I just saw a campaign commercial for a Supreme Court Justice

I’m confused.

It was during the Greta van Sustern show on MSNBC. It had a woman who worked for the Obama administration, talking about how she supported Neil Gorsuch’s nomination to the Supreme Court. The spot directed viewers to the website www.confirmgorsuch.com.

Is this how we do things now? It keeps changing so fast, I can hardly keep up.

It’s being played frequently during both CNN and MSNBC shows where I live.

After having seen the similar ‘support confirmation of Jeff Sessions’ commercial a couple of weeks back, I’m no longer surprised by this.

Attorney General is a political position. Not elected, but follows the orders of, supports the agenda of, and serves at the pleasure of, the president.

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court is… not supposed to be a political position. I know it is, but we’ve held on to this pretense of independence so tightly for such a very long time. Seeing that commercial makes me wonder if we’ve officially abandoned it.

The Judicial Crisis Network is behind the ad.

Here’s the wiki on them:

This is the first time I can remember ever seeing an ad like this one for Gorsuch. I don’t like it.

Just another SuperPAC. Liberty and justice in America my ass. Liberty and justice for conservatives alone, maybe.

There were also ads for Betsy DeVos.

The sort of people who are influenced by advertisements are entitled to have this comforting, understandable form applied to their voting mental processes.

I’m honestly not sure what you are trying to say here, but if your contention is that only conservatives have Super PACs then you are dead wrong. In fact, the largest Super Pac of all in terms of money raised for the 2016 election cycle - by far - is the liberal Priorities USA Action. The top 10 Super Pacs, by the same metric, are evenly split between liberal and conservative. A quick analysis of the overall list indicates it’s pretty even.

This is hardly new. Here’s an ad supporting Elena Kagan: Elena Kagan: "Commitment" - YouTube

Here’s an ad opposing her: NRA Ad Opposing Elena Kagan's Confirmation as Associate Justice on U.S. Supreme Court - YouTube

I remember a number when Sotomayor was nominated, as well.

Heck, here’s an article from 1987 regarding television ads run against the Bork nomination. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/21/us/ads-against-bork-still-hotly-disputed.html

Although it is a bit unseemly to see an ad for a justice as if it were an elected position, I would view it more along the lines of other policy type ads that you see from time to time. Such as ads sponsored by oil companies asking people to call their congressman to oppose climate change legislation.

It’s common around DC to see ads for military programs. They’re essentially targeted at lawmakers and their staffs.

I’ve never seen an ad for a SCOTUS nominee before. Ever. But there it was, broadcast to the NYC / Tri State Area.

He may not have sounded like a Terrible pick before, but this kind of advertising can’t be allowed to set a precedent. Block his nomination or delay it by every means possible.

That’s comforting.

A post above has the precedent cast for Elena Kagan, or earlier. To be consistent you should call for her to be thrown out first.

You would if you had read the wiki page on JCN, linked above.

And it’s just another SuperPAC, like any other, with almost no restrictions on spending.

I’d like to ask her how she felt about the seat getting stolen from her president. Lady, I am not cool with it.

I’m aware of the group, thanks. They are not a Super Pac, they are organized as a 501(c)4 “social welfare” organization, sometimes referred to as a “dark money organization”. The differences are material - 501(c) organizations do not have to disclose their donors, PACs do; 501(c) organizations are under IRS jurisdiction, PACs are not; IRS regs say that 501(c) organizations cannot spend more than 1/2 of their resources on political activities, PACs are under no such restriction; 501(c) orgs cannot contribute directly to a candidate, PACs can. Well known examples of 501(c) organizations that are politically active are The National Rifle Association, The Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, US Chamber of Commerce and the Progressive Donor Network.

JCN received, in 2013, less than $5MM in donations, the majority likely coming from Koch affiliated sources. That number wouldn’t even put them in the top 50 Super PACs.

Just to be clear, though, my point was that both sides do this in pretty equal proportion. Your post seemed to indicate that it was somehow a conservative dominated activity.

I saw ads in the Pentagon subway station for things like missile systems and such. I cannot imagine how such an ad is supposed to work.

Procurement guy: “General Hawk told me to order up a new missile system. Now, what was that ad I saw this morning on my way to work?”

Does anyone really work that way? Are major military systems bought so casually that a billboard in a subway station can sway the purchase?

More likely obliquely reminding politicians of the vacation in the Caymans they paid for.

What is this fascination with size? I don’t care if they’re not in the top 5000 Super PACs. It matters nothing except to accountants and list keepers.

The JCN is what I was commenting on, based on their self-description. Do you think you’re telling me anything new by saying the liberal side does it too? What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?