[SCOTUS] thread we dreaded updates for because RIP RBG

1495052545559

Posts

  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    It's going to be fucking Omarosa isn't it

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    ElvenshaezagdrobOsvikTicaldfjamemp123
  • TenekTenek Registered User regular
    OK, so... Romney, Collins, Murkowski won't vote during the lame duck term, and McSally won't be able to if she loses, so... that's 4, right?

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    Mvrck wrote: »
    Yeah the play is to nominate a woman, even better if it's a lady POC because that'll let the media both sides it.

    The real play is to nominate a nominal moderate but that won't happen

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    They already did this to Thurgood Marshall. Pay no attention to their judicial beliefs, we nominated a black man so it's totally the same right.

    aeNqQM9.jpg
    JaysonFourBigJoeMBlackDragon480FencingsaxMan in the Mistsautono-wally, erotibot300shrykeToxTicaldfjamLord_AsmodeusSpoit
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Tenek wrote: »
    OK, so... Romney, Collins, Murkowski won't vote during the lame duck term, and McSally won't be able to if she loses, so... that's 4, right?

    There would be a 20+ day gap between Kelly gets the seat and Mcsally loses it. So you still need 4 GOP senators to say no.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    TetraNitroCubaneboogedybooBlackDragon480ShadowfireJazz
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    The only hope right now is that Murkowski, Collins and Romney stick to what they've said and Mark Kelley wins in Arizona (where he'd immediate be seated in the senate since McSally was a replacement).

    And that the other 47 dems stick together.

    And incredibly thin needle to thread, relying on people who have, in the past, not been reliable in this way.

    Undead Scottsman on
    OrcaHeir
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    CNN just pointed out - Osoff and Kelly are running in special elections. If they win, they can be sworn in during the lame duck. They would narrow the margin by half (if both win).

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    I was thinking McConnell would wait till the recess appointment to try his brand of shit fuckery, but I guess he is drunk on his own success at destroying the values of the nations, that he is going to announce his intention. Funny thing is that can and hopefully will bite him in the ass. Sure democrats won't get a super majority to remove all the republican filth from the courts, but they can still get a majority. A majority allows them to play the "get fuck GOP, not get fuck, do not pass go, do not go to jail, but get royally fucked!" card. That card is to turn around point out that they do actually have the authority to pass a bill to expand the court, fill said spots in with Biden appointees and render all of Trump's picks worthless. Also depending on how things go and how badly McConnell's open shit fuckery pisses off people. If we do get some pleasant surprises, well statehood for DC and PR could make it possible to impeach Trump's appointees. I'd actually be cool with the idea of stacking the courts and then purging all of Trump's picks out.

  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited September 19
    All replacement talk goes here, so we're not using 2 different threads to talk about it, and also to keep this thread for other SCOTUS business.

    https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/237636/supreme-court-vacancy/

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
    ElvenshaeMan in the MistsToxdestroyah87spool32
  • NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    y'all need to understand the difference between a single possible scenario and a foregone conclusion

    one ain't the other

    Just looking briefly at FiveThirtyEight, and it seems like the Senate is going to be close, so it's in the best interest of Republicans to try and ram through a candidate as fast as possible before the election for maximum fuckery

    no it's best for Republicans to hold the vote after the election because a lot of races that shouldn't be close are close due to how bad their brand is

    losing the Senate is far greater a loss than losing the Presidency

    A big reason the Senate is so powerful is SCOTUS appointments. It would be a net win if Republicans lose the executive and Senate if they get to replace RGB with a young federalist toady.

    I'm not saying we are going to have an autocratic dystopia, but things keep happening that look like they come from an autocratic dystopia.
    JaysonFourIncenjucarBlackDragon480Commander ZoomMan in the MistsKalnaur
  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    The only hope right now is that Murkowski, Collins and Romney stick to what they've said and Mark Kelley wins in Arizona (where he'd immediate be seated in the senate since McSally was a replacement).

    And that the other 47 dems stick together.

    And incredibly thin needle to thread, relying on people who have, in the past, not been reliable in this way.

