President Biden said he won’t expand the Supreme Court because doing so would “politicize” the court in an unhealthy way. But it’s a political institution by its nature — and a disturbingly undemocratic one.
Sounds like a good opportunity to use his massive platform to build up public support for the idea and sell them on its necessity for the advancement of better politics. Too bad he’s not willing to though.
Perhaps for 2024. I suspect polling has told them otherwise. Like it or not, there are too many “white moderates” who aren’t very affected that would see this as over react.
I wouldn’t knock it. The Roe vs. Wade repeal brought big turnout in the 2022 midterm primaries to oppose state level abortion repeal in states you wouldn’t expect it like Kansas (they had something like 50% turnout, which is largely unheard for a midterm primary. Only around 36% turnout was anticipated). Stuff like this could easily be a huge motivator for turnout. Doubt he’ll do it at all though, as he doesn’t seem to support it.
Let’s not gloss over the fact that it’s not a little thing. It is a power grab, even if we can rationalize it various ways. I think we need a bigger buffer in congress before we start talking about a new FDR. Biden isn’t the person for it, but I also don’t see anyone standing there behind him ready to lead us into that kind of era. You need a strong understanding of politics and further left than normal modern politics to get there.
Let’s not gloss over the fact that it’s not a little thing. It is a power grab, even if we can rationalize it various ways.
Play to win or don’t play, bud. The chuds understand this, which is why they get to legislate from the bench.
I think we need a bigger buffer in congress before we start talking about a new FDR. Biden isn’t the person for it, but I also don’t see anyone standing there behind him ready to lead us into that kind of era. You need a strong understanding of politics and further left than normal modern politics to get there.
You’re not going to get there by trying to shut down any attempt to introduce such ideas into the discourse. At best you’re just getting in the way.
The time to play to win was 2016, but too many people didn’t take the threat seriously and refused to vote for Hillary. So instead of a liberal they didn’t like they let that court legislate from the bench.
I’m not getting in the way. There is little movement to expand the court. I’m only pointing out why it’s logistically not feasible. I’m not standing in the way in anyway if it were to happen.
2016 primary voters should’ve picked a better candidate, but you can’t turn back time, so the only option is to pack the court.
I’m not getting in the way. There is little movement to expand the court.
You are, because the way to build that movement is to start doing public advocacy for the solution to the problem and on-board the public, which you have spent this entire comment chain arguing against.
Pointing out the hurdles you have to take into consideration isn’t blocking it. If you have a list of seats that can be flipped in 2024 with this in mind, please share them. We already know there aren’t 50 Senators on board today and 2 of them will never change their minds. That’s reality.
He doesn’t have the votes to confirm more Justices so it’s moot.
Sounds like a good opportunity to use his massive platform to build up public support for the idea and sell them on its necessity for the advancement of better politics. Too bad he’s not willing to though.
Perhaps for 2024. I suspect polling has told them otherwise. Like it or not, there are too many “white moderates” who aren’t very affected that would see this as over react.
I wouldn’t knock it. The Roe vs. Wade repeal brought big turnout in the 2022 midterm primaries to oppose state level abortion repeal in states you wouldn’t expect it like Kansas (they had something like 50% turnout, which is largely unheard for a midterm primary. Only around 36% turnout was anticipated). Stuff like this could easily be a huge motivator for turnout. Doubt he’ll do it at all though, as he doesn’t seem to support it.
Let’s not gloss over the fact that it’s not a little thing. It is a power grab, even if we can rationalize it various ways. I think we need a bigger buffer in congress before we start talking about a new FDR. Biden isn’t the person for it, but I also don’t see anyone standing there behind him ready to lead us into that kind of era. You need a strong understanding of politics and further left than normal modern politics to get there.
Play to win or don’t play, bud. The chuds understand this, which is why they get to legislate from the bench.
You’re not going to get there by trying to shut down any attempt to introduce such ideas into the discourse. At best you’re just getting in the way.
The time to play to win was 2016, but too many people didn’t take the threat seriously and refused to vote for Hillary. So instead of a liberal they didn’t like they let that court legislate from the bench.
I’m not getting in the way. There is little movement to expand the court. I’m only pointing out why it’s logistically not feasible. I’m not standing in the way in anyway if it were to happen.
2016 primary voters should’ve picked a better candidate, but you can’t turn back time, so the only option is to pack the court.
You are, because the way to build that movement is to start doing public advocacy for the solution to the problem and on-board the public, which you have spent this entire comment chain arguing against.
Pointing out the hurdles you have to take into consideration isn’t blocking it. If you have a list of seats that can be flipped in 2024 with this in mind, please share them. We already know there aren’t 50 Senators on board today and 2 of them will never change their minds. That’s reality.
The time to play to win is anytime you’re not dead.
Even if he did, he’d pick a Merrick Garland type and it wouldn’t matter all that much.