2020 Presidential Election: let the jockeying commence
- Thread starter ProdigalHorn
- Start date
Horn2RunAgain
2,500+ Posts
As long as Biden doesn't hit the 50% threshold, there's a decent-to-strong chance for Trump
You probably do this, but if one looks at the details of polling they'll find the samples are very small. Like 800 sampled would be on the high side. Hard to be accurate with a sample size that small. OTOH, several samples equals something of a decent snapshot (but again, that snapshot is taken over a period of time that ranges in weeks, not the critical immediate timeframe
The one hope i have in this election is I'm hearing repubs are registering (as new) at a far higher rate than dems are. Those might not be polled as "likely voters" and are ready to roll at the ballot next month
Last edited:
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
Two differences. First, Garland's nomination came much earlier in the year. That makes Garland's case stronger than Barrett's.
Second, Republicans control the Senate, giving them the power to control a vote. More on that below.
Refusing to confirm Garland might have been just "a punch in the face". But confirming Barrett would be very much more than that. It would amount to stealing a seat on the Supreme Court, which is a huge deal.
Increasing the Court to 11 and appointing 2 liberals would do nothing more than take back the seat that was stolen in the Garland/Barrett switcheroo. This would certainly be a damaging escalation, but not nearly as big of an escalation as you suggest.
I have also heard some talk of increasing the Court by 4. That would be huge, indefensible escalation.
You are probably right. But it is also possible that Republicans will come to regret stealing a seat on the Court. If the newly emboldened right wing of the Court overturns Roe v. Wade and Obergefell and upends the ACA, who knows what impact that would have on future elections. Predicting long-term public reaction to political events is a hazardous art.
The next time Democrats control the Senate but not the Presidency will be in the distant future, much too late to remedy the theft of a seat on the Supreme Court. If they are going to right that wrong, packing the Court could be the only option.
Fair point. But the Senate's advice-and-consent power was not created to make the president and the Senate co-equals in the appointment process. It was designed to prevent the appointment of radicals, and to force the President to appoint candidates that are more acceptable to all. That's what Democrats did in rejecting Bork, leading to the appointment of Kennedy (during an election year, btw).
The fact that Republicans had the votes in both 2016 and 2020 doesn't justify stealing the seat, just like the Democrats hypothetically having the votes to pack the Court in 2021 wouldn't justify them doing that. Both acts are Constitutionally appropriate, but damaging to the nation and its legal system.
One last thing -- I want to make sure you guys don't misread this to say that I support Court packing. I don't. If the opportunity arises, I hope Democrats will refrain from taking advantage of it. Someone has to be the bigger person before everything goes to crap.
That said, while I don't support Court packing (did I mention that I'm opposed to Court packing???), I do understand why at least some Democrats want to head in that direction. And I can't really fault them all that much. It's just another incremental escalation in a context where both sides have been escalating for a long time.
So, now people are saying McConnell and the Republicans should have wasted everyone's time in 2016 with fake hearings and a vote they knew would deny a conformation?
I have a good friend in NC who’s voting for Trump. Hasn’t voted for President in decades. We got Mr Deez voting for Trump. We got Black men and Hispanics secretly voting for Trump. Yes, there is some attrition on the Trump side, but the point is that I doubt the polls are picking this up. Hell, they didn’t pick it up in 2016 either.
Stealing the seat?
Joe Biden said that “the American people deserve a fully-staffed court of nine.”
Obama:
"“Historically, this has not been viewed as a question. There’s no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That’s not in the constitutional text.
I’m amused when I hear people who claim to be strict interpreters of the Constitution suddenly reading into it a whole series of provisions that are not there,”
Schumer
In 2016, Ruth Bader Ginsburg said senators refusing to vote on a nominee to the Supreme Court should 'recognize that a president is elected for four years not three'
"
"The president is elected for four years not three years, so the power he has in year three continues into year four."
“Maybe members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be," she added."
Your remark on stealing is laughable. That is really weak.
Joe Biden said that “the American people deserve a fully-staffed court of nine.”
Obama:
"“Historically, this has not been viewed as a question. There’s no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That’s not in the constitutional text.
I’m amused when I hear people who claim to be strict interpreters of the Constitution suddenly reading into it a whole series of provisions that are not there,”
Schumer
In 2016, Ruth Bader Ginsburg said senators refusing to vote on a nominee to the Supreme Court should 'recognize that a president is elected for four years not three'
"
"The president is elected for four years not three years, so the power he has in year three continues into year four."
“Maybe members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be," she added."
Your remark on stealing is laughable. That is really weak.
I don’t think anyone knows what’s going to happen. I was on a drive today and heard both sides. The Dems seem more confident while the republicans are uneasy.
I think there is not much enthusiasm for Joe. Trump will pull more Hispanics and Blacks than 2016. Trump will get more legitimate votes, but the dead will bring Joe a victory.
I think there is not much enthusiasm for Joe. Trump will pull more Hispanics and Blacks than 2016. Trump will get more legitimate votes, but the dead will bring Joe a victory.