    And if people like Graham who have said before that they'd totally never do this go against Trump, then they're going to lose their own base and lose their elections.

    Nobeard
  • BubsBubs Not Burbs ChicagoRegistered User regular
    Just read I Dissent and She Persisted to a heartbroken 6 year old. RBG’s influence truly transcended the generations

    PSN: thewheelz
    IncenjucarFiendishrabbit
  • MrMonroeMrMonroe Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    Yeah the play is to nominate a woman, even better if it's a lady POC because that'll let the media both sides it.

    The real play is to nominate a nominal moderate but that won't happen

    That's the play if you're thinking about winning this election. I think McConnell's conclusion is and has been for several months that they're going to lose it, so the best move is to get things in motion now to frustrate the Democrats once they take power in January. I think it's part of why he hasn't taken the obviously party-saving move of doing any meaningful coronavirus relief. Like they could have been all "we saved america fuck yah" and it's hard to imagine them getting punished electorally for that, but he just... refused, because he wants to leave the biggest possible mess to Biden to try to clean up, while simultaneously doing everything possible to tie his hands to prevent him from doing any clean up. Mitch's biggest priority is "indefinite republican power", and it's fine to be out of it for a bit so long as you can completely hamstring the other guy.

    A Kobold's KoboldOrcaSpoit
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    The only hope right now is that Murkowski, Collins and Romney stick to what they've said and Mark Kelley wins in Arizona (where he'd immediate be seated in the senate since McSally was a replacement).

    And that the other 47 dems stick together.

    And incredibly thin needle to thread, relying on people who have, in the past, not been reliable in this way.

    And if people like Graham who have said before that they'd totally never do this go against Trump, then they're going to lose their own base and lose their elections.

    Graham is in a tough election in his home state (tied a day ago, in fucking South Carolina) because people have gotten the message that he's a sniveling weasel. Sticking with Trump will endear him to his base, but going back on his word is a fucking cudgel that hurts his re-election chances.

    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
    Commander Zoom
  • The Dude With HerpesThe Dude With Herpes Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    EDIT: sorry, didn't see the mod ask to move discussion about replacement elsewhere.

    The Dude With Herpes on
    Steam: Galedrid - XBL: Galedrid - PSN: Galedrid
    Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
    Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand

    Commander Zoom
  • NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    edited September 19
    ***moved to new thread https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/237636/supreme-court-vacancy#latest ***

    1. Trump wants to start on Monday with the process of appointing a new justice.

    2. For the GOP, appointing a young federalist toady justice before 2021 is win big enough to outweigh losing the Executice and Senate.

    3. McConnell absolutely can confirm a new SCOTUS before the election because there is no black and white written rule that says he can't.

    4. Collins, Romney, and Murkowski ain't gonna save you.

    These are your starting positions. Gonna take a lot of 'splainin to convince me otherwise.

    Nobeard on
    I'm not saying we are going to have an autocratic dystopia, but things keep happening that look like they come from an autocratic dystopia.
    IncenjucarTetraNitroCubaneBigJoeMCommander ZoomExtreaminatusDacJaysonFourFencingsaxzagdrobNetscape
  • JaysonFourJaysonFour Classy Monster Kitteh Registered User regular
    Nobeard wrote: »
    1. Trump wants to start on Monday with the process of appointing a new justice.

    2. For the GOP, appointing a young federalist toady justice before 2021 is win big enough to outweigh losing the Executice and Senate.

    3. McConnell absolutely can confirm a new SCOTUS before the election because there is no black and white written rule that says he can't.

    4. Collins, Romney, and Murkowski ain't gonna save you.

    These are your starting positions. Gonna take a lot of 'splainin to convince me otherwise.

    5. Trump and the GOP challenge the results of the election and ratfuck us for another four years via court cases for his hand-picked supreme court, and that's game for the democracy.

    steam_sig.png
    TetraNitroCubaneIncenjucarExtreaminatusA Kobold's KoboldMrVyngaardOrcaNobeardDisruptedCapitalistElvenshaeJazz
  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    \
    Nobeard wrote: »
    1. Trump wants to start on Monday with the process of appointing a new justice.

