Vote!

[jesmu84]

That was all before the Republicans played “let the people decide“ in 2016, then ignored the people in 2020. Now that the Democrats have been stung, they might be more bold.

In hindsight, the Republicans may end up wishing they had confirmed Garland in 2016. With the two vacancies they have filled since then, that would still give them a 5-4 advantage, and make it less likely that the Democrats would expand the Court. Instead, if the Democrats decide to increase the number of seats now, the Republicans could quickly find themselves on the short end once again.

I wasn't referring to just SC related moves. But also any legislation or other projects.

[jesmu84]

The bolded isn't really true.  Alito was nominated during Bush's second term, and he won a majority of the popular vote in 2004.

Roberts and the three Trump justices are the only ones who were nominated by presidents who didn't win the popular vote during the term they were nominated.

Mea culpa

[shoothoops]

It took some voters 5.5 hours to vote in the Upper East Side of Manhattan today.

https://twitter.com/JeffHeckelman/status/1321163996641267715?s=19

[dgies9156]

As a Florida resident, your vote counts less than a resident of any other state in the union. Your vote carries 1/4th the value as one from Wyoming.

Possibly, but because the Republicans and Democrats in my state are about equal, my vote matters.

Whatever my state decides may well elect the next President. That's because we're big and because our politics are lively.

The downside of this is we get bombarded with outright misrepresentations, lies, nonsense and glittering generalities on television. 24 hours a day of silly political ads. Would you guys PLEASE spend you money someplace else???!!!!

[MU82]

That was all before the Republicans played “let the people decide“ in 2016, then ignored the people in 2020. Now that the Democrats have been stung, they might be more bold.

In hindsight, the Republicans may end up wishing they had confirmed Garland in 2016. With the two vacancies they have filled since then, that would still give them a 5-4 advantage, and make it less likely that the Democrats would expand the Court. Instead, if the Democrats decide to increase the number of seats now, the Republicans could quickly find themselves on the short end once again.

That would be perfect. Then, when the Republicans win next time, they could expand the court again. And then, when the Dems win the time after that, they could expand the court again. And so on and so on.

It will be cool to have 27 SCOTUS justices!

[HutchwasClutch]

Or maybe she had faith that the Republicans would have the best interest of the United States of America at heart, like the Democrats did in 1988 and 1991, and not turn the Supreme Court into a political organization, aina?

Now therein lies her mistake.

Is this where I play victim and say "IBTL?"

What a bunch of horse dung. The Democrats “Borked” out Reagan’s preferred nominee, forcing the next nominee to be a known moderate, in order for them to confirm anyone.

Then Thomas had to endure salacious accusations to try and nuke his nomination, and what he termed a “high tech lynching”. 

Now Biden refuses to answer if the courts will be packed, the most brazenly political move that can be made to the S.C.  He’s not even putting up the pretense of lying he and his fellow liberals won’t do so to shut our side up until the election. 

Democrats just don’t want S.C. to be judicially conservative and rule by law. They’ve always wanted a liberal and activist court. 

[GooooMarquette]

It took some voters 5.5 hours to vote in the Upper East Side of Manhattan today.

https://twitter.com/JeffHeckelman/status/1321163996641267715?s=19

A friend who lives in Brooklyn voted on the first day (Saturday? Sunday?) and it took her a little over five hours.

[Pakuni]

Now Biden refuses to answer if the courts will be packed, the most brazenly political move that can be made to the S.C.  He’s not even putting up the pretense of lying he and his fellow liberals won’t do so to shut our side up until the election. 

Democrats just don’t want S.C. to be judicially conservative and rule by law. They’ve always wanted a liberal and activist court.

You're so used to supporting a president who lies incessantly that you consider Biden's refusal to lie a character flaw.
Cult.
And you make a fool of yourself when you claim conservatives want a court that rules by law. They want every bit as much an activist court as the left. It's not a coincidence that they just nominated and confirmed a justice on record as being willing to ignore stare decisis. You can't get more activist.

[shoothoops]

A friend who lives in Brooklyn voted on the first day (Saturday? Sunday?) and it took her a little over five hours.

P.J. Clarke's was passing out coffee and hot chocolate in the UWS in Manhattan today. They had about a 5 hour wait as well. (World Central Kitchen has also been all over the city with food and water)

Wait times have been significantly better in Queens. Going later in the day has had better lines too.

314,000 in first 3 days. Expanded hours now due to popular demand and added voting machines.

[forgetful]

Now Biden refuses to answer if the courts will be packed, the most brazenly political move that can be made to the S.C.  He’s not even putting up the pretense of lying he and his fellow liberals won’t do so to shut our side up until the election. 

Democrats just don’t want S.C. to be judicially conservative and rule by law. They’ve always wanted a liberal and activist court.

Regarding the first element. Maybe, he honestly hasn't decided yet. It is a massive decision with huge implications. It is something that wouldn't have even been a serious consideration 45 days ago. I'd hope he'd think long and hard about this before making a decision one way or the other.

