[Nevyn]

The white house defined FBI investigation into Kavanaugh is starting to feel like an Institute for Tobacco Studies investigation into smoking and cancer links.

[Nevyn]

In terms of a way out of this, one or a couple of the few remaining democrats on speaking terms with one of the few remaining republicans (whether they are retiring or not) really ought to be reaching out to them this week and saying

"Its a terrible message to the country to put him on the court with this cloud over his head. Tell McConnell to pull him and I won't help block a credible replacement conservative (within reason) nominee even if we narrowly win back the senate."


There are probably some republicans who would love to get out of having to put forward a yes vote on this guy right now. But the conservative focus has been on a court majority so stridently and for so long (and the fights are getting so nasty) that even the Flakes of the world (double meaning intended) are going to have a hard time walking away. Flake doesn't wanna be the guy that enables the Democrats to energize their voters for all out court obstruction for 2 years and throws away a court majority any more than he wants to be the guy voting yes on an alleged rapist.

But if the stakes were just an embarrassing loss for a president Flake (or others, shouldn't put it all on him) can't stand and then they get another conservative justice anyway, he could go with it, especially if it potentially de-escalates the trend.
And for democrats there is a certain appeal because even if they beat Kavanaugh the most likely outcome is they still don't win the Senate and still get whoever Trump picks anyway.

The tradeoff for democrats is political. They probably prefer Kavanaugh winning ugly and a symbol on the court to help them win further elections to confirming a less rapey, less partisan hacky conservative justice who could have actual credibility. And so again, we come back to do both sides want to find a way to make the right call and protect the institution, or do they just want to win? The answers have been trending in the wrong direction.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 03 October 2018 - 04:22 PM

[amphibian]

Amy Barrett, the likely next choice for the nomination, is as bad a judge for the country as Kavanaugh even without the sexual assault.

The offering of a deal to grease the wheels for the next nominee is a bad idea. That could be exploited to put up an even worse nominee than Kavanaugh or Barrett.

The Republicans essentially don't want the government to work well because they and their patrons make money and accumulate power from that state of being. That's why this doesn't work - the two sides aren't playing the same exact game.

[Nevyn]

amphibian, on 03 October 2018 - 05:10 PM, said:

Amy Barrett, the likely next choice for the nomination, is as bad a judge for the country as Kavanaugh even without the sexual assault.

The offering of a deal to grease the wheels for the next nominee is a bad idea. That could be exploited to put up an even worse nominee than Kavanaugh or Barrett.

The Republicans essentially don't want the government to work well because they and their patrons make money and accumulate power from that state of being. That's why this doesn't work - the two sides aren't playing the same exact game.

Hence the words "within reason". I'm not suggesting a blank cheque in any deal. The deal would not only address Kavanaugh, but keep Trump from going even further right with his next pick both as punishment and as a way to froth up his base.

The no deal scenario as it stands is Kavanaugh or someone worse, and the only route around it is somehow defeating Kavanaugh, then somehow winning an unlikely (and narrow) Senate majority, and then keeping hard party line discipline to denying any nominee for 2 years (further escalating the precedents of judicial confirmation partisanship) and then winning not only the presidency but maintaining the senate majority when you have incumbent democrats trying to defend 2 years of obstruction as "advise and consent".

So while I'm not calling the situation ideal, sometimes you need to be aware of how weak your hand is. Daring republicans to push him through is essentially folding and trying to maximize the political gains that result from them looking bad.

[Vengeance]

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 06:00 PM, said:

amphibian, on 03 October 2018 - 05:10 PM, said:

Amy Barrett, the likely next choice for the nomination, is as bad a judge for the country as Kavanaugh even without the sexual assault.

The offering of a deal to grease the wheels for the next nominee is a bad idea. That could be exploited to put up an even worse nominee than Kavanaugh or Barrett.

The Republicans essentially don't want the government to work well because they and their patrons make money and accumulate power from that state of being. That's why this doesn't work - the two sides aren't playing the same exact game.

