Blue Waves and Red Waves

[carpedm9587]

You, apparently, have more confidence in the Republicans on this than I do. So many times, they're a bunch of gutless weenies and will cave at the drop of a hat. I would not be surprised if this delayed the vote to allow for "hearings", and this got pushed past the midterms.

Possible. The Dems have scant opportunity to take the Senate, so I'm not sure it would make a lot of difference. But I agree that the Reps in congress have proven to be significant weenies. There is little challenging Trump on his outrageous behavior - largely out of fear of his base. The disenchantment so many have with the "gutless wonders of Congress" might actually create an opening. Who knows - maybe Dems will take BOTH houses. If so, I hope they lose the lower house in 2020 when they take the executive branch...

[Terraceth]

We can agree on "unliked." We probably will disagree on "legitimately."

To clarify, my usage of "legitimately" was meant in the sense of "definitely" or "assuredly", not necessarily "correctly."

[carpedm9587]

To clarify, my usage of "legitimately" was meant in the sense of "definitely" or "assuredly", not necessarily "correctly."

Got it. I misunderstood your use. Thanks for clarifying.

[Terraceth]

I think so. The current accusation stems from High School. It is uncorroborated (as far as I know), and the timing is a little suspicious to me. There is no other scent of impropriety related to this man, as far as I can see. I am not a fan of how it is going to skew the court and I think the Senate Republicans are being massively disingenuous not to apply the same "let the people have their say" argument they made for Garland, but I can find no reason not to approve this man on the basis of his credentials. Republicans are fairly tight on this, and there are a few Democrats who cannot afford to vote against him or they will jeopardize their re-election prospects. I expect him to be confirmed.

Government-wise, would it make that big a difference if the Republicans vote against Kavanaugh? If he doesn't make it onto the court, then Trump just nominates a different Federalist Society-approved judge that gets approved by the Republican majority Senate.

[One Bad Pig]

Government-wise, would it make that big a difference if the Republicans vote against Kavanaugh? If he doesn't make it onto the court, then Trump just nominates a different Federalist Society-approved judge that gets approved by the Republican majority Senate.

Someone new nominated now would not be likely to be confirmed by this Senate unless Republicans keep control in the election.

[Terraceth]

Someone new nominated now would not be likely to be confirmed by this Senate unless Republicans keep control in the election.

Well, depending on when the vote is (again, assuming a "no" vote), there could be time before the election to re-hold hearings and a vote. But even if that's not enough time, the Republicans are most likely going to keep the Senate. But even if there's not enough time and they don't keep the Senate... there's still months between the election and the new Senate taking their seats in which a nominee could be voted on and confirmed (this would undoubtedly provoke controversy, but the option is always there).

[carpedm9587]

Government-wise, would it make that big a difference if the Republicans vote against Kavanaugh? If he doesn't make it onto the court, then Trump just nominates a different Federalist Society-approved judge that gets approved by the Republican majority Senate.

Not unless the Senate Republicans suddenly decide to become consistent in their arguments, which is unlikely. The political stakes are too high for consistency.

I suspect, if they move to over-turn Roe v. Wade, the next Democratic president will attempt to "pack the court."

What a mess...

[carpedm9587]

Well, depending on when the vote is (again, assuming a "no" vote), there could be time before the election to re-hold hearings and a vote. But even if that's not enough time, the Republicans are most likely going to keep the Senate. But even if there's not enough time and they don't keep the Senate... there's still months between the election and the new Senate taking their seats in which a nominee could be voted on and confirmed (this would undoubtedly provoke controversy, but the option is always there).

Agreed. It is unlikely that the court will NOT swing right.

[Terraceth]

I suspect, if they move to over-turn Roe v. Wade, the next Democratic president will attempt to "pack the court."

What a mess...

Honestly, I think Roe v Wade is perhaps more to blame than anything else for how polarized the Supreme Court process has gotten, and it needs to be overturned in order to try to make the process less partisan, though it'd obviously make the liberals go crazy. Granted, I have bias in that I think Roe v Wade was incorrectly decided and should be overturned anyway, but I do think a lot (not all, but a lot) of the current polarization regarding the Supreme Court appointment process is the result of that decision, due to it taking such a contentious issue and telling people the only way to either effect change (or keep the current policy in place) is to get the court itself to change it, which is generally only possible via replacing justices with those more likely to rule differently. If it's overturned, all that effort from both sides on the issue can be spent trying to change the minds of state legislatures rather than trying to change the court.

[Cow Poke]

Just one little tidbit, but this was a shocker to a lot of us who know something about this particular district...