Regarding the 2nd element. All judges say they "rule by law." Fact is, when push comes to shove on partisan issues, they all often "Rule by party." That's true whether it is a conservative or liberal judge.

[GB Warrior]

How's this...in an election year where one side will try their damnedest to win from behind and leverage the court if it has to, you have as many lawyers on the court who were involved with Bush v Gore as you do liberal justices.

[Warriors4ever]

Eisenhower rued the day he appointed Earl Warren, and John Paul Stevens turned out much differently than expected. Somehow I don’t anticipate that happening here.
And I do regret that RBG didn’t retire when it was broached by Obama.
I suspect Breyer may well retire if Biden wins and the Senate flips, after the RBG experience.

[HutchwasClutch]

You're so used to supporting a president who lies incessantly that you consider Biden's refusal to lie a character flaw.
Cult.
And you make a fool of yourself when you claim conservatives want a court that rules by law. They want every bit as much an activist court as the left. It's not a coincidence that they just nominated and confirmed a justice on record as being willing to ignore stare decisis. You can't get more activist.

The liberal playbook just before a general election is to lie about their positions so they don’t expose themselves as the radicals they are.  Biden’s already lied about not wanting to ban fracking, even though he’s on record proclaiming he wants to do exactly that, and he’s had to walk back his debate pledge to kill the oil industry.  So why he’s not following suit about his position on packing the court is surprising because lying is what he does.  And that’s solely why I brought that point up.

At least you admit the left wants an activist judiciary.  You may not like arguments why liberal ideas you like aren’t constitutional, but that is not our sides version of judicial activism.  The duty of The Supreme Court is to interpret and uphold our Constitution, not blindly follow legal precedent that goes against our Constitution. 

[HutchwasClutch]

The liberal playbook just before a general election is to lie about their positions so they don’t expose themselves as the radicals they are.  Biden’s already lied about not wanting to ban fracking, even though he’s on record proclaiming he wants to do exactly that, and he’s had to walk back his debate pledge to kill the oil industry.  So why he’s not following suit about his position on packing the court is surprising because lying on his policy positions is what he does.  And that’s solely why I brought that point up.

At least you admit the left wants an activist judiciary.  You may not like arguments why liberal ideas you like aren’t constitutional, but that is not our sides version of judicial activism.  The duty of The Supreme Court is to interpret and uphold our Constitution, not blindly follow legal precedent that goes against our Constitution.

[Pakuni]

The liberal playbook just before a general election is to lie about their positions so they don’t expose themselves as the radicals they are.  Biden’s already lied about not wanting to ban fracking, even though he’s on record proclaiming he wants to do exactly that, and he’s had to walk back his debate pledge to kill the oil industry.  So why he’s not following suit about his position on packing the court is surprising because lying is what he does.  And that’s solely why I brought that point up.

At least you admit the left wants an activist judiciary.  You may not like arguments why liberal ideas you like aren’t constitutional, but that is not our sides version of judicial activism.  The duty of The Supreme Court is to interpret and uphold our Constitution, not blindly follow legal precedent that goes against our Constitution.

You clearly don't understand Constitutional law or how the court works.

[Billy Hoyle]

Yes, Biden said he wanted to ban fracking...on federal lands. Kind of an important qualifier there.

[HutchwasClutch]

Yes, Biden said he wanted to ban fracking...on federal lands. Kind of an important qualifier there.

His campaign, as it usually has to in most things he says, clarified that aspect  later, after he had said in primary debates no more fracking period. 

Kind of an important qualifier there.

[4everwarriors]

You now have a Big Guy who's a traitor and sold out the U.S.A. for personal gain. Bobulinski is the 2020 version of Monica's blue dress, aina?

[wadesworld]

The liberal playbook just before a general election is to lie about their positions so they don’t expose themselves as the radicals they are.  Biden’s already lied about not wanting to ban fracking, even though he’s on record proclaiming he wants to do exactly that, and he’s had to walk back his debate pledge to kill the oil industry.  So why he’s not following suit about his position on packing the court is surprising because lying is what he does.  And that’s solely why I brought that point up.

At least you admit the left wants an activist judiciary.  You may not like arguments why liberal ideas you like aren’t constitutional, but that is not our sides version of judicial activism.  The duty of The Supreme Court is to interpret and uphold our Constitution, not blindly follow legal precedent that goes against our Constitution.

Lol!

You now have a Big Guy who's a traitor and sold out the U.S.A. for personal gain. Bobulinski is the 2020 version of Monica's blue dress, aina?

Also lol! I love this stuff. Let me know when the President of the United States of America is paying more in taxes to the USA than he is to China. Then I’ll worry about a sellout running our country.

[Uncle Rico]

You now have a Big Guy who's a traitor and sold out the U.S.A. for personal gain. Bobulinski is the 2020 version of Monica's blue dress, aina?

