Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[oilcan]

Let the people decide....

From today's WaPo....

  It’s too soon to tell whether the Supreme Court vacancy left by Ginsburg will benefit Republicans or Democrats in the November elections, but recent polls show voters trust Biden more than Trump to nominate the next justice.

In New York Times/Siena polls in Maine and the battleground states of North Carolina and Arizona, voters said they thought Biden would do a better job than Trump choosing a justice for the high court.

The margin was widest in Maine, considered a safe state for Biden, with 59 percent of voters saying they preferred the Democratic presidential nominee and 37 percent saying they preferred Trump. In Arizona, Biden led Trump on the issue 53 percent to 43 percent, according to the polls. In North Carolina, 47 percent of voters said they favored Biden to pick the nominee, compared with 44 percent favoring Trump.

The polls, released Friday, involved 653 likely voters in each state.

Biden also had a strong advantage in a nationwide Fox News poll conducted in the second week of September. Fifty-two percent of likely voters said they trusted Biden to do a better job nominating the next justice, compared with 45 percent who said Trump would do a better job, according to the poll...   

[barton]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/09/19/mcconnell-biden-pack-court/

If Moscow Mitch is really going to violate his own election year rule,  then maybe Democrats should fight back.   And pack the court.  Just remember,  hypothetical Democratic congress:  odd numbers are better.   

[bankshot1]

Perhaps a direct appeal to whomever a prospective nominee is to refuse a nomination until the winner of the 2020 election has been sworn in, as their reaffirmation of the seemingly shifting principle as outlined by McConnell in 2016, that in an election year, a SC apppointment  should be decided by the people. That is if you believe in our democratic process you won't be party to this sham.

Never happen.

Republicans believe in power, and voter suppression to maintain that power, not shame, nor democracy.

Its a shame

Part of the question is how many "defectors" McConnell needs to deal with. If he only had 1 or 2, then he can do it whenever he wants before the inauguration. But if he has 3 GOP senators saying no to the nomination, then he'll have to act by November 30th or risk losing because Kelly could be sworn in then or shortly thereafter, if he wins. And with McSally promising to support McConnell/Trump in this, she seems resigned to losing.

I have to say, I hate needing to rely on the likes of Susan Collins, but she's one.  “I think that's too close, I really do,” She added that she would oppose seating a justice in the lame-duck session if Democratic nominee Joe Biden defeats Trump. That's important.

Graham was clear in 2018: “This may make you feel better, but I really don’t care,” Graham said. “If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait until the next election.” And he's the (comparatively) new chairman of the Judiciary Committee. In 2016, he was even stronger: Graham was even more explicit in 2016, saying, “I want you to use my words against me: If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said, ‘Let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination.’ And you could use my words against me, and you’d be absolutely right.”

But his more recent comments have been fuzzier - and he's been known to reverse course. More recently, he followed McConnell's "reasoning" (or excuse-making): "Merrick Garland was a different situation. You had the president of one party nominating, and you had the Senate in the hands of the other party. A situation where you've got them both would be different. I don't want to speculate, but I think appointing judges is a high priority for me in 2020."

Grassley said this summer, that "I'm just following what was established by the Biden Rule in 1986 and then emphasized by him in 1992... They set the pattern. I didn't set the pattern. But it was very legitimate that you can't have one rule for Democratic presidents and another rule for Republican presidents."

It's hard to believe that Lisa Murkowski is the most reliable of the four, but I think she just is: “When Republicans held off Merrick Garland it was because nine months prior to the election was too close, we needed to let people decide. And I agreed to do that. If we now say that months prior to the election is OK when nine months was not, that is a double standard and I don’t believe we should do it,” she said. “So I would not support it.”

Romney hasn't been heard from, contrary to some reports. But I have to tell you, I sure would feel more comfortable if 5 GOP senators came out against a nomination approved before election or if there is a lame duck presidency. It protects against Manchin.

its going to be an interesting bit of kabuki theatre watching Repubs defend their partisan hypocrisy.

It will also be fascinating that in a country of 330 million people, that the 53 Rep senators screened and selected from that 330 million, we will probably not find more than a tiny handful with the decency and principles to stand tall for democracy, fairness, and what's right and in the long-term best interests of the country.



 

[josh]

https://projects.jhkforecasts.com/presidential-forecast/

[facilitatorn]

https://projects.jhkforecasts.com/presidential-forecast/

This has a lot to do with it

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/19/america-deadly-wildfires-trump-inferno

In addition to fire, trump is also a big supporter of COVID-19, job loss, poverty, and street violence.

[facilitatorn]

For the first time in modern history, rather than their being millions more jobs in America at the end of a presidential administration than there were at the beginning, there are millions fewer jobs now than their were four years ago.

Trump is running as a job destroyer with the promise to end millions more American livelihoods if given the time and political support.

[LarryBnDC]

https://projects.jhkforecasts.com/presidential-forecast/

This has a lot to do with it

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/19/america-deadly-wildfires-trump-inferno

In addition to fire, trump is also a big supporter of COVID-19, job loss, poverty, and street violence.

