The problem with this is when one side plays dirty and tells the other side not to.
E.G. McConnell opposes any supreme court nominee a democratic president puts forward. Then a republican president gets in and nominates someone and McConnell tells the dems terribly sorry for the last time. NOW we will play fair and so should you. Dems do. Then a democratic president puts forward a nominee and McCConnell is HA! Opposed suckers!
Rinse and repeat.
Sooner or later dems are either perpetual dupes or they have to “do it too.”
I think we all know that the POTUS, any POTUS, is not elected by popular vote.
If someone doesn’t like that reality, work to change it. But saying that President X lost the popular vote is meaningless when discussing who the President is/was.
If the Dodgers beat the Cubs 3-2, one can’t reasonably say that the Dodgers came in second because the Cubs actually had more hits.
But that is the crux of the problem. It really is near impossible to change (as a practical matter). So, a majority is being ruled by a minority and that minority makes sure it stays that way.
Follow along with the conversation. We were discussing what role the people have in choosing the President. The Electoral College is part of the problem I was describing.
Yes, the system of slavery really did a great job of removing the negatives of human nature. So did our unequel representation. Thank GOD we don’t have a direct democracy or those bastard Yanks would have abolished slavery even sooner. Thank God for the founding fathers, in their infinite wisdom, put into place SYSTEMS of representation that give undue power to slave states, ensuring that the SYSTEM of slavery, which was handed down by God Hisself, cannot be abolished by “populist demagogues”. Yes sir, thank God For systems!
Thank God for that, or those dastardly Yanks would have been able to steal good honest Southern men’s slaves without even declaring the War of Northern Aggression!
I hate this trope that some of the justices lied. That’s really just not true. What did they say? They said Roe was settled law. That was true. Then, they (may) vote to overturn it – now, it’s overturned and no longer settled law. There’s no lie there.
No justice respects stare decisis for all decisions and laws and previous rulings are overturned pretty regularly.
I can’t stand the new justices. Everyone knew they would (likely) vote this way. But, they didn’t lie.
This puts it in a contemporary setting and incidently colors only one side of it (Pubs do it). How about these rulings.
Texas v. White
Wickard v Filburn
Brown v Board of Education, Topeka KS
Regents of the University of California v Bakke
National Federation of Independent Business v Sibilius
All of these could be considered political rulings that conservatives hated and ranted against “activist judges” yet the left stayed mute or applauded the rulings. So what’s the point? The Court is a political body and always has been and their landmark rulings will piss of one side off or the other. The question is: is that a bug or a feature?
He did not harm one hair. That’s exactly what he promised to do.
Look, I get what you’re saying. You’re right, he (and the others) left himself plenty of weasel room, so that technically he didn’t lie.
But in context, people were trying to determine if he would overturn roe v wade, and he said a lot of words to imply that the answer is no. The politically informed observer (just like the kid watching the Disney movie) knows this is a trick, but just because a lie is obvious doesn’t mean it isn’t a lie.
Which, to be blunt, was a fool’s errand. They knew they could not just go: “YES or NO, sir, WILL you uphold Roe? YES OR NO?!?” and create a Col. Jessup moment. So of course they had to leave them the door open to weaselword it and they knew that was what would happen.
They would have gotten exactly the same votes. I’m sure Collins and Murkowski would have found a way to justify confirming them without needing the fig leaf of them being gullible fools that believed they wouldn’t.
Nonsense. Look around. Republicans are getting away with immoral and illegal acts because they have a system that insulates them from the consequences. The system you’re defending is perpetuating the negatives.
The Democrats aren’t perfect. They have their bad people. But the Democrats still hold bad people accountable.
The Republicans don’t. Even the Republicans who aren’t personally committing crimes defend the other Republicans who do.