“Yes, Republicans are lying, morally-bankrupt hypocrites, but in this deeply implausible hypothetical the Democrats are even worse!”
"Yes, Republicans are lying, morally-bankrupt hypocrites, but what’s important is how much it upsets liberals. "
I don’t see our problem as a matter of resiliency; I think Americans, like all people, are basically resilient, so I don’t think that’s our problem.
Our problem is character.
What kind of people are we? Are we a society that values equity or not? Do we value inclusion and making sure that more people, regardless of what status they were born into, have a shot to improve their lot in life, or do we value power?
Who are our heroes? Are they simply people who have power, or are do our heroes also include people who are vulnerable but nevertheless show courage?
What does it mean to be a citizen: is it just having money and a job?
What does freedom mean to us? Is it just not being told what to do?
I think these are the questions America has to answer at this critical hour.
I mean the resiliency of our institutions as it relates to good governance, we simply do not have the resiliency to respond to crises in any kind of coherent, rational way that addresses the immediate issue and then tackles the underlying causes. We lurch from crisis to crisis.
Interesting article - thanks for sharing.
To your point, I think the reason our institutions lack resilience is due to the fact that there has been a war on institutions. As I said in another thread somewhere else, democracy relies on both competition and cooperation. There’s definitely competition, but little in the way of cooperation anymore. The GOP is telling its supporters that they don’t have to cooperate with others.
Absolutely, there has been a very deliberate war on institutions and the idea that good governance has value. It’s why dumb ass Trump voters want an outsider, because they don’t understand that governing is a skill. Since Reagan they’ve been brainwashed that government bad, business good. It’s not that they are uneducated, it’s that they’ve been actively de-educated. It’s why they’re willing to sellout our democracy for whatever bigoted trope the oligarchs trot out every four years.
They’ve been an anchor around our necks for the entire history of the nation, always pulling us under, and now they’ve pulled us down for the last time. We don’t recover from this because we don’t have the capacity anymore.
Clarify “conservative majority” please. Do you refer to the legislative branch, or the the make-up of SCOTUS? If the latter, which Team Evil justice do you see going away during the first Biden administration?
A mind being open does not preclude the possibility of reaching a conclusion.
I rather suspect that it was madmonk having an open mind that was responsible for him reaching this one.
When the leader of a political party praises nazis after one of them drives a car into a crowd of peaceful protesters there is quite a bit of evidence about who these people are.
Question:
Can a Democratic Senate increase the number of judges on the Supreme Court having ONLY a simple majority?
I might as well repeat here what I said in the Politics & Elections thread on Ginsburg’s death: We aren’t fucked, judges don’t live forever, SCOTUS has made good decisions on the ACA and gay rights and other issues dear to progressives, and over time this country will continue to advance on the road where everyone is treated fairly. This is a setback, if Trump gets another nominee through, yes, but I just don’t get this pessimism from a lot of you. Have you no more faith in the American experiment than this? Have you no more faith than this in your fellow Americans? And have you seen Trump’s approval ratings? Clearly, a majority of people don’t like him at all, and the sizable lead Biden has over him now should be an indication that democracy is doing just fine, despite the last 3 years, and we will have a reasonable person in the White House come January 21st.
Uh, I think for a lot of folks, including people previously posting in this thread, the answer to both questions is pretty clearly no. I mean, you may disagree, but I’m not sure how they could make their views clearer or how you can not understand where they’re coming from.
No, they believe that America is (and in some cases, has always been) a failure. No, they think that 40% or so of their fellow citizens are dangerously ignorant at best and outright evil racist fascists at worst. And I think they’ve made it abundantly clear even within the confines of just this thread.
I come from Missouri, the Show Me State: I’ll believe it when it happens.
Nope. There are FAR more people that support this so-called “president” than I ever believed possible.
There may be a whole thread on this question, but I’ve been offline the last three days and don;t have the patience to search the whole SDMB.
Hey, conservative posters: How do you defend McConnell’s pushing to seat a new SCOTUS justice six weeks before this election, when he thought nine months was too close in 2016?
I think it was/is nonsensical. McConnell had no grounds to deny Garland a vote in 2016 and his grounds were utterly specious then.
That doesn’t mean that Barrett (or whoever the nominee is) shouldn’t be brought up for a vote now, though.
Really? Why not? Defend McConnell’s actions, please.
Pretty sure they could, if the House passed reconcilable legislation, and the President didn’t veto it (heh. As IF!). They would need to eliminate filibusters for legislation, of course, but neither action is something that would require a constitutional amendment.
Of course I don’t. Anyone who is paying attention wouldn’t have faith. The president is a corrupt racist game show host installed by the Kremlin and the Klan. Where in the fuck have you been?
Two wrongs don’t make a right. To make a habit/precedent/rule out of “We don’t confirm Supreme Court nominees in an election year” is a nonsensical, needless rule. Any time there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, it should be dealt with within a few months, regardless of whether we’re 1 day away from Election Day or 1000.
That rule should be done away with, if it ever really existed to begin with.
Yep; there’s faith (which was bolstered in 2018 to be sure), but there’s also EVIDENCE (which was provided in 2016).