    2. For the GOP, appointing a young federalist toady justice before 2021 is win big enough to outweigh losing the Executice and Senate.

    3. McConnell absolutely can confirm a new SCOTUS before the election because there is no black and white written rule that says he can't.

    4. Collins, Romney, and Murkowski ain't gonna save you.

    These are your starting positions. Gonna take a lot of 'splainin to convince me otherwise.

    I don't think the GOP has the numbers. On the other hand not trying would piss off their base and trying would energize their opponents. I honestly don't know what the pure power politics Machiavellian move here is. Given Biden's pretty overwhelming numbers in current polling I'd guess you take one last shot and go for it. But there's also the how do you sleep at night factor. People are people. They want to feel like protagonists in their own lives. I'm sure many Senators think this is war and by any means necessary but I doubt 50 feel that way.

    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

    Path of Exile: themightypuck
  • JaysonFourJaysonFour Classy Monster Kitteh Registered User regular
    \
    Nobeard wrote: »
    1. Trump wants to start on Monday with the process of appointing a new justice.

    2. For the GOP, appointing a young federalist toady justice before 2021 is win big enough to outweigh losing the Executice and Senate.

    3. McConnell absolutely can confirm a new SCOTUS before the election because there is no black and white written rule that says he can't.

    4. Collins, Romney, and Murkowski ain't gonna save you.

    These are your starting positions. Gonna take a lot of 'splainin to convince me otherwise.

    I don't think the GOP has the numbers. On the other hand not trying would piss off their base and trying would energize their opponents. I honestly don't know what the pure power politics Machiavellian move here is. Given Biden's pretty overwhelming numbers in current polling I'd guess you take one last shot and go for it. But there's also the how do you sleep at night factor. People are people. They want to feel like protagonists in their own lives. I'm sure many Senators think this is war and by any means necessary but I doubt 50 feel that way.

    This is their chance to ratfuck us for good and forever and ever. They'll flush down whatever they have to to do it.

    steam_sig.png
    IncenjucarCommander ZoomDacTetraNitroCubaneboogedybooAistanMrVyngaardOrcaNetscapeNobeardCantideHacksawBlackDragon480emp123electricitylikesmeA Kobold's KoboldMan in the MistsJazzsilence1186ExtreaminatusSpoitDarkPrimusLilnoobs
  • BigJoeMBigJoeM Registered User regular
    If they were "People", they wouldn't be Republicans.

    JaysonFourNetscapeNobeardHonkMan in the Mists
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    Wrong thread

    zagdrob on
  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    BigJoeM wrote: »
    If they were "People", they wouldn't be Republicans.

    Well I suppose what will be will be. I was just trying to sort things out in my head. There are arguments that go both ways even if you are a pure power Machiavellian thinker. That said, the obvious by any means necessary move is to go for it and let the Devil take the hindmost. But that kind of power move doesn't lead to a stable equilibrium. You only do it if you assume the other side will do the same.

    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

    Path of Exile: themightypuck
  • BigJoeMBigJoeM Registered User regular
    They know the other side won't, that's part of why they do it.

    Trolls love to fuck with people who can't or won't fight back.




    IncenjucarTetraNitroCubaneJragghenAistanMan in the MistsJazzJaysonFour
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    She is gone, the strong base of the nation,
    The dove to her covet has fled;
    Ye heroes lament her privation,
    For Ruth Bader Ginsburg is dead.

    She is gone down, the sun of the Union,
    Like Phoebus, that sets in the west;
    The planet of peace and communion,
    Forever has gone to her rest.

    She is gone down from a world of commotion,
    No equal succeeds in her stead;
    Her wonders extend with the ocean,
    Whose waves murmur, Ginsburg is dead.

    She is gone and can ne’er be forgotten,
    Whose great deeds eternal shall bloom;
    When gold, pearls and diamonds are rotten,
    Her deeds will break forth from the tomb.

    She is gone out of glory to glory,
    A smile with the tear may be shed,
    O, then let us tell the sweet story,
    Triumphantly, Ginsburg is dead.


