politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
When Trump does lose, the Roberts court will crown him winner by Christmas. The best hope is for Biden to have enough of a showing in swing states that SCOTUS wouldn't be able to deny it.
"John [Roberts] has made his decision; now let him enforce it."
-Joe Biden channeling Andrew Jackson (who was, to be clear, a garbage human being and on the wrong side of history, much like most of our current supreme court)
Stop quoting that time Jackson ignored the Court to do the Trail of Tears goddamnit you might as well put skulls on your uniform
But but what if they're inclusive skulls?
If Roberts attempts something like that, couldn't Biden simply dissolve SCOTUS?
Or, if he couldn't, perhaps add 7 or so lawful (i.e., not fascist) justices to it in advance, so any vote has a reasonable outcome?
in acid.
dissolve them in acid.
officially.
But otherwise, I think no, only the house or something can do that.
Congress passed a law setting the size of the court, but it doesn't actually have that constitutional authority. It can only provide for courts below the Supreme Court. The Constitution gives the President and the Senate the power of making (or not making) new SCOTUS judges.
Yes - that is a very real possibility.
That's actually part of the reason that I've favored dumping Biden and throwing the nomination open and the DNC backing the fuck off and letting the people rally around whoever they might choose - in order to improve the chances that the Democrat nominee wins by enough of a margin to undermine at least most of the grounds upon which the result might be challenged. Biden might be able to accomplish that, but IMO, a candidate that the voters sincerely want rather than one that they'll just hopefully be willing to settle for in the face of the alternative would make it a sure thing.
Of course, that all could be for naught too.
The problem is how much recognition anyone else may have to the voting population. People here pay attention. Most voters do not. I can only speculate, but I'd bet that better than 20% of voters don't actually know who the VP is. I'd make a similar wager that more than that didn't know who their congressional representatives are.
Pure speculation, but say that 30% of registered eligible voters are unaware of a new candidate. Probably about 1/3 of those would never vote Democrat anyway. How do you get the remainder excited about the new candidate and fight off the inevitable misinformation in the next 3.5 months?
Anyone that fills that role is going to be starting at zero with a not insignificant number of voters.
The media would take care of that. Everyone would know the new guy within 24 hours.
Nope. Biden can use his new official executive authority from the supreme court to have Traitorapist Trump arrested the day after the election for his 2020 insurrection "pending trials". The only way Biden could be held accountable is for the court to fix that ruling. And the courts would then have to shift from delaying the trials to speeding them up. Meanwhile Traitorapist Trump is in jail until inaguration.
win - win -win