Man, have I got some news for you about the family of grifters in the White House right now, aina?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

What a bunch of horse dung. The Democrats “Borked” out Reagan’s preferred nominee, forcing the next nominee to be a known moderate, in order for them to confirm anyone.

Then Thomas had to endure salacious accusations to try and nuke his nomination, and what he termed a “high tech lynching”. 

Now Biden refuses to answer if the courts will be packed, the most brazenly political move that can be made to the S.C.  He’s not even putting up the pretense of lying he and his fellow liberals won’t do so to shut our side up until the election. 

Democrats just don’t want S.C. to be judicially conservative and rule by law. They’ve always wanted a liberal and activist court. 

Any conservative who talks about "rule of law" with a straight face these days makes me laugh.

Anyway, I do agree with you on Bork.  But Thomas should have never been nominated nor approved.  Textbook sexual harrassment, not to mention he was under qualified as a judge. 

Look, I know when Republicans are in power they are going to nominate justices whose rulings I am not going to particularly like.  But I would much rather justices who have a judicial philosophy that is consistently applied to the case in front of them (Roberts and Gorsuch for example) than someone whose philosophy seems to ebb and flow depending on the politics involved. (Thomas and Kavanaugh)

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

You now have a Big Guy who's a traitor and sold out the U.S.A. for personal gain. Bobulinski is the 2020 version of Monica's blue dress, aina?

This is exactly why I have lost faith in a good portion of our country right now.  For anyone to say that Biden "sold out" when he has been very forthcoming about his income (he released his tax returns right?) while the evidence is pretty enormous that the current occupant of the White House has used his position to attempt to enrich himself, is just a great example of how people turn off their logic button to justify how they voted (or will vote.)

And anyway, you should be outraged at this as well.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1321419565738397697?s=20

But at least he didn't park sideways in a Walgreen's parking lot ai''na?

[TSmith34, Inc.]

From the NYT morning brief so no link:

The fight over voting

Democrats and Republicans are engaged in a furious struggle over voting rights. In almost every instance, Democrats are trying to make it easier for Americans to cast ballots, and Republicans are trying to make it harder.

Much of the fight involves voting by mail, which many people would prefer to do this year, to minimize their risk of contracting the coronavirus at a polling place. Lawyers have already filed more than 300 lawsuits, across 44 states, over issues related to pandemic voting. The most important cases are in the battleground states on which the presidential election or Senate control could hinge.

Here are the latest developments:

Pennsylvania: The state’s highest court has ruled that election officials should count mailed ballots that arrive up to three days after Election Day. Pennsylvania Republicans are trying to get the Supreme Court to reverse the order, so that only ballots received by Election Day will count.

North Carolina: Republicans and the Trump campaign have asked the Supreme Court to block the state’s board of elections from extending the deadline to receive mail ballots. The board has said ballots can arrive until Nov. 12, as long as they were mailed by Election Day.

Wisconsin: The five Republican-appointed justices on the Supreme Court sided on Monday with Republican officials in Wisconsin, ruling that ballots must arrive by 8 p.m. on Election Day to count. (A lower-court ruling would have allowed state officials to count any mailed ballots postmarked by Election Day and received up to six days later.) In response, the state’s Democratic Party is urging voters to return mail ballots in person — to a drop box or clerk’s office — rather than mailing them.

Nevada: The Trump campaign has sued to stop the counting of absentee ballots in the Las Vegas area, evidently hoping to challenge the signatures on many ballots. Last night, the campaign and Nevada Republican Party filed a separate lawsuit, seeking detailed information on the vote-counting process.

Texas: The state’s top court yesterday upheld a policy announced by Greg Abbott, the Republican governor, which limits each county to a single drop-off box for mailed ballots. The state’s largest county — Harris, which includes Houston — is home to 4.7 million people.

Michigan: A conservative judge yesterday overturned an order by Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, and ruled that people could carry unconcealed guns at polling places on Election Day.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I don't think the strategy of limiting those who can vote, making it harder for people to vote, and putting limits on how and when votes can be counted, is a long-term winner.

Eventually broadening your appeal is going to have to be the way to grow your party.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

The liberal playbook just before a general election is to lie about their positions so they don’t expose themselves as the radicals they are.  Biden’s already lied about not wanting to ban fracking, even though he’s on record proclaiming he wants to do exactly that, and he’s had to walk back his debate pledge to kill the oil industry.  So why he’s not following suit about his position on packing the court is surprising because lying is what he does.  And that’s solely why I brought that point up.

At least you admit the left wants an activist judiciary.  You may not like arguments why liberal ideas you like aren’t constitutional, but that is not our sides version of judicial activism.  The duty of The Supreme Court is to interpret and uphold our Constitution, not blindly follow legal precedent that goes against our Constitution.

I just want to make sure I understand your position: Lying is bad, really, really bad, and no one should vote for a candidate that lies, is that correct?