Winning the Supreme Court while owning the Republicans

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday September 26, 2020 · 2:32 PM PDT

2020/09/26 · 14:32

Barring some procedural miracles, Amy Coney Barrett is likely to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The polling may be in our favor, but the Senate is not.

What then?

Unless we win the Presidency and the Senate with more than 54 or 55 seats, we are unlikely to get an expansion of the Court. More likely we’d have 50, 51 or 52 (on a really good night) seats and some of those shaky even on ending the filibuster. If we threaten Court expansion with that, we may not even get the filibuster removal, which is the key to any legislative agenda.

Under that assumption, we have to figure out how to shape the 9 to our needs.

First up focus: John Roberts. In a 5-4 court he was thrust into the role of “swing” vote. He’s a definite conservative, but he’s also always keeping an eye on his legacy. A radical right court could be problematic to that legacy. While he can’t swing the Court in a 6-3 scenario, he can still moderate it by deciding to write the opinion in controversial cases by joining the majority and defining things narrowly. Arguments made need to focus on him to try to limit the damage.

So how do we own the Republicans if we can’t expand the Court?

Find ways to get Alito and Thomas and lots of other judges off the Court. One idea: pensions. Republicans love to cut pensions of public employees. So let’s give them what they want. Judges are public employees and they have really fat pensions. While neither Alito nor Thomas are poor men, they aren’t super rich by DC standards and they have both been rumored to want to retire. Perhaps it’s time to add means testing to federal judge retirements for those judges who have not retired as of a certain date. That would give Biden opportunities to target any straggling conservative judges thinking about retiring up and down the Court system.

If we can manage to get rid of Alito or Thomas, then we’re no worse than where we were while RBG was alive. If we get both out, we swing the Court in our favor.

We’re going to have to be creative, we need to start coming up with ideas.

The RBG battle will be lost. We need to win the war.

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday September 20, 2020 · 3:42 PM PDT

2020/09/20 · 15:42

There will be theater and announcements and maybe even a few process plays, but with Dems in the minority in the Senate and there being roughly 100 days until a new Senate, there’s little we can do to stop them from ramming through a pick.

If you doubt that they will do it, answer the question why they shouldn’t?

Fairness?

Integrity?

Respect for the institution?

We’re talking Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump.

This is about one thing and one thing only: POWER.

If Trump wins the election, his pick will be seated, even if the Dems win the Senate. As long as his pick is even marginally “qualified” (not what we would want, but objectively capable of doing the job), the claim would be the American people spoke and he should get what he wants. And while the Repubs would still have the Senate, even if just for a few more weeks, they’d confirm.

If Trump loses the election but the Repubs hold the Senate, Mitch would still confirm. Why would he give Joe Biden the pick when the threat of expanding the court disappeared with the Republicans winning the Senate? Per above, please don’t try answering with fairness, integrity, etc..

Finally if Trump loses and the Senate switches hands, what does Mitch have to lose? Let the Dems try to kill the filibuster and expand the Court. He’d just as soon bet on the Dems being weak-kneed and not going through or being successful with one or both. And even if they did manage to be successful, it would be an exercise of the only thing he understands: POWER.

So while we should do everything we can to stop them from replacing her, we must be realistic in the expectation that they will replace her and not be defeated by that. We need to be doing everything we can to ensure Trump and the Republican Senate gets turned out, then we can do what we need to do: exercise POWER.

We need to stop learning the lesson that elections have consequences and start teaching that lesson.

The "easy" fix to the Supreme Court

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday September 19, 2020 · 6:48 AM PDT

2020/09/19 · 06:48

People leave candles, flowers and signs at a makeshift memorial on the steps of the Supreme Court buidling in memory of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in Washington, DC, on September 18, 2020. - Progressive icon and doyenne of the US Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has died at the age of 87 after a battle with pancreatic cancer, the court announced on September 18, 2020. Ginsburg, affectionately known as the Notorious RBG, passed away "this evening surrounded by her family at her home in Washington, DC," the court said in a statement. (Photo by ALEX EDELMAN / AFP) (Photo by ALEX EDELMAN/AFP via Getty Images)

It’s not packing the Court. It’s the threat of packing the Court.