Hence the words "within reason". I'm not suggesting a blank cheque in any deal. The deal would not only address Kavanaugh, but keep Trump from going even further right with his next pick both as punishment and as a way to froth up his base.

The no deal scenario as it stands is Kavanaugh or someone worse, and the only route around it is somehow defeating Kavanaugh, then somehow winning an unlikely (and narrow) Senate majority, and then keeping hard party line discipline to denying any nominee for 2 years (further escalating the precedents of judicial confirmation partisanship) and then winning not only the presidency but maintaining the senate majority when you have incumbent democrats trying to defend 2 years of obstruction as "advise and consent".

So while I'm not calling the situation ideal, sometimes you need to be aware of how weak your hand is. Daring republicans to push him through is essentially folding and trying to maximize the political gains that result from them looking bad.

That assumes that Trump will get a 3rd pick for the court. Which is a thought that should make any sane person shudder with fear and disgust. Making any deal based on future deals is bullshit. Block this one then work on blocking the next one. The get majority back and tell him to fuck off and wait until the people speak at the 2020 or 2024 election. Leave the sit empty for the next 6 years if we have to.

[Vengeance]

Fuck deals with traitors. Did they even bother to do their duty and have a hearing on merrick garland fuck no. So block this cunt and then the next.

[Nevyn]

Vengeance, on 03 October 2018 - 06:49 PM, said:

That assumes that Trump will get a 3rd pick for the court. Which is a thought that should make any sane person shudder with fear and disgust. Making any deal based on future deals is bullshit. Block this one then work on blocking the next one. The get majority back and tell him to fuck off and wait until the people speak at the 2020 or 2024 election. Leave the sit empty for the next 6 years if we have to.

No it doesn't.

If Kavanaugh is rejected (or told to withdraw because they dont have the votes), then Trump nominates someone else.

Now the subtext of the current situation is that the democrats want to not only block Kavanaugh, but then win the senate and stall the vote on any replacement for 2 years. But even if they win the Senate they'd need total party line voting to hold it together. The theoretical deal I am talking about is to allay that fear by saying "put aside Kavanaugh, don't nominate someone worse out of spite, and win or lose in November we'll give you a vote on it".

Vengeance, on 03 October 2018 - 06:50 PM, said:

Fuck deals with traitors. Did they even bother to do their duty and have a hearing on merrick garland fuck no. So block this fruitloop and then the next.

First, they can't "block this fruitloop" without a deal. They don't have the votes and can't filibuster, unless they pursuade a republican to side with them. And the republicans won't do that if they think you are just planning to block the next one whoever they are.

And at a deeper level, you can certain try to keep escalating things because the other side is too. But win or lose, you do untold damage setting up a future where supreme court seats stay empty unless president and senate are the exact same party, and a senate minority never have any say on anyone. The minority delay tactics would get worse and worse. And both sides would increasingly go for complete hacks who shouldn't be on the court, because their future rulings are more politically reliable.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 03 October 2018 - 07:04 PM

[Obdigore]

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

And at a deeper level, you can certain try to keep escalating things because the other side is too. But win or lose, you do untold damage setting up a future where supreme court seats stay empty unless president and senate are the exact same party, and a senate minority never have any say on anyone. The minority delay tactics would get worse and worse. And both sides would increasingly go for complete hacks who shouldn't be on the court, because their future rulings are more politically reliable.

So your answer is what? Appeasement? That always works well with Fascists.

Do you know why people didn't vote in 2016? Because they didn't see a reason to. Because Hillary, while much better than Trumpenstein in my eyes, was not better in their eyes. I was having a chat with a gentleman last night who lives in a place of 'lost people', because neither the Dems nor the GOP does anything for them that they see. Because Dems have been corporate dems for years, and the GOP is... well they hate anyone who isn't a landed white straight male.

The simple factor is that the left needs to move left, instead of this slow slide to the right they have been doing for the past couple decades. Obama was a great 1980s Republican President, and the fucking GOP claimed he was too far to the left. That is the direction the entire country has been going because of the GOPs refusal to compromise while the Dems try to make little agreements.

