent vice president Hubert Humphrey lost to Richard Nixon.
    I never suggested Harris is guaranteed to win a general election (no one is) or that she's a stronger general election candidate than every other Democrat.

    But I don't think she'll get out of the way for a Klobuchar/ Warnock ticket.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  10. #39325
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    29,875

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    Party discipline is a bit different in the US due to the primary system.

    But these are also different scenarios. Insisting that Senators vote in favor of a candidate who hasn't been chosen or vetted is different from going after a member who torpedoes a reasonable, qualified and scandal-free nominee.

    Sinema and Manchin's main apostacy is that they won't break the filibuster for massive legislation. They're generally supportive of Biden's nominees.

    I never suggested Harris is guaranteed to win a general election (no one is) or that she's a stronger general election candidate than every other Democrat.

    But I don't think she'll get out of the way for a Klobuchar/ Warnock ticket.
    Personally, I think it's still way too early to even be predicting what will happen in 2024. Ask someone in 2013 who would be the Republican front runner in 2016, and no one would have said Trump.

    Though there is no harm in speculative talk.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  11. #39326
    Old school comic book fan WestPhillyPunisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    27,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    Personally, I think it's still way too early to even be predicting what will happen in 2024. Ask someone in 2013 who would be the Republican front runner in 2016, and no one would have said Trump.

    Though there is no harm in speculative talk.
    Hell, Trump wouldn’t have said Trump. Around 2013 or 14, he was trying to buy the Buffalo Bills.
    Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!

  12. #39327
    Ultimate Member Gray Lensman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    13,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    Party discipline is a bit different in the US due to the primary system.

    But these are also different scenarios. Insisting that Senators vote in favor of a candidate who hasn't been chosen or vetted is different from going after a member who torpedoes a reasonable, qualified and scandal-free nominee.

    Sinema and Manchin's main apostacy is that they won't break the filibuster for massive legislation. They're generally supportive of Biden's nominees.

    I never suggested Harris is guaranteed to win a general election (no one is) or that she's a stronger general election candidate than every other Democrat.

    But I don't think she'll get out of the way for a Klobuchar/ Warnock ticket.
    And the games they have played with reconciliation legislation. That is separate from the filibuster issue.
    Dark does not mean deep.

  13. #39328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    And this is sadly a second case. One woman has already died in November last year under similar circumstances. Polish abortion laws are insane.

  14. #39329

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    I'm glad you agree that the lines don't have clear definitions and that these discussions can be hard. That allows for a more meaningful discussion.
    As I said in my previos post, the lines that don't have clear definition are when it comes to the safety of others, such as the example that was mentioned: covid restrictions. When no other person is inconvenienced by your freedom, there isn't really much to discuss. Unless the goal of the person fighting against said personal freedom is violation of freedom.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    The obvious counterpoint to the question of whether Democrats support restrictions when it's worthwhile is that Republicans will argue that the restrictions they push for come with tradeoffs. With gay rights, there is the question of the extent to which others have to agree (IE- the legal pressure on the owner of Masterpiece cake shop to make cakes for gay weddings.) There are also major social changes that have been harmful for society (higher rate of unmarried parents) so that makes for an argument to encourage particular norms.
    I don't quite understand what social changes regarding LGBT+ rights have been harmful for society. Or what that has to do with unmarried parents and how are unmarried parents harmful to society.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    When it comes to abortion, there is the whole question of when life begins.
    And one can make decisions about their life according to their personal opinion. No law (in western world) forces people to have abortions. Just as no one forces people to undergo a sex change or marry whom they want. It tends to be only one side (conservative) that wants to have a say in rights of others.

  15. #39330
    BANNED Xheight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post

    If counties secede, that can lead to even more trouble, because it's no longer about the borders between states, but borders between counties.

    Most counties are not going to be able to produce everything they need, which is going to lead to a lot of problems (IE- dependence on another county for power/ water production) to say nothing of the federal government taking its property back.
    Trouble? We are talking about the break up of the US as we know it so it goes without saying there will be hangers on, Brexit wasn't unanimous. μολὼν λαβέ to the Feds. However that interdependence isn't a bad thing and is in part the motive to reset the power relations of resources to populations. The Electoral Collage was not just about protecting State rights and role but addressing the natural disparities that arise from resources to brute majority dictates. An interesting example of this is the Sewer Socialism movement of Milwaukee that ran into one of the many problems it had in trying to draw on resources from the rest of WI. Pragmatic cooperation is perhaps the surest cure to our ideological times. This tonic runs counter to those who want a dictatorship of the masses but we know how that story plays out.

    BTW - of course Harris will only have a strong hand in an election rigged in similar fashion to Ole Joe's

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •