Maher's panel republicans saying that we should have used the filibuster for the next justice

[Jonny Appleseed]

because now they can appoint one even further right.

1. How do you get further right than Gorsuch?
2. What would've stopped them from doing that anyways? The filibuster? Why should it? They would've nuked it then too.

[still_one]

1. I have a better idea, let's take back Congress in 2018 and the WH in 2020, and tell the republicans

to go f**k themselves

[Jonny Appleseed]

8. Do you really expect anything other than the default "kumbaya let's reach across the aisle"

When we get everything back?

[orleans]

12. yeah... that shit really pisses me off n/t

[still_one]

15. ruth bader ginsburg, and every Supreme Court justices appointed by Democrats were no

"kumbaya appointments", so frankly you don't know what you are talking about in this regard

[Jonny Appleseed]

17. That we'll push through a democratic agenda instead of watering it down for republicans

whose votes we won't actually need.

[still_one]

19. That was my point

[Jonny Appleseed]

20. I'm not talking about the supreme court specifically though.

[still_one]

21. That is what I thought the OP was about, and why the republicans eliminated the filibuster

so they could push their right wing SC judge through

[Jonny Appleseed]

22. Yes but not what the thread you're replying in is about

Which is that we will tell republicans to fuck themselves

[still_one]

25. My subthread was addressing the OP's presentation of a guest on Maher's show

which said the Democrats made a mistake filibustering Gorsuch, in lieu of a more a more right wing judge following Gorsuch, and what I was trying to convey was not giving them another chance of appointing another SC justice by winning in 2018 and 2020. That's all

[sharedvalues]

2. *Republicans*. Everything they say on TV is strategic

They are willing to blatantly lie if it helps their party.

Here, while the Dems made the obviously correct move to resist being bullied, there is GOP advantage to be gained by suggesting falsely the Dems might have made a mistake. They are wrong.

[Jonny Appleseed]

7. Evan McCullen was being pretty genuine

[sharedvalues]

11. Fair, but I think he has the legislative strategy way wrong.

Dems rolling over after unprecedented stolen seat would have been the ultimate surrender.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

3. There's a school of thought a deal could have been made with three or four repig moderates.

It would only take a handful of Democrats and a handful of repigs to make a coalition.

Senators are famous for their "gang of six" or "gang of twelve" grandstanding.

The deal would be, allow Gorsuch now and we will block a rule change next time.

It's easier to hold a couple senators on either side to a deal than the whole party. Things are so divided that's all you have to do.

I learned this on du the other day. Forget who schooled me.

It may have made sense. They were getting Gorsuch one way or another. Now we are completely exposed until at least 2019 if something happens to one of our very liberal Justices. Longer if we don't take the Senate.

The way we did it will only pay off if .. 1.) nobody on our side retires or dies in the next 2 years. 2.) we have to take back the Senate just to be able to block any or all nominations by trump -- this would probably involve leaving seat(s) open.

Extra credit if we get Presidency next time with a dem Senate. Then we get the last laugh.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg has/had pancreatic cancer and by statistics should be dead. On the plus side, she does a bunch of push-ups and planks every day -- she'll probably outlive me.

[JCanete]

5. that was the school of thought. Who on that side of the aisle would you trust not to cave

in the face of conservative pressure, regardless of what they promised? McCain, just as an example of the kind of fortitude we can expect, was literally stupid enough to go on record about what kind of person would vote for the nuclear option, and then a day or two later voted for it.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

9. I don't know.

Yeah, the the big bag of "precious" floating around in the event of an RBG replacement might have been too much for anyone to resist. Also, we would need an extra cushion of repigs to cover a few, ahem, less than 100% reliable Dems too.

I'm still on the fuck 'em let them pay the price side. Let's just hope our people all stay healthy. Because we are fucked if we lose anybody in two years - four if we don't take The Senate.

Even if we take The Senate in 2 years, we only can play a delaying action IF our people have the stomach for it AND we have enough margin to overcome weaklings and, ahem, ls reliables.

[mr_liberal]

29. McCain would have made the deal because it would have also allowed

him to vote for Gorsuch. There's no way he could have supported the filibuster now and blocked Gorsuch from being confirmed. His party would killed him.

Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski are probably two that would have made the deal. Theyre both moderate and pro-choice. You'd only need one more.

[JCanete]

31. the question is, when the next hard right wing justice is up for nomination, why wouldn't

the Republican party kill him for not sabotaging the filibuster then? What would really make it any different? His word?

[mr_liberal]

32. Yes it would be the word of the 3 Republicans. It wouldnt only be their word though

... there'd be a press conference on video. And then these are Republicans from purple states that get elected with moderate Republican, independent, and even some Democrat votes so if they broke their promise it could be used against them in their reelection.

