I hope RBG's legacy doesn't get lost in all this, for the record.
Honestly I'm kinda pissed at her for not retiring under Obama. Not a good response, I admit, but that's where I am right now. Stubbornness is a double edged sword.
It seems like the past 5+ years have just been one death scare after another. Trying to stick things out was a serious mistake on both a personal and national level.
+2
Options
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
Hey, so, I named the thread the way it had been because I dreaded this day with every fiber of my being.
My problem isn't with Ginsburg not wanting to retire, but with the nature of justices being for-life anyway, because it promotes the idea of nominating young justices to serve as long as possible and leads to situations like this where one person dying has massive ramifications for years upon years of court precedent down the line. Ginsburg's desire to retire or not should not even be a factor, IMHO.
Switch Friend Code: SW-3011-6091-2364
+16
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
There's going to be a rush to fill the seat. Then when January comes around there's going to be an about-face to try and block the seat getting filled.
The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.
Expected, but still good to see, and it gives the incumbrent Dems up for election their point to reject a "qualified" nominee.
(not that I expect whatever asshole Trump picks to be qualified)
There's going to be a rush to fill the seat. Then when January comes around there's going to be an about-face to try and block the seat getting filled.
I am Nostradamus.
If that happens I'll take the fuckery about blocking to fill it because that means we have a democratic president at the very least and the seat was empty till then.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
My problem isn't with Ginsburg not wanting to retire, but with the nature of justices being for-life anyway, because it promotes the idea of nominating young justices to serve as long as possible and leads to situations like this where one person dying has massive ramifications for years upon years of court precedent down the line. Ginsburg's desire to retire or not should not even be a factor, IMHO.
I mean the whole situation is basically "America is designed to fail" from so many directions.
I hope RBG's legacy doesn't get lost in all this, for the record.
Shit goes pear shaped, this will be her legacy.
As it should be. Once her actual legal legacy is erased through twenty years of a hard-right Court, then yes her primary legacy should be as a warning, to consider retiring when a favorable President is in office instead of rolling the dice for four, eight, twelve extra years. She should have retired in 2014. Now here we are.
I’m angry tonight though, so maybe I’m not being reasonable.
You are being eminently reasonable. Democrats need to stop pretending partisanship doesn't exist and that unfair systems are fair. The Supreme Court is a fundamentally unfair, fundamentally partisan system without value unless you can capture it to enforce your own views. If ever a party controls both senate and presidency then all justices of their party over 50 should immediately retire.
If they fill the vacancy and we win the election then we just pack the court immediately.
My problem isn't with Ginsburg not wanting to retire, but with the nature of justices being for-life anyway, because it promotes the idea of nominating young justices to serve as long as possible and leads to situations like this where one person dying has massive ramifications for years upon years of court precedent down the line. Ginsburg's desire to retire or not should not even be a factor, IMHO.
Ginsburg may have wanted to retire but the courts never firmly stacked in an alignment compatible with her viewpoints. Her last three decades have been spent on a wall guarding a thing she built and believed in. She's earned respect.
Edit:
I wish I had confidence in the Democrats right now.
The fact the very fabric of the US continually hinges on the random deaths of a very small bunch of super old people, who may or may not die in a "favourable" year is so incredibly fucked up. Yet the charade goes forever onwards into the depths of fucking despair.
There's going to be a rush to fill the seat. Then when January comes around there's going to be an about-face to try and block the seat getting filled.
I am Nostradamus.
If that happens I'll take the fuckery about blocking to fill it because that means we have a democratic president at the very least and the seat was empty till then.
and I don't think we're going to be so lucky, on either count.
I hope RBG's legacy doesn't get lost in all this, for the record.
Shit goes pear shaped, this will be her legacy.
60 years of (successful) work for womens right in Law and before the law can't just be erased by her inability to live 6 more months. People say "Why didn't she step down under Obama" and forget that Obama never had a strong political position where he could have appointed someone as radically liberal as RGB (both Sotomayor and Kagan are IMHO more centrist).
You can say a lot about Bill Clinton, but his ability to get the Senate to elect the judges he wanted without opposition was pretty hardcore (and appointed two of the strongest women's rights advocates the SCOTUS has ever had).
