|
Also, is this true? Not seeing it anywhere else. https://twitter.com/marianne_levine/status/1315331610380775425?s=19
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 01:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Also, is this true? It's buried in this CBS News article: quote:Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer indicated on Sunday that Democrats will "not supply the quorum" needed for the vote in the committee and the full Senate, hoping to delay the proceedings and force Republicans to delay a vote until after the election. But he said Democrats on the committee will attend the hearings, either in person or virtually. My interpretation is that they will attend for questioning, but will bug out when it's time to vote.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 02:10
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:While, four months would be nice, delaying until after the election is important given the chance of vote suppressing fuckery.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 02:11
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:Delaying until after the election also makes the act feel more politically egregious. If you're the sort of person hoping the democrats retaliate via court-packing, that's much easier to do if Barrett isn't seated until after election day. I’ve still yet to see anyone propose a mechanism that would produce even the necessary delay to push it past Election Day. (Quorum-avoidance mostly just forces the Rs off the campaign trail - which is worthwhile! - and might produce a day or two of delay and some more rules changes that make the process look even less legitimate, not enough to get you into November.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 03:03
|
|
|
E: I can't do math. I'm the one the who's been Chucked.
HootTheOwl fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 03:28
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:With 3 Republicans out with Covid and two opposed doesn't that mean the votes against are currently up 48-47 against? So they could just force the vote before anyone recovers and just win. I'm pretty sure the Senate majority, which is Graham for the Judiciary Committee and McConnell overall, would simply not hold the vote. And even if this somehow magically worked, the Republicans would just nominate her for the position again immediately and then hold the hearings as scheduled, starting the day after the three senators who admitted testing positive leave quarantine, which is currently tomorrow I think. The best way to look at the ACB situation, imo, is to view it as an inevitable loss--she will be confirmed, if not in the next three weeks then in the lame duck session--and try and make it as painful a loss for the Republicans as possible. That isn't something Democrats are always good at, when they know they can't win they often concede rather than fight like hell to make the next fight a little easier, but hopefully doing things like not helping the Republicans make quorum will help.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 03:34
|
|
|
Yeah there's nothing the Dems can do to stop that religious bigot from taking RBG's seat so she can help set the country back a century. Dems need to just focus on the fact that she's not wanted by anyone except a fringe of the US and that the SCOTUS will consist of a majority of justices selected by presidents the people of the US didn't elect and who don't represent the people. Then pack the loving court and primary everyone who resists doing so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 04:37
|
|
|
The court needs to be packed whether she’s seated or not. Seat her so the succdems will get on board with 13 justices in January.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 04:45
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Yeah there's nothing the Dems can do to stop that religious bigot from taking RBG's seat so she can help set the country back a century. Dems need to just focus on the fact that she's not wanted by anyone except a fringe of the US and that the SCOTUS will consist of a majority of justices selected by presidents the people of the US didn't elect and who don't represent the people. Then pack the loving court and primary everyone who resists doing so. Any Dem left who doesn't want to pack the courts is dumb on an unfathomable level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 05:05
|
|
|
Restructuring the federal judicial bench is literally in the democratic platform. It's not new. You need to stop constructing elaborate counterfactual faildem fantasies to rage at.Some Guy TT posted:YouGov is a lovely pollster now? I mean if you have another one that shows court packing is an untouchable third rail of America politics I'd be happy to read it. I'd be very surprised if you could find one that has a majority actually opposing it simply because so many people don't even know what court packing is. A yougov poll of registered voters finds an even divide of voters. You do not advertise a highly divisive policy on the eve of an election when you are in the lead. This really, really isn't complicated. People have explained it to you multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 05:41
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Restructuring the federal judicial bench is literally in the democratic platform. It's not new. You need to stop constructing elaborate counterfactual faildem fantasies to rage at. To paraphrase Biden, he is the democratic party and he doesn't seem interested in it despite it being in the platform.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 05:43
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:To paraphrase Biden, he is the democratic party and he doesn't seem interested in it despite it being in the platform. I think it's more that he doesn't want to discuss it, because whichever position he takes, he's going to get criticism for it, and the more the media focus is on "Are the Democrats going to pack the court", the less focus is on "The Republicans are going to force through Barrett, who's an extremist." The party and Biden would much rather the conversation be focused on the second.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 05:49
|
|
|
"If the democrats are planning to rework the federal judiciary, why do I keep insisting they aren't!?" "A poll of registered voters funded by the Washington Examiner found court-packing is intensely divisive and more voters oppose than support it, even if ACB is confirmed. Why won't Biden, who is winning without talking about it, emphasize court packing like Trump wants him to!?" Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 05:50
|
|
|
Political theorycrafting: The Democrats will want a major political backlash to fuel court-packing, as its a politically risky endeavor. I expect with ACB confirmed, the conservative SCOTUS (assuming they dont trash the ACA immediately) will attempt to avoid this by biding its time on culture wars until post-2022. Democrats will try to force the issue by passing the pro-choice bill. I don't think there's much chance of packing the SCOTUS without 51 seats at a minimum though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 06:38
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:I don't think there's much chance of packing the SCOTUS without 51 seats at a minimum though. Wow, you are really going way out on a limb there, buddy
