2016 Democratic Presidential Primaries

[RavynousHunter]

Its even more cunning than that.  If Obama were to put up a hard-left candidate for the SCotUS, Congress could spin it as him giving them intentionally unconfirmable candidates, basically trolling them, giving them a chance to go "clearly, the Democrats don't understand the art of compromise."  By giving them a compromise candidate, any obstructionism can't be spun as anything other than what it truly is.  If they stonewall him, Obama can spin it as them being intentionally obtuse and essentially throwing a tantrum.  However, if they confirm said centre candidate, then little, if anything, is truly lost.  Not going balls-deep is a good move, and gives Obama the chance he needs to either expose the GOP for the frauds they really are, or give liberals enough push to get things done in yet another branch of government.

[davedan]

Except he can appoint someone who will sway the balance of the Court for decades. What I find astounding though is that being a current judge/practicing lawyer doesn't appear to be a necessary qualification.

[RavynousHunter]

Except he can appoint someone who will sway the balance of the Court for decades. What I find astounding though is that being a current judge/practicing lawyer doesn't appear to be a necessary qualification.

I think the general rule is either practicing lawyer or current legal scholar for the SCotUS, and being...45+, I think.  Also, someone that'd actually sway the Court would be impossible in the current climate and could very well badly backfire for the Democratic Party.  Getting someone that's on your side at least half the time is a reasonable compromise and, in the long run, will help.  It wouldn't be a massive shift in the right direction, but any progress is good progress.

[dpareja]

Except he can appoint someone who will sway the balance of the Court for decades. What I find astounding though is that being a current judge/practicing lawyer doesn't appear to be a necessary qualification.

I think the general rule is either practicing lawyer or current legal scholar for the SCotUS, and being...45+, I think.  Also, someone that'd actually sway the Court would be impossible in the current climate and could very well badly backfire for the Democratic Party.  Getting someone that's on your side at least half the time is a reasonable compromise and, in the long run, will help.  It wouldn't be a massive shift in the right direction, but any progress is good progress.

There are actually no mandated qualifications for service on the Court, although there are undoubtedly informal ones.

And yeah, it would be impossible to get a hard liberal on the Court right now. And backing off and rolling the dice on November could backfire. Better to choose a moderate who will side with the liberals on at least one bugbear (abortion, in Sandoval's case), who will embarrass the Senate GOP if they refuse to consider him (because he's a GOP governor and former GOP-appointed judge, in Sandoval's case), and won't make things any worse on other bugbears (but only because things probably can't get worse than Heller and Citizens United).

Then either you get said judge, or you make the GOP look bad (or worse, considering people have a very low opinion of the Congressional GOP). Win-win.

EDIT: Oh, never mind. Someone just pointed me to this letter:

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/judiciary/upload/SCOTUS%2C%2002-23-16%2C%20member%20signed%20letter%2C%20no%20hearings.pdf

Basically, Grassley (Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman) and every other Republican on that committee have promised not to hold hearings on any Supreme Court nominee until after January 20, 2017.

So, if there's no hope for getting anyone through for now, should Obama nominate a hard-left justice (to mobilize the base with the promise that if the Democratic nominee for President wins, he or she will nominate the same person to the vacancy), or a moderate justice (to embarrass the GOP)?

[SCarpelan]

The risk is that enough of the more moderate republicans change their stance and confirm the nomination. If that happens the republicans have scored a defensive victory specially if democrats win the presidential election and even more clearly if Sanders wins the presidency. In a healthy political atmosphere where the republicans hadn't had so much success with the temper tantrum politics during the Obama presidency this might be a tolerable compromise. In the current situation it's just another success for them.

Maybe the risk is worth the potential payout if the republicans stick to their guns, though.

[dpareja]

Further to the above, apparently, Sandoval's anti-union. Which means there's a good chance he's pro-corporation, which means there's a good chance he'll uphold Citizens United.

[mellenORL]

Fuck no to Sandoval, then. C.U. is the SCOTUS ruling most immediately in need of reversal. It's a lynchpin for de facto plutocracy.

[dpareja]

Fuck no to Sandoval, then. C.U. is the SCOTUS ruling most immediately in need of reversal. It's a lynchpin for de facto plutocracy.

And this is how progressives find themselves on the same side of a debate as hard-right Republicans.

[Ironchew]

Fuck no to Sandoval, then. C.U. is the SCOTUS ruling most immediately in need of reversal. It's a lynchpin for de facto plutocracy.

And this is how progressives find themselves on the same side of a debate as hard-right Republicans.

And this is how the "Both sides do it!" fallacy fails to accurately represent reality.

[The_Queen]

I think within a week, Hillary will have the nomination wrapped up.

Fortunately, the tragic comedy that is the GOP race should get better.

[Vypernight]

I think within a week, Hillary will have the nomination wrapped up.

Yes, i'm sure it's a huge inconvenience for her to actually work for her nomination and defend all her B.S. when she could be out giving more $100,000 speeches.

Hopefully Sanders hands her her ass in the end. 

[The_Queen]

I think within a week, Hillary will have the nomination wrapped up.

Yes, i'm sure it's a huge inconvenience for her to actually work for her nomination and defend all her B.S. when she could be out giving more $100,000 speeches.

Hopefully Sanders hands her her ass in the end.

Oh, you again! I thought you disappeared from this thread after I asked for specifics as to the "dirty tricks" Clinton was playing. I won't hold my breath on expecting an answer--such has been the norm with Nicki and Ibbles for the past 6 months. I'm just sorry to see you join them.

But, between South Carolina (today) and Super Tuesday (Tuesday, obviously), there are a shit ton of pledged delegates up for grabs. Focusing on the five biggest Super Tuesday states and South Carolina, there are a total of 640 pledged delegates at stake. The five biggest Super Tuesday states are Texas, Virginia, Minnesota, Massachusetts, and Georgia. Hillary is going to win South Carolina, Georgia, and Texas by double digits. She's going to win Virginia. The most recent stats out of Minnesota and Massachusetts have Hillary up, but I think Bernie will over-perform the polls in those states. But, even if he wins these states, it'll be by a slim margin and will not be enough to keep him in viable in the primaries. Either way, I said it almost two months ago,

If Bernie wins Iowa, New Hampshire, limits his loss in South Carolina, and does well at Super Tuesday, then he's probably going to be the democratic nominee for president. Polls are not static and they can change. However, if Hillary wins Iowa, and most states on Super Tuesday, I doubt that her win will be that different from what the scientifically conducted polls say.

Simply put, Bernie surged at the right time, but he didn't do enough to be competitive beyond Nevada, and I think the clock is about to strike midnight on his Cinderella story of a campaign.

[ironbite]

You're adorable when you think you're right.

Ironbite-I got the feeling he'll fight all the way to the convention if need be.

[The_Queen]

You're adorable when you think you're right.

Ironbite-I got the feeling he'll fight all the way to the convention if need be.

Oh, I didn't say he'd drop out. I don't think he will, at least for another month or two. But, simply that I believe that today marks the beginning of the end for his campaign. I think that, overall, Hillary will win big from now until June in the primaries. True, Bernie will win a handful of states, but it will  not do enough to keep him viable to win the nomination.

And hopefully Bernie does the right thing and not challenge this onto the convention, or possibly thereafter, thus ensuring a GOP win in November. Nothing shouts "I'm a liberal" like setting back liberal causes.

[dpareja]

Considering how much more popular Sanders is than Clinton with independents, I desperately hope you're wrong, Queen.

Clinton might get more done as President, but she couldn't get anything done if she can't get elected.