Ginsburg

[fazer]

As if there is not enough gasoline on the fire,  Ruth Bader Ginsburg pasted away.  RIP!  The republicans have picks already.  What a firestorm coming this way.  2020 rolls along non stop. What’s going to happen next.  God bless this mess!

 

[Ricardus]

What's going to happen next is:

Congratulations newest Supreme Court Judge William Barr.

 

[Brian Roth]

And senate  filibuster is no longer in play for SCOTUS.  This is going to become quite ugly with perhaps very bad outcomes "on the street".

 

[pucho812]

She is not even buried yet and already. picks were being hinted at for sometime now. There is a process to it all. it will play out eventually.  May she R.I.P

 

[hodad]

Murkowski has said she's opposed to taking a vote before the election.  Collins absolutely will not win reelection if she supports a vote--but she might not care because she's way down in the polls already.  Romney doesn't like Trump and doesn't need Trump to keep his seat, so he's a question mark.  Gardner in CO, Ernst in IA, even Graham in SC--they will undoubtedly be trying to figure out what helps them most in the election.  Of course, if you want to motivate the Democratic base, go ahead and hold that vote.

 

[JohnRoberts]

The body is still warm, how about RIP for a well respected jurist?

JR

 

[iturnknobs]

Is it me, or according to Mitch McConnell, the pick should go to the incoming president... or it should have gone to the sitting president according to the constitution.... or people should have gone crazy then.... or they’re probably goin to go f’ing bananas if MM doesn’t do as he says/did... I can’t imagine why sh*t has been going off the rails prior to this... I was in this band called “Bonker Sauce” once...

 

[iturnknobs]

The body is still warm, how about RIP for a well respected jurist?

JR

Your well intentioned comments might be more effective over in the Breitbart comments section. Most people here are actually worried about the ramifications of what has happened and what is about to ensue. RBG would want people to immediately work towards the proper solution to her demise. The opposite will likely be the result. RIP democracy.

 

[Rocinante]

I so respected her. She was such an amazing person.  I'm sure the illiterate, anti-liberal, anti-mask, climate change deniers, are having a party at this news. Trump and his minions get to appoint some merciless white supremacist to take a seat at the highest office. Considering this administration's other choices of highly unqualified toadies like they have in place of every branch e.g. homeland security, education, health, epa, national security, FEMA, etc.... (the list is literally too long to type but its every branch). Remember every top military official resigned because of how idiotic and disgraceful the administration was. They are still pushing their fake drug that 99% of scientists say has no validity. Another Qanon joke.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the best of us. Like Elijah Cummings whom Trump had no nice words for. Scum bags. That have scum bags following them.
We are doomed.

 

[hodad]

The body is still warm, how about RIP for a well respected jurist?

JR

Well respected by you?  Well respected by McConnell or Trump? BTW, McConnell has already announced his intention to hold a vote on a nominee for the seat, so I don't really think he gives a damn about showing any respect. 

 

[iomegaman]

Without opening an already open can of worms there seems to be a general flavor of over-reacting to things we do not have all the facts about...this holds unbearably true about the future.

While it is very likely the House will rush to appoint some ill-vetted lifetime candidate there is also the very real possibility that this action will produce another reaction in the polls and the party not in full power of the house will fall into full control of the house after the election...if that happens I expect to see the SCOTUS change from its current number to probably 12 or so...which would be entirely legal and of course would mitigate any current "rush-to-fill" seats of justice with party affiliates...

Be careful what you wish for, you might get it in spades.

 

[hodad]

Without opening an already open can of worms there seems to be a general flavor of over-reacting to things we do not have all the facts about...this holds unbearably true about the future.

While it is very likely the House will rush to appoint some ill-vetted lifetime candidate there is also the very real possibility that this action will produce another reaction in the polls and the party not in full power of the house will fall into full control of the house after the election...if that happens I expect to see the SCOTUS change from its current number to probably 12 or so...which would be entirely legal and of course would mitigate any current "rush-to-fill" seats of justice with party affiliates...

Be careful what you wish for, you might get it in spades.

While I agree there's not really a firm answer to how this could potentially play out, your post is very confusing.  The House has nothing to do with Supreme Court nominations or confirmations.  The White House nominates, the Senate confirms.  Maybe by House you mean Congress as a whole? 

Another question is whether Trump and vulnerable Senate Republicans would be better holding out that Supreme Court seat as a sort of GOTV carrot, or whether they'd wait until after the election to consider a nominee in an effort to tamp down Democrats' motivation to vote, etc. etc.  There's not a doubt in my mind that both sides are doing polling running focus groups, etc. already. 

 

[iomegaman]

While I agree there's not really a firm answer to how this could potentially play out, your post is very confusing.  The House has nothing to do with Supreme Court nominations or confirmations.  The White House nominates, the Senate confirms.  Maybe by House you mean Congress as a whole? 

Another question is whether Trump and vulnerable Senate Republicans would be better holding out that Supreme Court seat as a sort of GOTV carrot, or whether they'd wait until after the election to consider a nominee in an effort to tamp down Democrats' motivation to vote, etc. etc.  There's not a doubt in my mind that both sides are doing polling running focus groups, etc. already.