The time is now to say 'oh fuck no'. There are no compromises. Show the people, not the white racists, but the actual people, that you are trying to fight against the corporate purchasing of this country, and then get that message the fuck out to the people, and the dems wont lose another election.

The Dems 2020 slogan should be 'Fuck Racists, we can fix this shit'. Maybe 'Punch a racist then vote Dem'? Or 'Slap a Fascist then vote Kamala'.

[Nevyn]

Obdigore, on 03 October 2018 - 07:14 PM, said:

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

And at a deeper level, you can certain try to keep escalating things because the other side is too. But win or lose, you do untold damage setting up a future where supreme court seats stay empty unless president and senate are the exact same party, and a senate minority never have any say on anyone. The minority delay tactics would get worse and worse. And both sides would increasingly go for complete hacks who shouldn't be on the court, because their future rulings are more politically reliable.

So your answer is what? Appeasement? That always works well with Fascists.

Do you know why people didn't vote in 2016? Because they didn't see a reason to. Because Hillary, while much better than Trumpenstein in my eyes, was not better in their eyes. I was having a chat with a gentleman last night who lives in a place of 'lost people', because neither the Dems nor the GOP does anything for them that they see. Because Dems have been corporate dems for years, and the GOP is... well they hate anyone who isn't a landed white straight male.

The simple factor is that the left needs to move left, instead of this slow slide to the right they have been doing for the past couple decades. Obama was a great 1980s Republican President, and the fucking GOP claimed he was too far to the left. That is the direction the entire country has been going because of the GOPs refusal to compromise while the Dems try to make little agreements.

The time is now to say 'oh fuck no'. There are no compromises. Show the people, not the white racists, but the actual people, that you are trying to fight against the corporate purchasing of this country, and then get that message the fuck out to the people, and the dems wont lose another election.

The Dems 2020 slogan should be 'Fuck Racists, we can fix this shit'. Maybe 'Punch a racist then vote Dem'? Or 'Slap a Fascist then vote Kamala'.

Yeah, totally, go with that. No way you'll lose, make your own party smaller, make the divide bigger, and just end up whining for 4 more years.

If only someone had tried calling anyone supporting the right racist as a blanket assertion, you'd have never lost an election. Why, you could even try a pithy phrase like calling their supporters a "basket of deplorables".

[amphibian]

The piece I think you're missing is that the GOP already did hold empty a Supreme Court seat for 293 days before Garland's nomination expired when the Congress was over that year.

It's already covered territory. The GOP won a presidency after doing that. This doesn't kill elections for candidates because that's not how the voters think now.

[Vengeance]

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 03 October 2018 - 06:49 PM, said:

That assumes that Trump will get a 3rd pick for the court. Which is a thought that should make any sane person shudder with fear and disgust. Making any deal based on future deals is bullshit. Block this one then work on blocking the next one. The get majority back and tell him to fuck off and wait until the people speak at the 2020 or 2024 election. Leave the sit empty for the next 6 years if we have to.

No it doesn't.

If Kavanaugh is rejected (or told to withdraw because they dont have the votes), then Trump nominates someone else.

Now the subtext of the current situation is that the democrats want to not only block Kavanaugh, but then win the senate and stall the vote on any replacement for 2 years. But even if they win the Senate they'd need total party line voting to hold it together. The theoretical deal I am talking about is to allay that fear by saying "put aside Kavanaugh, don't nominate someone worse out of spite, and win or lose in November we'll give you a vote on it".

Vengeance, on 03 October 2018 - 06:50 PM, said:

Fuck deals with traitors. Did they even bother to do their duty and have a hearing on merrick garland fuck no. So block this fruitloop and then the next.

First, they can't "block this fruitloop" without a deal. They don't have the votes and can't filibuster, unless they pursuade a republican to side with them. And the republicans won't do that if they think you are just planning to block the next one whoever they are.

And at a deeper level, you can certain try to keep escalating things because the other side is too. But win or lose, you do untold damage setting up a future where supreme court seats stay empty unless president and senate are the exact same party, and a senate minority never have any say on anyone. The minority delay tactics would get worse and worse. And both sides would increasingly go for complete hacks who shouldn't be on the court, because their future rulings are more politically reliable.

