#43 - Episode XIII - Prop Pardons Edition

[Cyn]

The hole in your argument is that the GOP is poised to have a 6-3 majority in the court that they played dirty to get in 2016.

[Andalusian girls]

that is one terrible reading of history. Democrats had a filibuster proof supermajority when passing New Deal laws yet nearly all the legislation was heavily supported by Republicans and FDR regularly compromised with them to alleviate some of their concerns. the Social Security Act, for example, passed 77-6 in the Senate and 372-33 in the House. in the House vote the opposition consisted evenly of 15 Democrats and 15 Republicans (with 3 from other parties).

indeed the only serious opposition to the New Deal laws came from SCOTUS which found a few of them unconstitutional, to which FDR responded by threatening to pack the Court. thankfully there was a rebellion among Congressional Democrats opposed to the plan and the bill died an unseemly death, getting shuttered to hell by a Senate vote of 70-20 (in a Senate consisting overwhelmingly of Democrats).

and i fear you are incapable of understanding my argument if you think Republicans playing dirty to retain Scalia's seat in 2016 represents a hole in it. for the record the 6-3 majority comes primarily from Kennedy retiring and RBG's death, but i digress.

[Milkster]

How about judges are no longer lifetime appointments and we don't need Peepaw sitting on a bench when he grew up and routinely walked by black people hanging from trees and queer people were operated on for shits and giggles.

[Melena]

I love how Trump keeps saying republican's can't win California, when prior to Bill Clinton, California was actually considered a strong leans republican state. Prior to Clinton, you had to go back to the 60's before they voted for the Democratic Nominee in a Presidential election. It's like all the people who grew up dealing with Republican's bullshit out here suddenly got sick of it and started voting them out.

[Lucavi]

How about judges are no longer lifetime appointments and we don't need Peepaw sitting on a bench when he grew up and routinely walked by black people hanging from trees and queer people were operated on for shits and giggles.

Why do you hate the constitution?! Why do you hate our country? You can't change what the founding fathers intended! Think abou-

I can't even keep up with this bullshit, lolol. God god, our country is great and fucking sucks all at the same time.

[Andalusian girls]

How about judges are no longer lifetime appointments and we don't need Peepaw sitting on a bench when he grew up and routinely walked by black people hanging from trees and queer people were operated on for shits and giggles.

by far the oldest members of SCOTUS in Breyer and RBG (formerly oldest i suppose) were the liberal ones while the two youngest ones in Kavanaugh and Gorsuch are, you know (and Barrett would be younger than either), but i don't disagree. the Constitution doesn't actually state the duration of appointment it's just been interpreted to be for life.

[Qalbert]

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1314627983471239168

[Salodin]

Fuck that, naked power is all that matters now. Just gotta make sure to make it so the other side can't win. Or make them have to move so far left on their positions to be viable that I actually wouldn't mind if they won.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

The reason the nuclear option was invoked in the first place was because Republicans were abusing the system in the other direction, Democrats didn't do it just to do it. Trump was able to make as many judiciary appointments as he has because Republicans threatened to filibuster every single appointment Obama attempted, which left the judicial branch all by paralyzed. It was take a gamble and hope they retained power or get literally nothing done in the face of McConnell stonewalling any attempt to sit a federal judge.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Kaslo]

How about judges are no longer lifetime appointments and we don't need Peepaw sitting on a bench when he grew up and routinely walked by black people hanging from trees and queer people were operated on for shits and giggles.

Remove the only thing that allows Justices to be objective... sounds like a great move.

[Andalusian girls]

a tenured appointment of say 20 years with no reappointment would still allow impartiality

[Salodin]

After 4 years of norm breaking don, honestly all I got to say is womp womp. The pendulum is swinging back and boy oh boy I cant wait to see what happens

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Tymon]

In an absolute best case scenario it's Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer in power.

If you think those guys are going to allow any broad overwhelming change or shift while they're alive you are fooling yourself

[Cyn]

that is one terrible reading of history. Democrats had a filibuster proof supermajority when passing New Deal laws yet nearly all the legislation was heavily supported by Republicans and FDR regularly compromised with them to alleviate some of their concerns. the Social Security Act, for example, passed 77-6 in the Senate and 372-33 in the House. in the House vote the opposition consisted evenly of 15 Democrats and 15 Republicans (with 3 from other parties).

indeed the only serious opposition to the New Deal laws came from SCOTUS which found a few of them unconstitutional, to which FDR responded by threatening to pack the Court. thankfully there was a rebellion among Congressional Democrats opposed to the plan and the bill died an unseemly death, getting shuttered to hell by a Senate vote of 70-20 (in a Senate consisting overwhelmingly of Democrats).

and i fear you are incapable of understanding my argument if you think Republicans playing dirty to retain Scalia's seat in 2016 represents a hole in it. for the record the 6-3 majority comes primarily from Kennedy retiring and RBG's death, but i digress.

Except I never even implied that the situation is identical, though I should have said liberal vs conservative instead of democrat vs republican. The fact remains though, that there was conservative resistance to the legislation, but FDR had consolidated so much power that he got much of what he wanted passed regardless, and those reforms went on to become seen as too popular to go after and repeal even after conservatives took back power decades later.

Trust me though, I do understand your argument, and I also understand that where the Democrats are right now is exactly what you want, so I'm really not surprised at your position.

[Andalusian girls]

[Salodin]

AG doesn't believe in the will of the people

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

If the people didn't want dems to pack the courts they wouldn't have given them a tsunami in 2018 and wouldn't have given them a trifecta immediately after trump made the courts 6-3 by stealing a seat

Gotta get these points warmed up for 2021

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Andalusian girls]

AG doesn't believe in the will of the people

have you seen the people

[Yabby]

peopleofwalmart.com

[Yabby]

After 4 years of norm breaking don, honestly all I got to say is womp womp. The pendulum is swinging back and boy oh boy I cant wait to see what happens

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Nothing, nothing is going to happen.

In an absolute best case scenario it's Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer in power.

If you think those guys are going to allow any broad overwhelming change or shift while they're alive you are fooling yourself

This, not sure why people even care about the talk of packing the courts... shit isn't going to happen.