    With apologies to George Moses Horton

    themightypuckNobeardFencingsaxJaysonFourCalicaExtreaminatus
  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited September 19
    moniker wrote: »
    She is gone, the strong base of the nation,
    The dove to her covet has fled;
    Ye heroes lament her privation,
    For Ruth Bader Ginsburg is dead.

    She is gone down, the sun of the Union,
    Like Phoebus, that sets in the west;
    The planet of peace and communion,
    Forever has gone to her rest.

    She is gone down from a world of commotion,
    No equal succeeds in her stead;
    Her wonders extend with the ocean,
    Whose waves murmur, Ginsburg is dead.

    She is gone and can ne’er be forgotten,
    Whose great deeds eternal shall bloom;
    When gold, pearls and diamonds are rotten,
    Her deeds will break forth from the tomb.

    She is gone out of glory to glory,
    A smile with the tear may be shed,
    O, then let us tell the sweet story,
    Triumphantly, Ginsburg is dead.


    I so hope Ruth Bader Ginsburg gets her due outside of the current political situation. She was more than just a pawn on the board.

    themightypuck on
    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

    Path of Exile: themightypuck
    HappylilElfCommander ZoomBlackDragon480dispatch.oA Kobold's KoboldJaysonFourExtreaminatus
  • NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    Mourners gather outside the SCOTUS. Candles, prayers, singing Amazing Grace, that kinda thing.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/news/517182-mourners-gather-outside-supreme-court-after-passing-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg

    I'm not saying we are going to have an autocratic dystopia, but things keep happening that look like they come from an autocratic dystopia.
    Man in the MistsJazzAbsoluteZeroExtreaminatus
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    My sister was there. Sounded amazing.

    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
  • NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    I imagine for some people it was a much mourning for the country as for RBG herself.

    I'm not saying we are going to have an autocratic dystopia, but things keep happening that look like they come from an autocratic dystopia.
    Commander ZoomOrcaFencingsaxJragghenJaysonFourCalicaToxMan in the MiststhatassemblyguyBlackDragon480Jazzsilence1186zagdrobboogedybooGONG-00AbsoluteZeroTetraNitroCubaneN1tSt4lkerElvenshaeAlexandierDarkPrimusKoopahTroopahemp123Stabbity Style
  • HefflingHeffling No Pic EverRegistered User regular
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    If a movement doesn't have someone that can sit down opposite those in a position of power and strike a deal, how can that movement achieve success?
  • HappylilElfHappylilElf Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2016 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite trhe republicans in the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    HappylilElf on
    destroyah87
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    tbloxhamBlackDragon480TychoCelchuuuShadowfireMortal SkymonikerpainfulPleasanceNobeardadejaanN1tSt4lkerTynnanshrykeElvenshaeSpoitDarkPrimusKoopahTroopahHacksawStabbity StyleTrace
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    Artereis wrote: »
    It's not your fault, Viskod. 1 out of every 10 people just happens to be a monster.
    Marathonsilence1186painfulPleasanceSleepBigJoeMExtreaminatusNobeardadejaanshrykeZonugaltbloxhamDarkPrimusHacksawStabbity StyleRoz
  • redundant_pairingredundant_pairing Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    She wanted to be replaced by the first woman president. Like it or not, that was her choice, she was very clear about it.

    Criticizing her, or the damage done, is very problematic.

    Fencingsax
  • OmnomnomPancakeOmnomnomPancake OttawaRegistered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    She wanted to be replaced by the first woman president. Like it or not, that was her choice, she was very clear about it.

    Criticizing her, or the damage done, is very problematic.

    She was one of 9 people get to decide for the rest of their lives the fate of hundreds of millions. Criticizing her and the damage done is fair and valid.

    mrondeauBigJoeMadejaanMosatiForarTynnanDacshrykeMarathonElvenshaeAlexandierZonugalbrynhrtmnNobeardKruiteelectricitylikesmeDarkPrimusJaysonFourKetarMunkus BeaverMrMisterHacksawStabbity StyleBullheadpainfulPleasancestopgapAbsoluteZero
  • redundant_pairingredundant_pairing Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    She wanted to be replaced by the first woman president. Like it or not, that was her choice, she was very clear about it.