If collins doesn't vote against this piece of shit then she most likely won't get elected. Same with Mukowski. We have bent over and tried to behave like adults for the last 12 years. That got us Trump as President and the 4 years of bullshit when Obama was president. Fuck them. They never compromise why the fuck should we. You want compromise then get rid of the gerrymandered districts. You want to see compromise then let them actually pass a law that helps people. When one party is anti-government the other party shouldn't bend over to help them. That is how Hitler gets elected.

[Vengeance]

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 07:26 PM, said:

Obdigore, on 03 October 2018 - 07:14 PM, said:

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

And at a deeper level, you can certain try to keep escalating things because the other side is too. But win or lose, you do untold damage setting up a future where supreme court seats stay empty unless president and senate are the exact same party, and a senate minority never have any say on anyone. The minority delay tactics would get worse and worse. And both sides would increasingly go for complete hacks who shouldn't be on the court, because their future rulings are more politically reliable.

So your answer is what? Appeasement? That always works well with Fascists.

Do you know why people didn't vote in 2016? Because they didn't see a reason to. Because Hillary, while much better than Trumpenstein in my eyes, was not better in their eyes. I was having a chat with a gentleman last night who lives in a place of 'lost people', because neither the Dems nor the GOP does anything for them that they see. Because Dems have been corporate dems for years, and the GOP is... well they hate anyone who isn't a landed white straight male.

The simple factor is that the left needs to move left, instead of this slow slide to the right they have been doing for the past couple decades. Obama was a great 1980s Republican President, and the fucking GOP claimed he was too far to the left. That is the direction the entire country has been going because of the GOPs refusal to compromise while the Dems try to make little agreements.

The time is now to say 'oh fuck no'. There are no compromises. Show the people, not the white racists, but the actual people, that you are trying to fight against the corporate purchasing of this country, and then get that message the fuck out to the people, and the dems wont lose another election.

The Dems 2020 slogan should be 'Fuck Racists, we can fix this shit'. Maybe 'Punch a racist then vote Dem'? Or 'Slap a Fascist then vote Kamala'.

Yeah, totally, go with that. No way you'll lose, make your own party smaller, make the divide bigger, and just end up whining for 4 more years.

If only someone had tried calling anyone supporting the right racist as a blanket assertion, you'd have never lost an election. Why, you could even try a pithy phrase like calling their supporters a "basket of deplorables".

40% of Republicans would support a person who sexually assaulted someone for the Supreme court. Yeah basket of deplorables fits. When the only way that a party can hold onto power is to let another country manipulate votes. Same thing.

[Obdigore]

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 07:26 PM, said:

Obdigore, on 03 October 2018 - 07:14 PM, said:

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

And at a deeper level, you can certain try to keep escalating things because the other side is too. But win or lose, you do untold damage setting up a future where supreme court seats stay empty unless president and senate are the exact same party, and a senate minority never have any say on anyone. The minority delay tactics would get worse and worse. And both sides would increasingly go for complete hacks who shouldn't be on the court, because their future rulings are more politically reliable.

So your answer is what? Appeasement? That always works well with Fascists.

Do you know why people didn't vote in 2016? Because they didn't see a reason to. Because Hillary, while much better than Trumpenstein in my eyes, was not better in their eyes. I was having a chat with a gentleman last night who lives in a place of 'lost people', because neither the Dems nor the GOP does anything for them that they see. Because Dems have been corporate dems for years, and the GOP is... well they hate anyone who isn't a landed white straight male.

The simple factor is that the left needs to move left, instead of this slow slide to the right they have been doing for the past couple decades. Obama was a great 1980s Republican President, and the fucking GOP claimed he was too far to the left. That is the direction the entire country has been going because of the GOPs refusal to compromise while the Dems try to make little agreements.

The time is now to say 'oh fuck no'. There are no compromises. Show the people, not the white racists, but the actual people, that you are trying to fight against the corporate purchasing of this country, and then get that message the fuck out to the people, and the dems wont lose another election.