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
Rejecting Garland can be defended In isolation. Confirming Barrett can be defended In isolation.. But those two decisions cannot be reconciled, and doing both would be stealing a seat.
Suppose an umpire squeezes the strike zone early in a game, and the pitching team complains. Nobody would take the ridiculous position that the team has to continue advocating for a wider strike zone even when they are batting. Having lost that argument the first time around, they have every right to expect consistency.
That ridiculous position is what you are advocating now. The Democrats lost the Garland debate. They have every reason to expect balls and strikes to be called the same in the next inning,
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Putin --
I've been saying this for several years now. The Soviets sent anyone who disagreed within to gulags. This is what modern Dems want to do with you. The current version (anyone who disagrees with them is a fascist, Nazi, KKK) is just prologue.
Putin Praises Trump Ties and Says Biden May Not Be Bad Too
The Russian leader even argued that the values of the Democrats were similar to those of the Soviet Communist Party, of which he said he’d been a member for 18 years. The Soviet regime’s longtime ties with the Black community in the U.S. could also be a basis for links to the Democrats, he said.
I've been saying this for several years now. The Soviets sent anyone who disagreed within to gulags. This is what modern Dems want to do with you. The current version (anyone who disagrees with them is a fascist, Nazi, KKK) is just prologue.
Putin Praises Trump Ties and Says Biden May Not Be Bad Too
Latest AZ poll by Reuters is 48-46 Biden. Does anyone else see the result as 52-48 Trump based on what happened in 2016? I just don’t know how people can be so ignorant of their bias. Yes, I recognize that I could be the one biased, but the media and twitter folks just seem delusional - just like the folks who thought Harris was going to kick Pence’s *** in the debate.
You actually said that the other seat was stolen too.
You're throwing around the theft/stealing verbiage a lot and using it as a justifiable basis to pack the Court. Can we specify what we mean by "steal?" If I hot-wire your car and drive off with it, I've stolen something, because I've seized possession of something that legally belongs to you and denied possession of that thing to you, it's lawful owner. How exactly have either of these seats been stolen? From whom? Who was the lawful owner, and what is the basis for that ownership? If you can't answer those questions, then you should drop that kind of rhetoric. It's inflammatory and false, and you're better than that.
Nothing got stolen. The GOP had some good luck, and they're exploiting it. They had control of the Senate at advantageous times (mainly because the Democrats decided they didn't give a crap about anybody who doesn't live a big coastal city), RBG decided to hang on until she died, and the Democrats chose its worst nominee in 200 years in 2016. Is it hypocritical? Yep. Is it theft? No. It also isn't particularly outrageous. If you look at the history of election year vacancies, they're not doing anything out of the ordinary. They're behaving like run-of-the-mill politicians. Do you honestly believe that if the roles were reversed that Democrats wouldn't do the same thing? Of course they would.
They won't overturn Obergefell. They might overturn Roe, and if they do, leftist activists will freak out, but the freakout will dissipate. Why? Because that would only mean that the issue would go to the states where it belongs. Feminist women in New Jersey will still be able to get abortions. They just won't get to dictate what happens in other states, which isn't their business.
As for overturning the ACA, I'm totally apathetic. If that costs Republicans, I couldn't care less. They picked that fight and pretended to have an alternative to the ACA when they didn't. If they get burned, so be it. Besides, the job of a judge is to apply the law as it's written, not to be concerned with political outcomes.
It was designed to put a check on presidential power in selecting judges, and nobody is entitled to confirmation. It is a veto power, as they used it on Bork. To be co-equal, the Senate would have to somehow be able to substitute their own pick for the President's.
You aren't sanctimonious, but that talking point is. If Democrats don't pack the Court, that wouldn't make them bigger. It would make them non-arsonists of the federal court system. It's like calling someone generous for not robbing a convenience store.
My hope is that we have a reckoning on the role of the Court. Nominations aren't supposed to be this high stakes. They became so, because the Court decided it wanted to be the final arbiter of the biggest social and cultural issues in the country regardless of what the law actually says. It was never meant to be that, and the founding fathers would be horrified at it. Undo that, and nominations will be much, much simpler and nicer.
Horns11
10,000+ Posts
No, because the western states have more of a +blue silent group than the Rust Belt, which clearly has a +red silent group. The last 4 major polls have an average of +5 for Biden in AZ. Plus, the movement to kick out McSally is going to affect the ballot for the other representative seats as well, including Pres.
Stunning that anyone still gives credence to "polls". Really discredits any other opinions.
Horns11
10,000+ Posts
It's what we've got. State-by-state data is relatively clear and close. Some national data, like from IBD/TIPP and Marist, were spot-on for 2016, but not in the ways that Republicans would have you believe the election turned out.
It's very difficult to forget Jane's photo op in the gunner's seat in North Viet Nam. There used to be a term for "giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war" - it was called treason!
It wasn't about how much time he spoke. It was how much he spoke over Biden and Wallace. He was terrible. Pence is is doing a dramatically better job.
Jail that sorry sack of ****.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