With RBG’s passing the likelihood of either Alito or Thomas retiring now to let Trump replace them is almost non-existent. Obviously if Trump wins, we’re permanently screwed and none of this matters. If however Trump loses and the Senate switches party control, then Biden can have a conversation with both Alito and Thomas and let them know the SC will be expanded to 13 unless they retire immediately.

Their choice would be to spend the next several years in a 7-6 minority or a comfortable retirement with nice pension. Neither are young men. Why spend several of your remaining years frustrated in the minority? Under that argument, he might even draw in Roberts — though Roberts seems less likely to retire even if in the minority.

Two of them resign and there’s a 5-4 liberal tilt to the court as the death of Scalia should have produced.

Keeping the Court at 9 would be seen as less politically damaging to the Court than expanding it. If they are unwilling to retire, then expansion would be an easy argument.

Note: For those questioning why 13 instead of 15 or 17, expanding the Court will require folks like Joe Manchin to come along for ride as part of also agreeing to remove the filibuster. A 1 vote Court majority aligned to what it should have looked like after Scalia is a much easier sale than trying to massively pack the Court.

Don't we want Kanye on the ballot?

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday September 14, 2020 · 7:05 PM PDT

2020/09/14 · 19:05

Rapper Kanye West speaks during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, U.S., October 11, 2018. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque - RC16CAE568A0 — Which voters is this man a magnet for?

Who are his voters?

Black women who voted for Biden instead of Kamala or Warren in the primaries?

White suburban women who previously voted for Trump but are sliding to Biden because of the chaos and misogyny?

Black men who voted for Hillary in 2016 but would suddenly dump Obama’s wingman in favor of someone who can’t win the electoral college and therefore would be helping Trump?

White men who voted for Hillary and haven’t moved to Trump because the racism bothers them more than any discomfort they may have over changing demographics?

Any other group that has decided Trump isn’t it?

Seems to me the only voters Kanye gets are disaffected folks who are either unreliable voters or folks who want to vote as a statement / joke. That latter group in particular would not have voted for Hillary in 2016 and probably not Johnson or Stein. The voting as a joke / blow the system up crowd voted Trump in 2016. Why wouldn’t we want them voting Kanye in 2020? It deprives Trump, not Biden of voters.

Bernie's lack of success is not the fault of moderates. Progressives made the choice.

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday March 07, 2020 · 6:55 AM PST

2020/03/07 · 06:55

Many Bernie supporters push back on comments from non-Bernie, now Biden supporters when the topic of party loyalty is raised. The problem for Bernie supporters is many people do put value in party loyalty. They think they’re stronger together than by being free agents. They think unions, while not perfect, are better than right to work.

To many of us, Bernie’s position to Dems over the last 5 years has been:

‘You’re awful, but not quite as awful as the other guys. So I work with you most of the time. I’m not really one of you, but I’ll say I am for a few months. Now make me your leader.’

‘Well, that didn’t work out. I’m back to saying I’m not one of you’

‘I’m back. You’re still inadequate. I don’t have a plan to get most of you to vote for me, but am hoping to capture the prize while there are lots of people running. Now make me your leader.’

And while some Bernie supporters won’t like that snarky characterization, it’s not inaccurate.

Warren supporters are currently split between Bernie and Biden. That tells us that Warren would have been the candidate with the best going-in chance to bring the wings together. Based on her policy positions, she started from a base on the left side. Had Bernie not run, that base would have been all hers, e.g., she was likely the second choice of Bernie voters more than any other group, making that her strongest alternate base. Had she led coming out of Iowa and New Hampshire, Nevada would have probably gone her way. And while SC might have gone towards Biden, it might not have been as big right along with the same said for Super Tuesday.

But none of that happened because Bernie had to have his revolution. Unfortunately for progressives, the revolutionary decided he was more important than the revolution.

Don’t blame moderates or Joe Biden for that. Yes, moderates decided who we would back and yes some of that was very much impacted by the progressives’ decision on who they would back. Progressives pushed forward someone less acceptable to the rest of us.

Progressive voters had a first round choice between Bernie and Warren. Progressives chose who to back.

What's the Sanders rationale now?