    Criticizing her, or the damage done, is very problematic.

    She was one of 9 people get to decide for the rest of their lives the fate of hundreds of millions. Criticizing her and the damage done is fair and valid.

    A woman wanting to be replaced by a woman is what the democratic party and liberalism in general is about. Complaining about that, and that maybe identity issues cause collateral damage to others opens up a can of worms that should not be opened. Because where that leads calls out everything we care about.

  • OmnomnomPancakeOmnomnomPancake OttawaRegistered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    She wanted to be replaced by the first woman president. Like it or not, that was her choice, she was very clear about it.

    Criticizing her, or the damage done, is very problematic.

    She was one of 9 people get to decide for the rest of their lives the fate of hundreds of millions. Criticizing her and the damage done is fair and valid.

    A woman wanting to be replaced by a woman is what the democratic party and liberalism in general is about. Complaining about that, and that maybe identity issues cause collateral damage to others opens up a can of worms that should not be opened. Because where that leads calls out everything we care about.

    An 80+ year old multiple-cancer survivor refused to step down from her lifetime political appointment because she wanted to be replaced by a female president. We can't criticize that decision, and the ramifications of (at minimum) 15 years of a 6-3 Supreme Court, because it would open up a can of worms?

    Roe V Wade is probably gonna be gone.

    Liberalism is losing.

    silence1186ExtreaminatusSleepThawmusadejaanNobeardBigJoeMMosatiBlackDragon480SmrtnikshrykeElvenshaeAlexandierZonugalbrynhrtmnMrMonroeDarkPrimusJaysonFourKetarMunkus BeaverKoopahTroopahHacksawStabbity StyleTraceBullheadpainfulPleasanceAbsoluteZero
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    Republicans de facto controlled the Senate after 2011 because the Democrats were deep in their bullshit about upholding traditions and as a result forfeited their actual control to the inability to reach a cloture vote

    Obama would not have been able to replace Ginsberg with a comparable justice

    anything beyond that is pointless what-if-ism and if it's more important to you* to tarnish the reputation of one of the greatest champions of women's rights in US history because you're scared right now, i think you should step back and examine that stance

    *royal you

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    IlpalaSo It GoesEtheazagdrobMrMister
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    "When we had it" is carrying an awful lot of weight there. Elections are not predetermined nor forces of nature. The 2014, 2016, and 2018 electorates bear fault for where we are today. Had they gone differently then things would be different.

    ChanusFencingsaxOneAngryPossumSo It GoesPhoenix-DMrMisteremp123
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Viskod wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    "When we had it" is carrying an awful lot of weight there. Elections are not predetermined nor forces of nature. The 2014, 2016, and 2018 electorates bear fault for where we are today. Had they gone differently then things would be different.

    Worth mentioning nearly zero people thought Democrats were going to lose in 2016.

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    FencingsaxCommander ZoomSo It GoesJaysonFourMrMisterKoopahTroopah
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Viskod wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Thanks for not swallowing your pride and retiring for the black president, Ruth.

    Are you claiming that RBG didn't retire because she was racist?

    I doubt it but there's apparently a lot of people who are super mad she didn't retire in 2014 because then clearly Obama could have filled her seat with an equally progressive pick despite McConnel controlling the senate and I hope you'll excuse me while I laugh uproariously at that utterly asinine idea for the following five straight minutes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_Senate_elections

    People were wanting her to retire in 2014 because the Dems had the majority. McConnell didn't get the senate til January 2015.

    She absolutely should have and the fact that she didn't take that chance when we had it is going to be the black stain that overshadows everything else amazing about her incredible life and career.

    "When we had it" is carrying an awful lot of weight there. Elections are not predetermined nor forces of nature. The 2014, 2016, and 2018 electorates bear fault for where we are today. Had they gone differently then things would be different.

    Worth mentioning nearly zero people thought Democrats were going to lose in 2016.

    And any of us that said otherwise were looked down upon as crazy and paranoid.

    Commander ZoomMeeqeTicaldfjamHacksawpainfulPleasance
Sign In or Register to comment.