Its too late now though. There was too much pressure from the far left on Democrat senators to make the deal. Its too bad, it was the smart strategic thing to do.

Whats ironic is conservatives wanted Democrats to do this because they knew it would easily be nuked and then Trump would only need 51 votes to replace Ginsburg. They would have been mad if there was a deal.

[mr_liberal]

33. Oh I see what you're asking now.

McCain would say he made a deal to save the filibuster for the good of the senate and he did it to get Gorsuch confirmed and now he has to keep his promise. I guess he thinks that would work with his Arizona voters. I think it probably would work better with someone like Collins because her voters are more liberal don't want the court stacked with conservatives anyhow.

[sharedvalues]

6. No way. That would be enabling the corrupt.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/opposing-a-corrupt-transaction

Josh Marshall got it right. The filibuster for scotus has been gone in all but name since the mid 2000s. We should be glad the fiction is over.

Justice Neil Asterisk will be illegitimate forever.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

14. I don't disagree. I'm ok with what happened.

[brush]

10. No sense in delaying it. A red flag should go up if repugs are saying we should've waited

Why the hell should we trust their advice? Like they're going to find someone further right.

Gorsuch is a Scalia acolyte, you can't get any further right so imo the Dems were correct in making a principled stand.

Many in the rank and file of the party would've lost all hope if we just caved.

We've done that too many times. Once more and gettinng people to work for 2018 and 2020 would be hopeless.

I'm glad they forced the repugs to blow up 230 years of Senate tradition. If

[JCanete]

4. that nonsense should have been slapped down. Maher and Lieu let it slide.

[shraby]

13. They just want to go back now to the way it was so Dems can't use it if they take

over in the next election.

[kentuck]

16. For a long time, Republicans have chosen their nominee and stuck with him.

At least going back as far as Clarence Thomas. It really doesn't matter to them if a justice is nominated by one vote or by twenty votes.

[Warpy]

18. Agreed, the Republicans have been acting like a racketeering organization

and they'll run right over people who are outside their racket no matter what they have to do.

I think the Democrats and the few Republicans petitioning to bring it back immediately are missing the point here. Getting rid of it will allow massive GOP overreach and people aren't going to like it.

No filibuster will completely gut that party the next time Congress changes hands.

[dchill]

24. Check it out. They're not acting.

[dchill]

23. "...now they can appoint one even further right. "

Seriously, why the fuck would they even WANT to do that? Is their every action based on being an even bigger dick? Seriously!

[customerserviceguy]

28. Well, when the filibuster was done away with for presidential appointments

that led to the confirmations of Rick Perry to lead the agency he once wanted to dismantle (if someone eventually reminded him of what that was) and Betsy DeVos to lead an education department that she'd like to abolish. They would have gotten that Carl's Jr. asshat confirmed if it hadn't turned out that he had supported hiring undocumented workers at his grease shops.

That's what we got from Harry Reid dumping the filibuster for presidential appointees, it was only a matter of time before it happened for SCOTUS justices.

If you think Gorsuch was a right-wing tool, wait until you see who Trump nominates for the next open position. And his kids are trying to get Kennedy to retire.

[mr_liberal]

26. Theyre right, Democrats should have made a deal...

with moderate Republicans to confirm Gorsuch in exchange for them promising not to nuke the filibuster for any remaining Trump nominees. It would have only taken 3 Republicans to agree.

Trump would then need 60 votes to replace Ginsburg or Kennedy, now he only needs 51.

These are moderate republicans from purple states too so there's a good chance they would keep their promise or it could be used against them in the next election.

[customerserviceguy]

30. Make that fifty votes to confirm the next Justice

Because Pence would then be able to break the tie. No ties are possible with a 60 vote super-majority requirement.

[Freethinker65]

27. Number one: The President, not they, do the nominating

Number two: If a conservative President gets to seat another Supreme Court justice with a rubber stamp Senate the same nuclear option bullshit would have been triggered because that is who Republicans are and what they do.

[MaeScott]

34. They did the correct thing by filibustering...

...it showed the US, once again, that pubbies are a party of dyed in the wool hypocrites and Pharisees. Dems better run on all the stuff they've done that has harmed the US. It's golden.

[mnmoderatedem]

35. makes sense

as I get the feeling the next trump nominee will be Jared Kushner. What the hell, he's designated him as everything else.

[Vinca]

36. Nothing would have stopped them from doing it anyways.

He could have chosen Rush Limbaugh for the seat this time around and if the GOP stayed united, he'd now be on the court.

[rurallib]

37. See? It's Democrats fault that Gorsuch got appointed because

they didn't stop Republicans from going nuclear.


good gawd