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday March 04, 2020 · 5:21 AM PST

2020/03/04 · 05:21

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks after being endorsed by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., at a campaign rally Monday, March 2, 2020 in Dallas. (AP Photo/Richard W. Rodriguez)

When Bernie was positioned as the front runner, the voters responded. They wanted somebody else. Nobody here can argue too many candidates depressed Bernie’s margin of victory. Nope. He lost most states last night.

Nobody can argue that Bernie will bring out more voters. Look at the Virginia numbers. Almost double the turn-out from 2016 and Biden won it going away.

Nobody can argue the establishment put their thumb on the scale with super-delegates. People voted yesterday. People aren’t the establishment.

What’s left?

Arguing that Bernie has a path via the convention? Why would anybody give the nomination to somebody who has demonstrated he can’t win one of the most important voting blocs to Democrats, African Americans. They shouldn’t and they won’t.

Yes Bernie might win a few states yet, but he’s not going to have a majority of delegates at the convention. After last night, it’s highly unlikely he would have a plurality going to the convention.

So Bernie has two choices: recognize the above and gracefully bow out or continue to fight on and try to undermine the front runner in hopes of somehow reversing the above. The only way to try the latter however would be an approach which would harm Biden and still not endear Bernie to the rest of the party — nobody wins fans with a scorched earth approach.

There’s only one person who benefits from that.

Where is Bernie?

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday March 01, 2020 · 1:20 PM PST

2020/03/01 · 13:20

Elizabeth, Amy, Pete, Joe, Mike even Tom (who dropped out last night) are walking across the Selma bridge in Alabama today to commemorate the Bloody Sunday event of 1965.

John Lewis, a living legend from that event and now fighting stage 4 pancreatic cancer is there.

Oddly Bernie is missing. He’s off campaigning in California.

For a candidate whose claim is that he will bring more people out, he sure seems to prefer acting like a lone wolf.

African Americans are one of the most important voting blocs of the Democratic Party. Bernie has shown historical difficulty winning their vote. Today when all the other candidates are trying to earn support, he’s showing how he feels.

Why should anyone believe that Bernie will be good for down-ballot candidates when he’s constantly making things about himself?

Voting for or voting against

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday February 29, 2020 · 5:44 PM PST

2020/02/29 · 17:44

CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA - FEBRUARY 25: Democratic presidential candidates (L-R) Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and former Vice President Joe Biden participate the Democratic presidential primary debate at the Charleston Gaillard Center on February 25, 2020 in Charleston, South Carolina. Seven candidates qualified for the debate, hosted by CBS News and Congressional Black Caucus Institute, ahead of South Carolinaâ€™s primary in four days. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

When New Hampshire rolled around and those of us not supporting Bernie pointed out that many more people hadn’t voted for Bernie than had, we were told that didn’t mean Bernie wasn’t popular. Instead Bernie couldn’t get a majority in New Hampshire or even get the same numbers he did in 2016 because there were so many people in the race.

Well tonight we have South Carolina and it appears there are still lots of candidates in the race. It also appears that Joe Biden was able to win a majority of the vote or at the very least a dominant plurality.

So if such a supposedly weak candidate as Joe Biden can win in such a decisive way, why should anybody believe that Bernie is a strong candidate when he can’t?

Here's the thing about Bloomberg

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday February 11, 2020 · 7:43 PM PST

2020/02/11 · 19:43

Like many here I an concerned about the idea of a plutocrat buying an election.

Here’s the thing however: if Bloomberg is serious and at $38 / sec, he sure seems serious, would he be content to have Mitch McConnell running the Senate? No. He’ll want a Senate he can get results from. If he’s the nominee, how would he not fund campaigns of senate candidates to ensure he can get stuff done?

Can I live with a plutocrat buying the Senate away from Mitch? I think I can.

Iowa's lesson: Moderate needed to beat Trump

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday February 05, 2020 · 5:46 PM PST

2020/02/05 · 17:46

The voting has begun and the counting is almost finished. As the group of voters that claims to respect facts, and not the alternative kind, Iowa did shed some light on the various hypotheses being written about on this site:

1. The far left has more support than the center left. FALSE

Pete + Joe + Amy > 50% of the vote.