Yeah but he is white.

[Hamilton Samuels]

The GOP is owned the corporations through the Federalists. That’s why I really don’t have much use for the Lincoln Project motherfuckers. Trying to play it both ways.

They helped create the monster that got loose on the land.

They’re gonna want credit and be let back into polite society when and if the monster and his minions are vanquished.

Fuck that.

They built the laboratory that spawned the monster.

This is kind of the way most people talk about people who are addicts.

They're going thru their 12 steps.

[josh]

So much for holding Lindsay Graham to what he said in 2016 and 2018.

Unsurprisingly, he has come out fully in support of Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/19/politics/lindsey-graham-ginsburg-supreme-court-seat/index.html

[LarryBnDC]

The GOP is owned the corporations through the Federalists. That’s why I really don’t have much use for the Lincoln Project motherfuckers. Trying to play it both ways.

They helped create the monster that got loose on the land.

They’re gonna want credit and be let back into polite society when and if the monster and his minions are vanquished.

Fuck that.

They built the laboratory that spawned the monster.

This is kind of the way most people talk about people who are addicts.

They're going thru their 12 steps.

They aren’t addicts they've been paid in full, (Judges, tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks)  and now they’re acting like they want credit for slaying the beast they set loose in the first place.

[barton]

Amy Barrett?   An originalist.  Has said she's not big on precedent.   Which was supposedly Susan "I'm concerned" Collins sticking point.   This will be interesting. 

[REDSTATEWARD]

Amy Barrett?   An originalist.  Has said she's not big on precedent.   Which was supposedly Susan "I'm concerned" Collins sticking point.   This will be interesting.

Say what?
Susan Collins is already a no vote.

[Driver125]

If Moscow Mitch is really going to violate his own election year rule

[/b]
If? If? This was as sure as the sun rising in the East.

[josh]

Amy Barrett?   An originalist.  Has said she's not big on precedent.   Which was supposedly Susan "I'm concerned" Collins sticking point.   This will be interesting.

Say what?
Susan Collins is already a no vote.

Nobody is a "no vote" until they have voted.

[bankshot1]

Perhaps a direct appeal to whomever a prospective nominee is to refuse a nomination until the winner of the 2020 election has been sworn in, as their reaffirmation of the seemingly shifting principle as outlined by McConnell in 2016, that in an election year, a SC apppointment  should be decided by the people. That is if you believe in our democratic process you won't be party to this sham.

Never happen.

Republicans believe in power, and voter suppression to maintain that power, not shame, nor democracy.

Its a shame

Part of the question is how many "defectors" McConnell needs to deal with. If he only had 1 or 2, then he can do it whenever he wants before the inauguration. But if he has 3 GOP senators saying no to the nomination, then he'll have to act by November 30th or risk losing because Kelly could be sworn in then or shortly thereafter, if he wins. And with McSally promising to support McConnell/Trump in this, she seems resigned to losing.

I have to say, I hate needing to rely on the likes of Susan Collins, but she's one.  “I think that's too close, I really do,” She added that she would oppose seating a justice in the lame-duck session if Democratic nominee Joe Biden defeats Trump. That's important.

Graham was clear in 2018: “This may make you feel better, but I really don’t care,” Graham said. “If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait until the next election.” And he's the (comparatively) new chairman of the Judiciary Committee. In 2016, he was even stronger: Graham was even more explicit in 2016, saying, “I want you to use my words against me: If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said, ‘Let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination.’ And you could use my words against me, and you’d be absolutely right.”

But his more recent comments have been fuzzier - and he's been known to reverse course. More recently, he followed McConnell's "reasoning" (or excuse-making): "Merrick Garland was a different situation. You had the president of one party nominating, and you had the Senate in the hands of the other party. A situation where you've got them both would be different. I don't want to speculate, but I think appointing judges is a high priority for me in 2020."

Grassley said this summer, that "I'm just following what was established by the Biden Rule in 1986 and then emphasized by him in 1992... They set the pattern. I didn't set the pattern. But it was very legitimate that you can't have one rule for Democratic presidents and another rule for Republican presidents."

It's hard to believe that Lisa Murkowski is the most reliable of the four, but I think she just is: “When Republicans held off Merrick Garland it was because nine months prior to the election was too close, we needed to let people decide. And I agreed to do that. If we now say that months prior to the election is OK when nine months was not, that is a double standard and I don’t believe we should do it,” she said. “So I would not support it.”

Romney hasn't been heard from, contrary to some reports. But I have to tell you, I sure would feel more comfortable if 5 GOP senators came out against a nomination approved before election or if there is a lame duck presidency. It protects against Manchin.

its going to be an interesting bit of kabuki theatre watching Repubs defend their partisan hypocrisy.

It will also be fascinating that in a country of 330 million people, that the 53 Rep senators screened and selected from that 330 million, we will probably not find more than a tiny handful with the decency and principles to stand tall for democracy, fairness, and what's right and in the long-term best interests of the country.

Lindsey Graham prepares to defend his partisan hypocrisy.