Fiendishrabbit on
"The western world sips from a poisonous cocktail: Polarisation, populism, protectionism and post-truth"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
My problem isn't with Ginsburg not wanting to retire, but with the nature of justices being for-life anyway, because it promotes the idea of nominating young justices to serve as long as possible and leads to situations like this where one person dying has massive ramifications for years upon years of court precedent down the line. Ginsburg's desire to retire or not should not even be a factor, IMHO.
I mean the whole situation is basically "America is designed to fail" from so many directions.
I see it more as 'America was designed to cater towards the interests and values of white supremacists,' though I guess my statement implies your statement *shrug*
Switch Friend Code: SW-3011-6091-2364
+5
Options
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
This just stole what little hope seeing Biden +10 and over 50% in most national and swing state polls for weeks had built up. I thought I learned my lesson in 2016. Never hope.
Even if he won, everything would be stopped by SCOTUS. But fortunately new SCOTUS can just prevent him from winning.
That so much of this county rests on the life and death of octogenarians should scare people
If all it takes is for one hand to drop the umbrella, then mine should have been up there a long time ago
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Run the message that an Impeached President should not be allowed to fill SCOTUS seats. I don't care if it's as much bullshit as "the people should choose the next blah blah blah." It's a good reminder that Trump was also impeached.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
This just stole what little hope seeing Biden +10 and over 50% in most national and swing state polls for weeks had built up. I thought I learned my lesson in 2016. Never hope.
Even if he won, everything would be stopped by SCOTUS. But fortunately new SCOTUS can just prevent him from winning.
Old scotus could also have cheated its way to victory though. I almost think things are so utterly rubbish and unfair that I don't know if this really makes things worse. What a Hellscape we inhabit.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
They'll leave it up to a lower court decision and go 4-4 to provide complicit deniability.
"We rule that all mail-in ballots could potentially be fraudulent in all states where they give Biden the win over Trump- but they're a-OK in states that Trump won. Cry more, libs."
But based on what? Like Bush V Gore was because Florida was the tipping state. Like you can't just sue because you don't like the outcome. If Biden is winning 300+ electoral Trump can't just sue in every state he lost claiming he would have won pinky swear?
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
People are fearful of a situation similar to the Bush-Gore election.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
Lets say it's a semi-close election in a certain state. Lets say Florida (just to pick an american state completely out of the air, right /s).
Now lets say that incumbent politicians engage in some scummy things that tips the election juuust enough for them to take home the electoral college vote in that state (like, lose some votes. Declare some votes invalid etc).
Lets say the local federal courts declare this completely legal (because they're in cahoots with the local incumbents). Then someone appeals it to the supreme court. The Republican aligned Supreme court refuses to take up the case, or upholds the state veridict.
State votes, and possibly the election, stolen.
"The western world sips from a poisonous cocktail: Polarisation, populism, protectionism and post-truth"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
But based on what? Like Bush V Gore was because Florida was the tipping state. Like you can't just sue because you don't like the outcome. If Biden is winning 300+ electoral Trump can't just sue in every state he lost claiming he would have won pinky swear?
Based on this court has two Trump appointees who would happily bend the court over backwards to suck him off because it would earn them brownie points with them. There is literally nothing the Republican party and conservatives as a whole would not do to get praise and headpats from the orange emperor.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
But based on what? Like Bush V Gore was because Florida was the tipping state. Like you can't just sue because you don't like the outcome. If Biden is winning 300+ electoral Trump can't just sue in every state he lost claiming he would have won pinky swear?
Do not underestimate the amount of bullshit they will claim happening across multiple states. We're heading toward a crises.
Ok under what pretense will the SCOTUS steal an election, like I know we're all in a bad place, but its not like SCOTUS just gets to say "no so and so is president." Like I know its a bad place right now, but don't give in to like negativity porn.
"Because fuck you, stop us"
Just worded nicer.
"God's law overrides federalism." is point one of American conservatism.
+6
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
y'all need to understand the difference between a single possible scenario and a foregone conclusion
But based on what? Like Bush V Gore was because Florida was the tipping state. Like you can't just sue because you don't like the outcome. If Biden is winning 300+ electoral Trump can't just sue in every state he lost claiming he would have won pinky swear?
The fear is that they could put their finger on the scale or anything short of a Mondaling. Pennsylvania and Florida are close? Suddenly the courts matter.
But yeah, a sufficient margin of victory does render it moot. You confident the margin will be sufficient? I’m not.
McConnell statement just out: "Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary. Once again, we will keep our promise.