Bernie + Elizabeth < 50% of the vote.

2. The anti-Trump energy will bring out thousands of new voters. FALSE

The turnout Monday night looked more like 2016 than 2008.

Will we bet on a progressive candidate bringing out new voters or do we bank on a centrist candidate pulling in some swing voters or at the very least not scaring center right voters so that they are comfortable staying home on election day. That’s our choice.

Iowa suggests the better bet is a centrist.

With the lane split among multiple candidates, the nomination might be Bernie’s to lose at this pojnt if Biden can’t pull it together. Winning the nomination isn’t worth much however if we lose the general.

The progressive pair couldn’t get the majority of the vote in the most liberal / progressive event of the season. Why would anyone think a strongly progressive candidate can win the general?

Where’s the historical data to show it can be done? 1932 and FDR? Well unless folks here are hoping for another Depression, we aren’t at those conditions. We’re certainly not at those conditions among suburban voters who could vote for Pete/Joe/Amy or stay home but who would never vote for Bernie / Elizabeth and would likely vote Trump instead.

Where’s the historical data showing traditional non-voters will show up to vote?

We’re soon going to have to decide whether we want to be right on all the issues and get nothing when we lose or whether we want to win and get much of what we want on most issues.

Poll

143 votes Show Results

I'd rather be

143 votes Vote Now!

I'd rather be

Right on the issues, even if it means losing

32 votes

Willing to compromise if it means winning

111 votes

Hugh Hewitt supporting Sanders to help Trump. What should we make of that?

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday January 19, 2020 · 8:32 AM PST

2020/01/19 · 08:32

US President Donald Trump speaks with Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during a meeting at Winfield House, London on December 3, 2019. - NATO leaders gather Tuesday for a summit to mark the alliance's 70th anniversary but with leaders feuding and name-calling over money and strategy, the mood is far from festive. (Photo by Nicholas Kamm / AFP) (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)

Hugh Hewitt on Meet the Press this morning declared he’d be voting for Sanders in Virginia’s open primary and for Trump in November election.

Seems pretty clear that Trump world thinks Sanders is the easiest challenger to defeat in November.

What other plausible explanation is there?

This is the rationale and fear of all of us Biden supporters. People like Hewitt know that Biden will have one of two effects on center and center-right swing voters:

- Vote for Biden

- Not vote for Trump

Either of those are good for us.

Meanwhile they also know that a Sanders candidacy has two different effects:

- Vote for Trump

- Not vote for Sanders

Either of those are bad for us

The inevitable question comes down to energy and voter likelihood. Like it or not, older and centrist voters tend to view voting as civic duty and are more likely to vote than left leaning youth. Obviously there’s an argument to be made that youth are more likely to show up if someone is more aligned to their interests. While true, it still requires placing our hopes on energizing a group that is historically less likely to vote than working the group that is more likely to vote. That’s not a bet many of us are willing to make.

To Biden, or not to Biden, that is the question...

palpatine316

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Thursday August 01, 2019 · 4:33 PM PDT

2019/08/01 · 16:33

youre-stuck-between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place-good_1_.jpg

It’s time to accept that team Biden has the potential winning strategy in sight.

Anyone watching MSNBC last night saw Kornacki’s number about non-college white votes. It’s not that any Democrat will win them , but rather how much will they lose them by.

Lose them by as much as Obama, and we elect a Democratic president. Lose them by as much as Hillary, and Trump gets 4 more years.

It’s no coincidence that Biden was Obama’s point person for the Midwest / Rust Belt during their campaigns.

Now Joe has wrapped himself up in the legacy of Obama / Biden years.

If you attack those years, then by proxy you attack Obama, which based on polling thus far allows Joe to hold on to a good portion of the African American vote as a defender of Obama’s legacy.

If you attack Joe Biden’s record from 30 or 40 years ago, you probably start depressing some of that gettable white vote below the Obama levels.

The only candidate who can keep Biden from the prize has to do it in a way that doesn’t attack Obama and doesn’t attack some of Biden’s more hard centrist policies.

Maybe Sanders or Warren, but right now they’re splitting their lane. If one were to drop, that would be the game changer.Until then, this is Biden’s to lose.

Newer
Older

RSS