The Dems 2020 slogan should be 'Fuck Racists, we can fix this shit'. Maybe 'Punch a racist then vote Dem'? Or 'Slap a Fascist then vote Kamala'.

Yeah, totally, go with that. No way you'll lose, make your own party smaller, make the divide bigger, and just end up whining for 4 more years.

If only someone had tried calling anyone supporting the right racist as a blanket assertion, you'd have never lost an election. Why, you could even try a pithy phrase like calling their supporters a "basket of deplorables".

Oh I see, you're quoting the russian shill lines at me because you think that is what lost Clinton the election? Let me guess, you also think there are people who voted for Trump after Bernie didn't get the nomination because of how mean everyone was to Bernie, and you think 'Walk Away' is a real thing?

Protip: If 'making the divide bigger' means I get politicians who will proudly stand and say 'I'm not a racist, fascist, Neo-Nazi', then I'm proud of making that divide bigger. It sounds almost like the you are making an argument to moderation, and ignoring the fact that the right wing refuses to compromise ever. Ignoring things like history, and what is actually happening because 'oh both sides do the same thing so everyone is wrong, and why wont the democrats just be nice'.

Democrats are spineless and not left at all. Being the 'left-most political party' in the US doesn't make them an actual left party.

[Nevyn]

amphibian, on 03 October 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

The piece I think you're missing is that the GOP already did hold empty a Supreme Court seat for 293 days before Garland's nomination expired when the Congress was over that year.

It's already covered territory. The GOP won a presidency after doing that. This doesn't kill elections for candidates because that's not how the voters think now.

No one is missing that.

The Senate held that seat empty at the mandated end of a president's term, and whats more they used the leverage of that open seat to keep voters spooked by Trump but wanting a right wing judge in line. So not only did they not get punished for doing it, doing it was their get out the vote strategy. I know because I argued tooth and nail with american voters who were trying to excuse their planned Trump support and justify it as 2 bad choices, and the last point they always came down to was "we want the judges". The reasons different. For some its Roe vs Wade, for some its 2nd amendment. Didn't really matter.

Republicans have been politicizing and activating their quest for conservative judges far better for way longer. They can turn it into votes. Did democrats or independents punish them for their tactics? No. In the year of Trump, Garland couldn't even get in the news cycle. But even if he could, they are way less activated and organized over fighting for judges.


But if you escalate things, and block a judge for 2 years, then that is definitely going to be the plank that Republicans run on. They'll "have to" stick with Trump to not let you win on judges And they will absolutely target races. Alabama, New Hampshire, Delaware, New Mexico, Virginia, all democrat seats playing defense in 2020. And every republican with any sort of desire for the race is going to show out in those races to punish the choice.


Regardless of what happens with this nomination, Democrats either need to get their voters more engaged on judges, or they need to find a way to change the game so that politics is left out of picking judges to a larger degree.

[Obdigore]

Vengeance, on 03 October 2018 - 07:45 PM, said:

If collins doesn't vote against this piece of shit then she most likely won't get elected. Same with Mukowski.

I mean, you say that, but the proven pedophile ray moore almost won re-election, purely because the other person had a 'D' next to their name.

You have people at Trump Rallies that wear shirts that say 'I'd rather be russian than democrat'.

This post has been edited by Obdigore: 03 October 2018 - 07:52 PM

[Vengeance]

Nevyn, on 03 October 2018 - 07:50 PM, said:

amphibian, on 03 October 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

The piece I think you're missing is that the GOP already did hold empty a Supreme Court seat for 293 days before Garland's nomination expired when the Congress was over that year.

It's already covered territory. The GOP won a presidency after doing that. This doesn't kill elections for candidates because that's not how the voters think now.

No one is missing that.

The Senate held that seat empty at the mandated end of a president's term, and whats more they used the leverage of that open seat to keep voters spooked by Trump but wanting a right wing judge in line. So not only did they not get punished for doing it, doing it was their get out the vote strategy. I know because I argued tooth and nail with american voters who were trying to excuse their planned Trump support and justify it as 2 bad choices, and the last point they always came down to was "we want the judges". The reasons different. For some its Roe vs Wade, for some its 2nd amendment. Didn't really matter.