Flores defeats Gallego in Senate District 19

Voters elected political newcomer Pete Flores to the Texas Senate on Tuesday, flipping a Democratic district red for the first time in 139 years and further bolstering Republicans’ supermajority in the chamber ahead of the November elections.

A retired game warden, Flores defeated former state and U.S. Rep. Pete Gallego for the Senate District 19 seat after receiving backing from some of the state’s most prominent politicians, including Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, and U.S. Sens John Cornyn and Ted Cruz.

“We conservatives are conservative in the way we make approaches. The gun fight’s not over until the last shot’s fired,” Flores told the Express-News after Gallego conceded in a phone call just before 9 p.m. “The last shot’s been fired.”

Flores’ win marked an incredible upset in a district that political observers said shouldn’t have been competitive for Republicans. Low turnout in special elections and high-level GOP interests in preserving a Senate supermajority helped push Flores across the line, they said.

“It will provide a completely unexpected gift for Republicans for the next legislative session,” said Mark Jones, a professor of political science at Rice University.

[carpedm9587]

Honestly, I think Roe v Wade is perhaps more to blame than anything else for how polarized the Supreme Court process has gotten, and it needs to be overturned in order to try to make the process less partisan, though it'd obviously make the liberals go crazy. Granted, I have bias in that I think Roe v Wade was incorrectly decided and should be overturned anyway, but I do think a lot (not all, but a lot) of the current polarization regarding the Supreme Court appointment process is the result of that decision, due to it taking such a contentious issue and telling people the only way to either effect change (or keep the current policy in place) is to get the court itself to change it, which is generally only possible via replacing justices with those more likely to rule differently. If it's overturned, all that effort from both sides on the issue can be spent trying to change the minds of state legislatures rather than trying to change the court.

I don't think you're going to resolve a contentious issue by just reversing the decision. If Roe v Wade stays in place, conservatives will "go crazy." If it is overturned, liberals will "go crazy." Abortion is contentious because it pits two closely held values against one another: life, and liberty. I is messy because it deals with the reality of two intertwined lives, with each side focusing on one life and largely ignoring the other. Like tic-tac-toe, there is only one resolution to the abortion issue that I can think of: not to play. Use every tool at our disposal to change the culture around abortion so that freedom is not impinged and abortion is as non-existent as it is possible to be. It will never be 100% non-existent.

[carpedm9587]

Just one little tidbit, but this was a shocker to a lot of us who know something about this particular district...

Flores defeats Gallego in Senate District 19

Voters elected political newcomer Pete Flores to the Texas Senate on Tuesday, flipping a Democratic district red for the first time in 139 years and further bolstering Republicans’ supermajority in the chamber ahead of the November elections.

A retired game warden, Flores defeated former state and U.S. Rep. Pete Gallego for the Senate District 19 seat after receiving backing from some of the state’s most prominent politicians, including Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, and U.S. Sens John Cornyn and Ted Cruz.

“We conservatives are conservative in the way we make approaches. The gun fight’s not over until the last shot’s fired,” Flores told the Express-News after Gallego conceded in a phone call just before 9 p.m. “The last shot’s been fired.”

Flores’ win marked an incredible upset in a district that political observers said shouldn’t have been competitive for Republicans. Low turnout in special elections and high-level GOP interests in preserving a Senate supermajority helped push Flores across the line, they said.

“It will provide a completely unexpected gift for Republicans for the next legislative session,” said Mark Jones, a professor of political science at Rice University.

I guess I'm not seeing the shock value, for a number of reasons. First, when there is scandal, it is not uncommon for the seat to flip. In this case the Democrat was convicted of a felony. Second, in the vast sea of national politics, I would be amazed if anyone thought no Republican would win a seat. Clearly that is not going to happen. This seems to me a bit like pointing to the handful of glaciers that are advancing and saying, "see - proves that global warming is a hoax."

So I guess I'm not seeing the point here...

[Cow Poke]

I guess I'm not seeing the shock value, for a number of reasons. First, when there is scandal, it is not uncommon for the seat to flip. In this case the Democrat was convicted of a felony. Second, in the vast sea of national politics, I would be amazed if anyone thought no Republican would win a seat. Clearly that is not going to happen. This seems to me a bit like pointing to the handful of glaciers that are advancing and saying, "see - proves that global warming is a hoax."

So I guess I'm not seeing the point here...

Ah, so you've been doing some googling. Cool.

[carpedm9587]

Ah, so you've been doing some googling. Cool.

Yes. I am not following state-level races all that closely, so your post sent me looking for "why."

[Cow Poke]

Yes. I am not following state-level races all that closely, so your post sent me looking for "why."

Cool.