|
yronic heroism posted:. I mean, there's a strong argument that this is the actual truth, and functionally it is impossible for Trump to have a fully neutral jury on any charge he faces. That said it's important to realize that the legal precedents for a "fair trial" don't actually require a completely, perfectly fair process for the defendant. It just has to be fair *enough*. The alternative would mean admitting Trump has a free license to commit all crimes, because he can never get a fully neutral process due to all his extremely well publicized criming. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Apr 16, 2024 |
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
In the end, who has said it better than George Lucas (or the author who novelized that scene): Anakin Skywalker: You can't. He must stand trial. Mace Windu: He has control of the Senate and the courts. If only they had charged Palpatine in Coruscant state court the whole crisis could have been averted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 02:59
|
|
|
Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like most people even on here would vote to acquit if the government really couldn't prove he broke the law. I have no doubt that won't happen, if only because you would have to be the most incompetent person on the planet to bring anything less than an air tight slam dunk case to this trial. But even if we are all going into it like "of course he fuckin did it," I'd still expect them to do their job and I'm not going to side with a bunch of incompetent cops just because Trump deserves it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 06:33
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I saw on BBC that 60 out of 96 potential jurors immediately got out of it by saying they could not be impartial. An easily double digit percentage of the population is completely politically disconnected and couldn’t named four things Trump did or didn’t do, or two vice presidents in history. They’re out there, I’m related to some of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 07:31
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like most people even on here would vote to acquit if the government really couldn't prove he broke the law. I have no doubt that won't happen, if only because you would have to be the most incompetent person on the planet to bring anything less than an air tight slam dunk case to this trial. But even if we are all going into it like "of course he fuckin did it," I'd still expect them to do their job and I'm not going to side with a bunch of incompetent cops just because Trump deserves it. I would 100% vote guilty the moment the trial started, before hearing any arguments. Possibly before the judge even gets in the room.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 09:36
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The alternative would mean admitting Trump has a free license to commit all crimes, because he can never get a fully neutral process due to all his extremely well publicized criming. What could be more fair than trial by combat? Pit Trump against Stormy Daniels with swords and let's see which truth God favours.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 11:36
|
|
|
zoux posted:For lower courts. This is a different ballgame. You'd have 51 D caucus votes for a Thomas replacement. Hang on, if it's that easy, why isn't Sotomayor retiring? She watched RBG wad up her legacy and drop it in the toilet and said "I wanna do that, too"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:09
|
|
|
ColdPie posted:Hang on, if it's that easy, why isn't Sotomayor retiring? She watched RBG wad up her legacy and drop it in the toilet and said "I wanna do that, too"? Because our oligarchs and their sock puppets would rather die than give up any hold on power.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:16
|
|
|
ColdPie posted:Hang on, if it's that easy, why isn't Sotomayor retiring? She watched RBG wad up her legacy and drop it in the toilet and said "I wanna do that, too"? Ginsburg died at 87. Sotomayor is about twenty years younger. I'm not at all sure why there's an internet meme going around that she's on the brink of death. e: Thomas is 75, Alito is 73, Roberts is the same age as Sotomayor and the funny sex number, Kagan is 63 in practice they should all be thinking about retirement but there isn't a whole lot of reason to get mad about Sotomayor specifically Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Apr 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:18
|
|
|
Goatse James Bond posted:Ginsburg died at 87. Sotomayor is about twenty years younger. I'm not at all sure why there's an internet meme going around that she's on the brink of death. Type 1 diabetes dramatically lowers life expectancy doesn’t it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:40
|
|
|
maybe for poors that arent just nameless tools for JOB, but for a face for one of the three branches of gov., probably not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:47
|
|
|
Goatse James Bond posted:Ginsburg died at 87. Sotomayor is about twenty years younger. I'm not at all sure why there's an internet meme going around that she's on the brink of death. She's the oldest Democratic justice. Obviously the Republicans aren't going to retire under a Democratic president. My dad went from healthy to dead at 68 in the span of five years. I don't think we should be having the most important political decisions in the country decided on the whims of when the body of someone who's already 5 years past retirement age decides to give up. She absolutely needs to retire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:52
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:Type 1 diabetes dramatically lowers life expectancy doesn’t it? Only statistically. For someone getting top tier health care there's no necessary reason she'd have any lower life expectancy than anyone else. It's a somewhat silly conversation though because the Democrats do not have anywhere near strong enough control of the Senate to guarantee seating her replacement, and without that guarantee, her retirement is just a gamble. We could easily have a situation where she retires and Manchin + Sinema stonewall a replacement until after the election.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:57
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:Type 1 diabetes dramatically lowers life expectancy doesn’t it? It ain't multiple cancer diagnoses including pancreatic while being 2 decades older. RBJ wasn't just an old lady who should have retired because actuarial numbers were showing she had less than 3 decades left.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 13:58
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Only statistically. For someone getting top tier health care there's no necessary reason she'd have any lower life expectancy than anyone else. Also it's not gonna happen before the election so it's an entirely moot conversation. In as much as it makes any sense, it would've needed to be planned 4 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 14:01
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Also it's not gonna happen before the election so it's an entirely moot conversation. yup. Now, Biden wins the election with a clear senate majority and it's a year from now? Then that's a whole new conversation and maybe her retirement is appropriate. Under those conditions though it would make even *better* sense to just . . . appoint more justices, period, and let Sotomayor remain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 14:05
|
|
|
The problem is that this is a very bad Senate map this year. Dems are going in with an immediate disadvantage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 17:03
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The problem is that this is a very bad Senate map this year. Dems are going in with an immediate disadvantage. Well, with Arizona, Florida and other purple states helpfully making abortion a key issue, the GOP is throwing the Dems a lifeline.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