Republicans have been politicizing and activating their quest for conservative judges far better for way longer. They can turn it into votes. Did democrats or independents punish them for their tactics? No. In the year of Trump, Garland couldn't even get in the news cycle. But even if he could, they are way less activated and organized over fighting for judges.


But if you escalate things, and block a judge for 2 years, then that is definitely going to be the plank that Republicans run on. They'll "have to" stick with Trump to not let you win on judges And they will absolutely target races. Alabama, New Hampshire, Delaware, New Mexico, Virginia, all democrat seats playing defense in 2020. And every republican with any sort of desire for the race is going to show out in those races to punish the choice.


Regardless of what happens with this nomination, Democrats either need to get their voters more engaged on judges, or they need to find a way to change the game so that politics is left out of picking judges to a larger degree.

The amount of Republican seats in 2020 are 20 the amount of Democate seats in 2020 are 10. The republicans who are up for election include Collons in a state that clinton won. Oh and Gardner in CO which Clinton also won and then NC were clinton only lost by 4. We picked up 19% in fucking Alabama during a special election. Sure it was against a child molester but still 19%!!! Don't fucking Compromise. There is 0 upside to it.

[worry]

Apparently Murkowski is getting the most phone calls on this topic ever, even more than before last year's ACA repeal vote. Of course constituents come second to big money donors, so I'm not predicting anything hopeful.

[Nevyn]

Vengeance, on 03 October 2018 - 07:45 PM, said:

If collins doesn't vote against this piece of shit then she most likely won't get elected. Same with Mukowski. We have bent over and tried to behave like adults for the last 12 years. That got us Trump as President and the 4 years of bullshit when Obama was president. Fuck them. They never compromise why the fuck should we. You want compromise then get rid of the gerrymandered districts. You want to see compromise then let them actually pass a law that helps people. When one party is anti-government the other party shouldn't bend over to help them. That is how Hitler gets elected.

Collins won in 2014 by over 30 points (in a state Obama won). Murkowski and her father before her have held the same seat since 1981, and in 2016 won by 15 points with the next 2 finishers being independents, the closest one to the right of her. This will put pressure on them, but writing them off as 2020 and 2022 losses based on this seems ... hasty.

You are also talking about 2 of the shrinking number (but still existing despite the rhetoric of yourself and Obdigore) of republican senators one can still compromise with in a pinch. So even if you manage to get them out you'd better win.


Anyway, if Democrats figure out how to better make their case and win elections, they can reverse recent results whether they compromise or not, with openness to compromise being better for the long term health of the country.

If they don't figure that out, compromise or not they'll lose often, and if both sides simply escalate things will be worse for everyone no matter who wins.

As for Obdigore's complaint about there being no left, etc etc, free to think that, but any tactic won't get what he/she wants.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 03 October 2018 - 08:44 PM

[worry]

Obviously establishment Dems are terrible at representing their (ostensible) ideals, but I don't see how you conclude being able to compromise is key to the solution. How do you make your case while simultaneously compromising your principles!? Dems lose because they're spineless losers who don't fight for what they claim to want, not because they're unwilling to compromise. In fact, compromising -- a delightful euphemism for caving -- has pretty much been their calling card since at least Clinton. And that has been awful for the long term health of the country.

[Vengeance]

You have laid out your side. I think it is full of shit and so does obdi. We tried reaching across it didn't work. It didn't work when we gave the Republicans a year for the ACA. It didn't work when we asked them to work toward immigration solutions. So fuck them. The rasist assholes questioned Obama's birth. Fuck them. They removed basic health protections. Fuck them. They try to take the county back to 1950. Fuck them.

One party wants to dismantle the country and sell it for the highest bidder. They have given tax cut after tax cut and recession after recession. The other cleans up the mess. Fuck them.

One party spent a trillion dollars on endless war. Hundred of thousands of lives lost. Fuck them.

One party denigns basic science. Fuck them.