Soxbadger

No hes suggesting the Democrats do a fools errand of chasing votes in stats they are unlikely to win. That is actually one of the mistakes Hillary made. Instead of just focusing on WI, MN, PA and FL. She started to branch out into GA, NC and TX, believing that in some world she could win those states too. Its like Hawk used to say, youre gonna win 60, youre gonna lose 60, its what you do with the other 42 that matter.

The current system requires you to go after a few states and forget about the rest of them. There are a handful of swing states that get pandered to, and the rest of the states dont really matter. Who cares if its 1 state or a million states? More people voted for her. That is a fact. Now the ultimate outcome of 2016 led to some pretty shitty results for the US, but it happens in life, just like upsets happen in sports. Politics is a long game, not a short one. Republican's got a good bounce in 2016, but their actions clearly show that they arent so confident in the future. You can only fight the inevitable for so long.

People are people. To say she was rejected by the majority is false. People in California and NY are people. You cant just discount them. Just like Democrats cant discount people in red states. Clinton was approved by the majority of the people in the United States. That is a fact. In the current political system having the majority of people doesnt necessarily mean you are victorious. But that doesnt negate the fact that the majority of voters picked Clinton.

I dont think most Democrats wallow in self pity. The Republican rule benefits most of the elite in the metropolitan areas. You think lower taxes hurt me? You think stocks going gangbusters didn't help my 401k? The reason im a Democrat is because i hope for other people to have the same access and chance as me. Because i don't want govt legislating religion, i want more personal freedom etc. The Kavanaughs of the world are who i grew up with, same as the Trumps. They are just going to rig the game more for people like me. Id rather the world was better, but tomorrow i wake up fine. Its the good people in the red states i worry about. They can't see the snake oil is poison.

Currently thats not how it works. If it did then red states would pay more than blue states. And you can always import crops. Prices may go up, but many countries rely on outside crops.

Both sides benefit from the relationship. That being said if the minority keeps ignoring the majority then the relationship isnt as beneficial. Id have to go through the agricultural output, but California and Illinois are nothing to scoff at. And im not sure where Wisconsin would go. The main crux of my point is that map doesnt mean much. There are more people in the blue than the red. I dont think the US will split, but i think the blue may start to get fed up with a govt that isnt in synch with the majority. Not to mention are Trump Republicans even Republicans? The Republican party of the past was for free trade, less govt etc. The new Republican seem to be against all of that, and they want a big govt to restrict your freedoms. Who really supports that?

The red parts cant exist without the blue paying for them. The blue can exist without the red. Look at which states have positive balances with the federal govt and which states survive on govt handouts. Counties are arbitrary lines, same with states. More people voted Democrat in the last 3 elections, time will catch up to Republicans, its inevitable.

If you went back to private practice after being a SC Justice youd make a huge amount of money. To be fair, anyone on the appellate circuit is already forgoing much more lucrative careers to be judges.

Yeah I was thinking of a model where it somehow is picked by the Circuit it represents. Im on the fence about lifetime appointments, but I do think that there should be some way to recall or change the dynamic if a judge goes off the rails.

They need to completely revamp how SC are picked. No matter what side of the aisle you are on, its pretty crazy when you realize that most SC justices all went to the same few colleges. Harvard, Yale and Columbia right now. I think that there should be some thought to Justices being picked regionally. So that each part of the country has a judge that represents them.

Makes me think they found him guilty. Hard to imagine everyone saying not guilty so quick.

I think she needs cover because a bunch of powerful groups in Alaska came out against the nomination.

You mean your uncorroborated testimony?

You mean crooked Hillary, lyin Ted, etc are calling people names? I wonder if Wrath believes what he writes, or if he just knows his lying.

Ginsburg made a mistake in judgment, which she apologized for: https://www.npr.org/2016/07/14/486012897/ginsburg-apologies-for-ill-advised-trump-comments I cant recall Kavanaugh making a similar pronouncement regretting what he said.

They are just following the Republican tradition. Youd think Republicans would be happy that Demcorats are following their lead for once.

I dont care of Justices disagree with me on the interpretation of the law. The real problem with a Judge like Kavanaugh, is he seemingly doesnt care about the law at all, and only cares about the team he plays for. That is a real issue, and reasonable Democrats and Republicans should agree on that. Which is why everyone should oppose him after his testimony the other day. And if a Democrat nominee started saying similar stuff, id want them immediately removed as well.

Those arent the facts. It was until the press started hounding Ford that she agreed to come forward. Had that not happened, none of this likely would have occurred. But once it came out, that should have halted the process, and the FBI/Senate Judiciary should have taken as much time as necessary to fully go through the allegations and any other information that came out, such as Kavanaugh's potential perjury. There is no reason to rush. Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment. And Republican's dont care about tradition. The tradition they created was that you dont confirm Supreme Court Justices if there is an election. So why change now?

He lied when he said it was legal for him to drink beer in HS. Next!

Diane Fienstein didnt release the information because the person who gave her the information asked her not to. Are you saying she should have against Ford's wishes and released it without her approval? Not to mention it has nothing to do with what is going on right now. The Republican's could release the information, they are choosing not to. Perhaps you dont care about the truth or transparency. Its become abundantly clear you dont care about the Supreme Court or US laws. Win some, lose some. But you cant fight time and you cant fight the inevitable. One day the dinosaurs will go extinct.

I cant wait for the future. I hope I get to witness the last dinosaur.

This is totally normal. Why would the public be entitled to information on someone who is going to make decisions that will impact all Americans for potentially the next 20+ years. Completely reasonable. And of course there is only 1 copy, most of the Republican's on the judiciary committee grew up before copy machines existed. We are turning back time to a better age.

Yep red wave. Lol If Republicans werent so afraid they wouldnt be doing this. They are the party of dinosaurs. Extinction will happen, its just a matter of when. So keep clinging to power by any means necessary. Disrespect the US and everything it stands for. Your time will come.

Prior to Garland had any party ever refused to nominate a Justice because an "election was happening in the future"? That was a line that never had been crossed. Now an election is happening in less than 2 months, shoudlnt we have the same standard?

Only way its even is if Garland gets nominated instead of Kavanaugh, which would be the fair and right thing to do. Not that Republicans care about fair or right.