While I think the abortion issue will help Dems somewhat in FL, I don't think it's going to flip a Senate seat or push the state away from the GOP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:23
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:While I think the abortion issue will help Dems somewhat in FL, I don't think it's going to flip a Senate seat or push the state away from the GOP. No, but its going to force the GOP to spend money defending a seat they shouldn't have had to pay to defend. Not that the GOP is going to have a lot of money being that they are forking it all over to DJT's defense. But I think a more interesting point is that this is going to have a lot of down ballot ramifications. The democrats really need to work on getting their farm team up and running.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:25
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:While I think the abortion issue will help Dems somewhat in FL, I don't think it's going to flip a Senate seat or push the state away from the GOP. GOP is clearly in red alert, they've seen the numbers and decided to pretend they're pro-choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:27
|
|
|
Cimber posted:No, but its going to force the GOP to spend money defending a seat they shouldn't have had to pay to defend. Not that the GOP is going to have a lot of money being that they are forking it all over to DJT's defense. Yeah, I don't think having abortion and weed on the ballot is going to lock it in for dems or something like that. It'd be more than a bit naive. But it is giving them a much, much better shot than they had any right to expect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:27
|
|
|
Cimber posted:Well, with Arizona, Florida and other purple states helpfully making abortion a key issue, the GOP is throwing the Dems a lifeline. AZ yes, but if FL is in play then we are probably having a very fun November. Ohio is, I think, the most likely tipping point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:32
|
|
|
Speaking as someone who has always lived in FL, the people who go out and vote in this state now are a lot more conservative and extremely anti-Dem than even 5 years ago. Meanwhile we still have the same horribly incompetent FL Dems that the DNC seems to have no interest in trying to fix.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:37
|
|
|
Forget about Democrats taking GOP Senate seats; the real nail-biters will be Dem incumbents and open seats: * Tester is polling even in MT against one potential challenger in particular. * If OH doesn't make an exception to allow Biden on the ballot, Brown would suffer bc of low turnout. (I think Biden will be on the ballot, though.) * NV has taken a turn to the red in presidential polling; Rosen could end up losing her seat. * MD Dems' former bff Larry Hogan is wiping the floor against both likely Dem candidates. * WV is a GOP lock, not that it'll make much of a pragmatic difference unless it literally tilts the balance of the senate. But a lot of states haven't yet had their party primaries, so the situation is pretty fluid & subject to change.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:58
|
|
|
Some of the state parties are extremely bad (Texas, Florida) but I don't actually know how you fix them externally. They generally get a lot of money pumped into them to try to patch over the dysfunction and their often terrible candidates, if it was put into funding organizing from the bottom-up instead that might help? Whatever they're doing isn't working but I'm not sure if there's a good example of a state party that's turned around from being as bad as some of those have been, for either party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:59
|
|
|
Candidate vs Generic GOP is always a terrible poll result. Sure, you might hate the guy you know, but wait until you hear about his opponent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:02
|
|
|
shimmy shimmy posted:Some of the state parties are extremely bad (Texas, Florida) but I don't actually know how you fix them externally. They generally get a lot of money pumped into them to try to patch over the dysfunction and their often terrible candidates, if it was put into funding organizing from the bottom-up instead that might help? Whatever they're doing isn't working but I'm not sure if there's a good example of a state party that's turned around from being as bad as some of those have been, for either party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:08
|
|
|
Cimber posted:Candidate vs Generic GOP is always a terrible poll result. Sure, you might hate the guy you know, but wait until you hear about his opponent. Is this a response to my post? If so, I meant polling in which there's more than one announced challenger in the other party but the polls are head to head by name, because the primary hasn't yet happened to choose a candidate. E.g.:  Although in that instance it's Hogan vs. Democrats the other polling I referenced also was about primary candidates who have yet to win the nomination. eta MT: 
Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Apr 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:31
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Meanwhile we still have the same horribly incompetent FL Dems that the DNC seems to have no interest in trying to fix. Even if they had an interest what could they really do? The DNC doesn't run the state parties, they don't have any real control over them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:59
|
|
|
We're still pretty far out so I imagine once a Dem wins their primary the gap should narrow quite a bit, I know nothing about Hogan but if he has a lot of name recognition that might be difficult race to win no matter the fundamentals. In fact this far out its hard to really be worried about any of the races, in particular Tester has had one negative/even poll that I can see on 538 since 2023, and have even been +15 in a previous pull this year and positive in every other poll. Like in particular: "NV has taken a turn to the red in presidential polling; Rosen could end up losing her seat." seems incorrect? Going by 538 all of Rosens polls have been positive. Brown has also been ahead in nearly every poll, perhaps Biden being off the ballot can hurt, but it might also help as Dems might be more motivated to turn out out of spite. WV is a GOP lock yes is for sure the only for-sure likely prediction, although sure Maryland seems concerning, but we can't say anything for sure and probably it wouldn't be wise to suggest narratives of the Dems being in trouble to keep the senate until we get closer to election day and all the primaries are finished.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 20:01
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Even if they had an interest what could they really do? The DNC doesn't run the state parties, they don't have any real control over them. Yeah people often wildly overestimate the reach and power of the DNC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 20:03
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:We're still pretty far out so I imagine once a Dem wins their primary the gap should narrow quite a bit, I know nothing about Hogan but if he has a lot of name recognition that might be difficult race to win no matter the fundamentals. Hogan is a reminder to "saner" times and is definitely helps moderates who hate paying taxes say "NOT ALL REPUBLICANS ARE NUTS." It sounds like he was popular in Maryland and as long as the GOP will let him triangulate, I can see him winning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 20:04
|
|
|
You can definitely run on being a centrist conservative in NoVa/DC/Maryland, it's when people try to extrapolate that to the rest of the country that it gets nuts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 20:15
|
|
|
nm.
Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Apr 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 20:32
|
|
|
shimmy shimmy posted:Some of the state parties are extremely bad (Texas, Florida) but I don't actually know how you fix them externally. They generally get a lot of money pumped into them to try to patch over the dysfunction and their often terrible candidates, if it was put into funding organizing from the bottom-up instead that might help? Whatever they're doing isn't working but I'm not sure if there's a good example of a state party that's turned around from being as bad as some of those have been, for either party. In Texas, you basically don't - it's too large with a major urban/rural divide that's already been gerrymandered. There are basically 3 things that can fix Texas: 1. Better candidates. Either the GOP has to elect people that are so odious (they're trying with Cruz) or the Democrats have to come up with people who are smarter than Beto. 2. Gerrymander them back. Functionally impossible, but worth mentioning. 3. SCOTUS - which will happen as soon as SCOTUS (or Congress) somehow fix gerrymandering across the board. Or eliminate the EC. Edit: I got distracted after I opened this and forgot we were discussing state parties, not national.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 21:07
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:
It's ultimately a poll of name recognition until there's an actual candidate, though. That is the problem with polling like this, hence why those numbers don't add up to 100. Not that it won't be competitive but it's going to take more than "I've heard of that guy" to get Maryland, a state that has had two Dem senators for 37 years, to flip the senate to the GOP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 21:08
|
|
|
Xombie posted:It's ultimately a poll of name recognition until there's an actual candidate, though. That is the problem with polling like this, hence why those numbers don't add up to 100. Not that it won't be competitive but it's going to take more than "I've heard of that guy" to get Maryland, a state that has had two Dem senators for 37 years, to flip the senate to the GOP. Hogan was pretty popular here, he won his last governor election by 10% and did an incredible job pissing off almost no one while still pushing back on Trump nonsense. The 2 people he's potentially against, one has been the head of the worst run county in the state (for a long rear end time, not specifically due to them, but it's not gotten any better), and the other is nothing but a pile of money. There is extraordinarily little chance Hogan loses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 22:22
|
|
|
shimmy shimmy posted:Some of the state parties are extremely bad (Texas, Florida) but I don't actually know how you fix them externally. They generally get a lot of money pumped into them to try to patch over the dysfunction and their often terrible candidates, if it was put into funding organizing from the bottom-up instead that might help? Whatever they're doing isn't working but I'm not sure if there's a good example of a state party that's turned around from being as bad as some of those have been, for either party. Also yeah, echoing that you shouldn't expect much out of the FL Dems. They are terrible and the bench is nonexistent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
Zero_Grade posted:Georgia might be an interesting one to look at. Represented by two Republicans for most of the 21st century (who replaced conservative Democrats) and then overnight both seats turned blue. I imagine demographics and the general growth of Atlanta helped out, but I've also heard that Stacy Abrams and other activists have put in a lot of behind the scenes effort into the change. I haven't found a good in depth analysis about the situation but would certainly read one. Abrams definitely did a lot of ground work registering African Americans to vote, but the real brunt of the lawsuits against Kemps voter registration laws were done by second generation Asian lawyers. Those registration laws hosed over anyone that went with an Americanized name that may have had some differences in spelling between various forms over the years which is very common for immigrants from Asia. Atlanta has a HUGE Asian population, and one of the biggest, ethnically diverse neighborhoods in the country around Buford highway. I’ll dig up some articles about it when I get home. Abrams got credit for it because it was an easier story to tell than a bunch of Korean lawyers from Georgia state doing grunt work because their family wasn’t allowed to vote. Like one of my friends who ran a banh mi place in EAV wasn’t allowed to vote because one form spelled her name slightly differently because it was translated from Vietnamese.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 00:47
|
|