The real question to me right now is if Trump appoints before the election. If it's pre-election, Trump will have a friendly SCOTUS to rule in his favor in a contested election. He will cheat even harder. The odds that we wind up with a full blown violent fascist coup goes up significantly.
Posts
This is gross, and assumes that somehow McConnell would have allowed a nomination to move forward for Obama.
Everyone's angry about the result of this, and maybe even agree she should have retired at some point previous. This isn't the way to express that.
It's possible all retiring 6 years ago would have done is give Trump two appointees weeks into his presidency instead of at the end.
It seems like the past 5+ years have just been one death scare after another. Trying to stick things out was a serious mistake on both a personal and national level.
Fuck me for being proven prescient.
Fuck Cancer. Fuck 2020.
STACK THE COURTS.
I am Nostradamus.
Expected, but still good to see, and it gives the incumbrent Dems up for election their point to reject a "qualified" nominee.
(not that I expect whatever asshole Trump picks to be qualified)
If that happens I'll take the fuckery about blocking to fill it because that means we have a democratic president at the very least and the seat was empty till then.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I mean the whole situation is basically "America is designed to fail" from so many directions.
You are being eminently reasonable. Democrats need to stop pretending partisanship doesn't exist and that unfair systems are fair. The Supreme Court is a fundamentally unfair, fundamentally partisan system without value unless you can capture it to enforce your own views. If ever a party controls both senate and presidency then all justices of their party over 50 should immediately retire.
If they fill the vacancy and we win the election then we just pack the court immediately.
Ginsburg may have wanted to retire but the courts never firmly stacked in an alignment compatible with her viewpoints. Her last three decades have been spent on a wall guarding a thing she built and believed in. She's earned respect.
Edit:
I wish I had confidence in the Democrats right now.
and I don't think we're going to be so lucky, on either count.
And boy oh boy do I hope it goes a certain way.
60 years of (successful) work for womens right in Law and before the law can't just be erased by her inability to live 6 more months. People say "Why didn't she step down under Obama" and forget that Obama never had a strong political position where he could have appointed someone as radically liberal as RGB (both Sotomayor and Kagan are IMHO more centrist).
You can say a lot about Bill Clinton, but his ability to get the Senate to elect the judges he wanted without opposition was pretty hardcore (and appointed two of the strongest women's rights advocates the SCOTUS has ever had).
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
I see it more as 'America was designed to cater towards the interests and values of white supremacists,' though I guess my statement implies your statement *shrug*
Even if he won, everything would be stopped by SCOTUS. But fortunately new SCOTUS can just prevent him from winning.
If all it takes is for one hand to drop the umbrella, then mine should have been up there a long time ago
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Bush v Gore except stupider?
2000. Bush vs. Gore.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
Old scotus could also have cheated its way to victory though. I almost think things are so utterly rubbish and unfair that I don't know if this really makes things worse. What a Hellscape we inhabit.
Bush v. Gore happened.
It's one of the more legit doom-think scenarios.
I just think there are way too many unknowns.
"Because fuck you, stop us"
Just worded nicer.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
They'll leave it up to a lower court decision and go 4-4 to provide complicit deniability.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
pleasepaypreacher.net
People are fearful of a situation similar to the Bush-Gore election.
Lets say it's a semi-close election in a certain state. Lets say Florida (just to pick an american state completely out of the air, right /s).
Now lets say that incumbent politicians engage in some scummy things that tips the election juuust enough for them to take home the electoral college vote in that state (like, lose some votes. Declare some votes invalid etc).
Lets say the local federal courts declare this completely legal (because they're in cahoots with the local incumbents). Then someone appeals it to the supreme court. The Republican aligned Supreme court refuses to take up the case, or upholds the state veridict.
State votes, and possibly the election, stolen.
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
Based on this court has two Trump appointees who would happily bend the court over backwards to suck him off because it would earn them brownie points with them. There is literally nothing the Republican party and conservatives as a whole would not do to get praise and headpats from the orange emperor.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
"God's law overrides federalism." is point one of American conservatism.
one ain't the other
The fear is that they could put their finger on the scale or anything short of a Mondaling. Pennsylvania and Florida are close? Suddenly the courts matter.
But yeah, a sufficient margin of victory does render it moot. You confident the margin will be sufficient? I’m not.
Full statement:
I know the Calvinball nonsense was guaranteed, but it is still infuriating.