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 07:22
|
|
|
2021: in a 26-25 decision,
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 07:22
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:"If the democrats are planning to rework the federal judiciary, why do I keep insisting they aren't!?" (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 07:24
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:"If the democrats are planning to rework the federal judiciary, why do I keep insisting they aren't!?" I'm surprised you're calling attention to the fact that this was a Washington Examiner poll because if we're going into full unskewing mode here that's even less reason to assume the divide is particularly stark.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 07:43
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:"I hate Joe Biden, who is a murderous rapist, and I have signed up to be banned if I ever support him with my voice or vote. The least he could do is try to appeal to me". Not very strong in the relationship between cause and effect there are you champ? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 07:45
|
|
|
Alright, separate from the slapfight, today is the day for the Judiciary meeting, right? Do we have a timeline for when it will happen, or any expectations that new information will come from it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 13:39
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:Alright, separate from the slapfight, today is the day for the Judiciary meeting, right? Do we have a timeline for when it will happen, or any expectations that new information will come from it? They must really want ACB seated if they’re taking time out of their most sacred holiday to push her through.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 13:42
|
|
|
Graham: "there's nothing unconstitutional about this process" Buddy, the president who appointed this candidate is asking militias to be prepared to violently overthrow of the government, is constantly accepting emoluments, and is $421 million in debt to adversary states. Not only is the second unconstitutional, the first and last are treasonous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 14:17
|
|
|
But the ~~PrOcEsS~~!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 14:37
|
|
|
I’m not going to watch this dumb farcical garbage, but will somebody please tell me if anyone bothers to ask Barrett why she thought attending a nomination ceremony that became a super spreader event was a good idea, and how that all outlines her ability to utilize good judgment in decision making?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:13
|
|
|
skylined! posted:I’m not going to watch this dumb farcical garbage, but will somebody please tell me if anyone bothers to ask Barrett why she thought attending a nomination ceremony that became a super spreader event was a good idea, and how that all outlines her ability to utilize good judgment in decision making?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:15
|
|
|
skylined! posted:I’m not going to watch this dumb farcical garbage, but will somebody please tell me if anyone bothers to ask Barrett why she thought attending a nomination ceremony that became a super spreader event was a good idea, and how that all outlines her ability to utilize good judgment in decision making? She already caught the rona in June and was immune so it's safe for her to do such things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:17
|
|
|
I think Barrett should be disqualified on the sole basis she brought her kids to sit through this for half a day.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:29
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:She already caught the rona in June and was immune so it's safe for her to do such things. It might have been safe for her but it's still irresponsible to hold a mass gathering of any kind right now
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:30
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:She already caught the rona in June and was immune so it's safe for her to do such things. I get that this might be her internal justification for why it was personally safe for her, however she could’ve pulled the plug on the whole thing because it was obviously unsafe for everyone else there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:31
|
|
|
Mike Lee is currently trying to give the Committee members Covid
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:33
|
|
|
haveblue posted:It might have been safe for her but it's still irresponsible to hold a mass gathering of any kind right now skylined! posted:I get that this might be her internal justification for why it was personally safe for her, however she could've pulled the plug on the whole thing because it was obviously unsafe for everyone else there. I agree, but that's the mindset for these people. Rona isn't real and we shouldn't act like it. It doesn't kill the rich and powerful. FlamingLiberal posted:Mike Lee is currently trying to give the Committee members Covid A shame he probably isn't contagious anymore 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:39
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:She already caught the rona in June and was immune so it's safe for her to do such things. Wait, really?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:51
|
|
|
If a case should be made to strip ACB of her kids due to the inherent risk of a supreme court justice, would she give up her seat or drop those lazy poo poo bags? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:52
|
|
|
Ben Sasse saying civis makes my skin crawl.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
Dunite posted:If a case should be made to strip ACB of her kids due to the inherent risk of a supreme court justice, would she give up her seat or drop those lazy poo poo bags? You're probably not being 100% serious but this is a pretty gross opinion. Crazy Joe Wilson fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 16:01
|
|
|
Dunite posted:drop those lazy poo poo bags?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 16:03
|
|
|
Mike Lee should be thrown in jail.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:Wait, really? Yup. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/barrett-coronavirus-court-trump/2020/10/02/ecf7c7ce-04cf-11eb-8879-7663b816bfa5_story.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 16:12
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:She already caught the rona in June and was immune so it's safe for her to do such things. And then someone can reminder her that COVID is not the chickenpox, you do not become immune to it simply because you had it once before. To say nothing of the lung scarring, brain fog, and other long term side-effects it's having on some people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 16:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:And then someone can reminder her that COVID is not the chickenpox, you do not become immune to it simply because you had it once before. To say nothing of the lung scarring, brain fog, and other long term side-effects it's having on some people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 16:56
|
|