President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

If that's how you see it, fine by me. I wasn't doing any post hoc analysis. I was just speaking to the reactions and the lack thereof to two very similar (to me) statements.

 

Because my statement is that I want Dems to fight as dirty as the GOP does and they don’t because they still want to remain above the fray. That doesn’t mean it’s the Dems’ fault. It means it’s the GOP’s fault for fighting dirty in the first place.

 

What could go wrong?

DeSantis proposes a new civilian military force in Florida that he would control - CNNPolitics

 

You realize the GOP believes the exact opposite, don't you?

If only "we" could be as nasty as "they."

 

And their beliefs are provably false.

They tried claiming the Dems would break into their offices just like they did for Watergate and failed miserably. They believe a president lying under oath about his sex life is impeachable and encouraging a riot at the Capitol is unimpeachable. They believe a mistake about a video being motivation for an attack is worth 8 investigations, yet believe we need to move on instead of investigating the Capitol riot. They believe it’s fine to have 8 justices on SCOTUS, or even less if Hillary is elected, but howl about tradition if Dems talk about expansion. They scream about cancel culture then call peaceful protesters “sons of bitches” and gas them for a photo op. They scream about bodily autonomy when it comes to wearing masks and taking vaccines, yet demand pregnant women be outlawed from having a medical procedure that THEY object to.

Do I need to keep going?

 

They want their team to win (even if it means 8 on the court, or 7, or Clarence Thomas by himself if necessary). You want your team to win (even if it means 15 on the court, or 23), to make sure Roe can never be touched. One is "absolutely acceptable." The other is a "blatant power grab."

And that's it.

 

Yes.

That's clearly why Biden packed the court as soon as he had the chance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ourt-commission-successfully-removes-pie-sky/

 

The Supreme Court is political. The Supreme Court has always always been political, since its first important act, Marbury v. Madison, was to seize powers for itself that were not necessarily established at the time. The one and only reason the Court has ever enjoyed an image as above politics is that there have been long periods in American history, notably from about 1940 to 1965, when Presidents really didn't give a shit about the Court (Truman and Eisenhower for sure, Kennedy too), and thus made appointments on non-ideological grounds (Earl Warren was an influential Republican who needed SOME job, Byron White was a friend of JFK's) that led to results Presidents didn't intend or desire. Pre-Civil War, too. Until the Dred Scott decision, Court appointees were simply very high level patronage gigs. It wasn't ever that the Court was nonpolitical. It's just that for long stretches, the political world and most voters paid little attention to it.

 

They’re the ones who first decided that 9 was no longer sacrosanct. They’re the ones who changed the rules. They don’t get to complain when the other team changes the rules too.

 

Every one of the right-wing justices got there via a nomination from a POTUS who lost the popular vote at least once. Half of them from one that lost the popular vote twice.

And that guy wouldn’t know the difference between Oliver Wendell Holmes and Sherlock Holmes.

When was the last time a Dem President who lost the popular vote got someone on SCOTUS?

The last time a Dem President got to pick the Chief Justice was in 1946, a fortuitous year for the MAGA faithful.