lolwut? why?
A) It's allowed
B) Federalist society picks are corrupt but let's glaze over it.
C) Who cares if we end up w/100 SC's. It'd be more representative of the country.
Election 2024 Foreplay
- Thread starter TreeFrogTrader
- Start date
lolwut? why?
A) It's allowed
B) Federalist society picks are corrupt but let's glaze over it.
C) Who cares if we end up w/100 SC's. It'd be more representative of the country.
You do realize it doesnt matter about how many elections dems have won popular votes with respect to SC because it is more timing. Just because Dems win an election they dont get to put justices on the Supreme Court...one has to retire or die. When trump was running for office it was clear that he was going to get to appoint 2-3 justices in his tenure and Dems failed miserably in 2016. It was said over and over again that elections have consequences and peole in MI, PA and WI decided it was more important to vote for Jill Stein than HRC and Hillary lost (not to mention how badly she fucked up the election).
All that had to happen was for HRC to win an election that was hers to lose and you would have the SC you wanted for years. Waiting until a Dem comes to office to pack the court is not the will of the people, that is the will of one party.
Representative of the country in what way...are the Dems looking to put more justices to represent the people or to make sure their policies stay in place. If all the people truly wanted abortion legal they would have voted that way in 2016 and in the states that passed abortion bans. The idea that 100 SCs would better represent the country is just hiding partisan bias.
I wonder how you would have felt in the 1950s if GOP packed the court to undue segregation laws since the country mostly wanted Blacks separate. It would seem like a proper response from the GOP after the liberal court banned segregation, laws against mixed marriages, etc...
you have not presented a cogent argument that separates you from a short sighted political viewpoint enough to justify why Biden should have packed the courts with Congress approval because it lost the 2016 election and forgot elections have consequences when it comes to the SC. What is the purpose of the SC if th other party can simply adjust the minority every time until we get to 100. That is not representative of the country, that is representative of the 1% who run the parties.
Thanks for the civics lesson but I have that covered.The majority of the county voted for Dems in the last 7 of 9 elections so thats what the court should represent.When the court does not represent the will of the people leaders should fix it as there is a constitutional way to do so.
It is not a civics lesson it is fact... Seats were open between 2017 and 2020 and the party in power had the choice. That is how the Constitution decided how Justices would be appointed and approved. The minority is the minority in Congress and President for reason. How was it the will of the people when Dems had no control over the Senate when appointees were voted on.
yes I forgot there was no segregation or racism in Boston or Chicago and busing and integration of schools was met with wild cheers and huge support in the North.... crack a book....
"Court-mandated busing, which continued until 1988, provoked enormous outrage among many white Bostonians, and helped to catalyze racist violence and class tensions across the city throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Anti-busing protests and iconography became national news in these years, and cemented Boston’s reputation as a city plagued by racial and socioeconomic strife."
I could post links and links of this but to think the South was the only ones who wanted Blacks separate ignores a lot of pain and suffeirng in the North as well...
If you think it was mostly the South you are not as progressive as you say you are or are quite young....
Im not young nor need to crack a book as I am well informed on the subject.I suggest you crack a book if you think the majority of the country supported segregation in the 50's.
Last edited: