Don't be surprised if Fishing Trip Sammy decides to retire this year and Trump gets to slam in another young crappy conservative. Wonder which way Mitch will vote?
Alito has stated publicly in the last week or so that he does not intend to retire soon.
Does Mitch still have the mental capacity to vote?
Don't be surprised if Fishing Trip Sammy decides to retire this year and Trump gets to slam in another young crappy conservative. Wonder which way Mitch will vote?
Don't be surprised if Fishing Trip Sammy decides to retire this year and Trump gets to slam in another young crappy conservative. Wonder which way Mitch will vote?
If that happens (I'd say pretty good odds), the Democrats should be all over every news cycle and people should be in the streets. The senate should fear a confirmation vote.
Don't be surprised if Fishing Trip Sammy decides to retire this year and Trump gets to slam in another young crappy conservative. Wonder which way Mitch will vote?
If Trump rushes through a nominee now, I would advise the Dems in. 2028 to run on expanding the court.
Pracitally speaking, it's also not a slam-dunk that he gets a majority with so many departures. Cornyn isn't likely to support Trump. Collins and Ernst might not support him rushing it. That's a tie (assuming Federman doesn't flip). Others might not fight him much....but there is no guarantee it'll get through.
The trick now is to win the Presidency and hold on to Congress in 2028. Alito is 76. Thomas is 78. Let's hope they both make it to 80, and are dead by 82. That would make a 6-3 court 4-5.
Don't be surprised if Fishing Trip Sammy decides to retire this year and Trump gets to slam in another young crappy conservative. Wonder which way Mitch will vote?
If they try to add a judge in the next two years, it should be a full stop NO. There is plenty of precedent at this point and there is no way trump should have another appointment (I think two of his should be removed).
+1
The trick now is to win the Presidency and hold on to Congress in 2028. Alito is 76. Thomas is 78. Let's hope they both make it to 80, and are dead by 82. That would make a 6-3 court 4-5.
Location: At the dude ranch / above the sea Gender:
Posted:
Nov 5, 2026 - 8:58am
islander wrote:
He's okay generally, but he often overstates the obvious, while understating (or even mis-stating) important points that counter his argument. Basically being overly idealistic/simplistic. He's also simply a member of the academic talking head class with a devotion to a couple of topics that pretty much ensure a lot of people won't listen to him on principle. I think he's 'directionally correct' most of the time, but I'd prefer he not be the face of most arguments. I posted this because it's a quick / easy demonstration of the topic I wanted to show and I found it quickly - I think it would reach more people if it was presented by someone else.
I saw him speak once at one of our annual company meetings. Most of us didnât realize he was so short, and when he came out many people (not me) shamefully laughed.
âYeah, but I was about 5â11â before the latest economic numbers came out.â
We had some amazing speakers. Our favorite was the hystericalâ¦Colin Powell. âThe worst thing now is that Hillary has my plane.â
After his speech a friend asked if I was gonna catch his second set at the nearby comedy club.
Another time we got to watch the head of Cisco discuss the future of health care with this young guy with an Afro, Malcolm Gladwell.
Then there was the one with Anna Devere Smith doing a one woman show with her musical accompaniment Suzzy Rocheâ¦
latter strategy sounds like head in the oven, feet in freezer...but on "average" my temp is fine.
ps, politicians can be as crazy left and right as they want...it's the voters that matter.
Yes, but if the right is intransigent (have you seen any moderation in republican ranks in the last few years? 'concern' from susan collins doesn't count). I think the voters did speak pretty loudly on Tuesday, we will see if anyone is listening soon.
I do think a good place for the new senate to be 'left of center' right now would be on the topic of the supreme court. If they try to add a judge in the next two years, it should be a full stop NO. There is plenty of precedent at this point and there is no way trump should have another appointment (I think two of his should be removed).
He's okay generally, but he often overstates the obvious, while understating (or even mis-stating) important points that counter his argument. Basically being overly idealistic/simplistic. He's also simply a member of the academic talking head class with a devotion to a couple of topics that pretty much ensure a lot of people won't listen to him on principle. I think he's 'directionally correct' most of the time, but I'd prefer he not be the face of most arguments. I posted this because it's a quick / easy demonstration of the topic I wanted to show and I found it quickly - I think it would reach more people if it was presented by someone else.
bad messenger and all, but the basics here are exactly correct. The right has gone much further away from 'center', so the 'center' has shifted rightward. If you want a return to centrist politics, you either need to get the right to move back toward center, or you need to move the left further left to make an average closer to 'center'. I'd much prefer the former, but I'm not seeing a lot of flexibility on that side (actually, I don't even see seriousness about governing from most of them).
bad messenger and all, but the basics here are exactly correct. The right has gone much further away from 'center', so the 'center' has shifted rightward. If you want a return to centrist politics, you either need to get the right to move back toward center, or you need to move the left further left to make an average closer to 'center'. I'd much prefer the former, but I'm not seeing a lot of flexibility on that side (actually, I don't even see seriousness about governing from most of them).
latter strategy sounds like head in the oven, feet in freezer...but on "average" my temp is fine.
ps, politicians can be as crazy left and right as they want...it's the voters that matter.
A return to center/consensus politics would be welcome.
ps, democrats would be foolish to interpret this âblue waveâ as voter endorsement of their candidates or platforms, center or progressive... more so, these were votes rejecting the republican costs, wars and chaos.
any potential democrat victory is still two years away.
bad messenger and all, but the basics here are exactly correct. The right has gone much further away from 'center', so the 'center' has shifted rightward. If you want a return to centrist politics, you either need to get the right to move back toward center, or you need to move the left further left to make an average closer to 'center'. I'd much prefer the former, but I'm not seeing a lot of flexibility on that side (actually, I don't even see seriousness about governing from most of them).
And that path should be through the center. It has been dragged so far right for the last several decades, it needs a hefty push to the left to even be center-right. Most of our 'left' politicians would barely be centrist in other countries.
AHCA was such a mess because the entrenched right wouldn't accept anything other than a slightly rebranded RomneyCare, and even then they fought it tooth and nail.
A return to center/consensus politics would be welcome.
ps, democrats would be foolish to interpret this âblue waveâ as voter endorsement of their candidates or platforms, center or progressive... more so, these were votes rejecting the republican costs, wars and chaos.
any potential democrat victory is still two years away.