Congress has been dead in the water for the last four years because the GOP controls the House, every bill dies on Mitch McConnells desk...if the house flips then the entire narrative flips...and in a lot of races it looks to go blue...I seriously doubt Congress will flip but the House itself is in play...

If Dems sweep all three races changes to the SCOTU and a few US territories becoming States is certainly on the table.

You can only gerry mander districts for so long...at some point everything flips its the pendulum swing of history...every generation or so things swing away from where they are.

 

[living sounds]

Congress has been dead in the water for the last four years because the GOP controls the House, every bill dies on Mitch McConnells desk...if the house flips then the entire narrative flips...and in a lot of races it looks to go blue...I seriously doubt Congress will flip but the House itself is in play...

If Dems sweep all three races changes to the SCOTU and a few US territories becoming States is certainly on the table.

You can only gerry mander districts for so long...at some point everything flips its the pendulum swing of history...every generation or so things swing away from where they are.

Democrats control the House since the 2018 midterms, the GOP controls the Senate since the 2014 midterms. The Senate is tasked with the confirmation of judges.

I think the problem is today's massive distortion of politicial representation in th US. The population is almost equally divided between rural, small mown, small city and big city areas. But rural areas have 35% of Senators while Big City areas have only 14%.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-senates-rural-skew-makes-it-very-hard-for-democrats-to-win-the-supreme-court/

Adding territories is a band aid, what would make sense is subtracting Senators from states that are mostly farmland and adding them to the most populous areas. Or divide states like California into smaller states.

 

[fazer]

Adding territories is a band aid, what would make sense is subtracting Senators from states that are mostly farmland and adding them to the most populous areas. Or divide states like California into smaller states.

Big thumbs down.

You probably don’t know but that is how the house works. The senate is 2 per state and is considered the the higher chamber.  The house is controlled by representatives per populations hence more representatives for New York than for say South Dakota.    But always 2 senator per state.  The US is vast and so individual states have different needs.  One size doesn’t fit all.   

 

[living sounds]

Big thumbs down.

You probably don’t know but that is how the house works. The senate is 2 per state and is considered the the higher chamber.  The house is controlled by representatives per populations hence more representatives for New York than for say South Dakota.    But always 2 senator per state.  The US is vast and so individual states have different needs.  One size doesn’t fit all. 

Oh, I know how it works. But the thing is that it doesn't. Not anymore.

There's no actual reason it couldn't be organized differently. Bill Maher always says that the US could do with one Dakota - just fuse them. That would be another way to do it. Highly unlikely to happen, I know.

Majority rule is a basic principle in a democracy because it legitimizes power. In the US a minority that is more rural, whiter and more conservative than the population as a whole effectively rules over the majority by their domination of the Senate and in extension the Supreme Court. This has nothing to do with "one size fits all". It's the one size of historically property owners, White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestants and today rural dwellers that gets forced on the rest of the country.

Good read:

https://truthout.org/articles/noam-chomsky-to-make-the-us-a-democracy-the-constitution-itself-must-change/

 

[fazer]

Yes nevertheless it’s a republic not a democracy and just like countries in Europe that would like to hang on to their culture in some form , so would states in the US.  It’s a brilliant system that IMO does not need a change to the senate.  Why don’t you work on converting Germany or the EU.  Sorry but globalization is not what it was sold as.  The house answers your so called representatives by numbers while the senate preserves the power of the states .  It’s always someone from the East and west coast that wants to change rules to benefit their state.  No thank you.  There is an election to change horses if enough states want that.  I’ll wait for that. 

 

[fazer]

I have read Or listened to Chomsky over the years but that article is part of the same playbook of BLM and Antifa and other communist liberals that want to tear down any belief in your country, culture or history.  It’s the worst kind of BS and insulting to this great nation with another condemnation of history.  I’m insulted by it.  You can stick it up your narrative.

 

[living sounds]

I have read Or listened to Chomsky over the years but that article is part of the same playbook of BLM and Antifa and other communist liberals that want to tear down any belief in your country, culture or history.  It’s the worst kind of BS and insulting to this great nation with another condemnation of history.  I’m insulted by it.  You can stick it up your narrative.

It's primarily a citation of facts. Are you insulted by the facts?

 

[living sounds]

Yes nevertheless it’s a republic not a democracy and just like countries in Europe that would like to hang on to their culture in some form , so would states in the US.  It’s a brilliant system that IMO does not need a change to the senate.  Why don’t you work on converting Germany or the EU.  Sorry but globalization is not what it was sold as.  The house answers your so called representatives by numbers while the senate preserves the power of the states .  It’s always someone from the East and west coast that wants to change rules to benefit their state.  No thank you.  There is an election to change horses if enough states want that.  I’ll wait for that.

What is it about the boarders of states that is chiseled in stone? They were drawn, often rather arbitrarily, fairly recently, and people do not differ in their culture from state to state, especially not between Dacotas (correct me if I am completely wrong there).

The whole idea of the US was that it was changeable, working toward a better, more perfect union. Now there is a faction that wants to preserve an imagined past in the most rigid way imaginable...

I don't see what problems in the political system have to do with "culture". If things don't work out in Germany, I want us to make appropriate changes. Happens all the time. Happened all the time in the US in earlier ages, too, that's where all the amendments came from.

From the point of view of the big citty dwellers it's 'taxation with underrepresentation'. They should start a tea party about it...  ;D