Cont: The Biden Presidency (3)

[Delvo]

I've seen a couple of takes on the Supreme Court's anti-abortion decision that it might actually harm the Republican cause, by pissing off so many people, including many who weren't even really following politics because it seemed like nothing would ever change but would now be snapped out of it and realize that things are changing for the worse.

I doubt it. They might be underestimating the extent to which the Democrats' constant uselessness has already made people completely give up and beaten out of them any hope, not just that things will ever get better, but that they won't keep getting worse. If they're already at the latter position, then they can't be "snapped out of it" from the former to the latter.

Also, even if they're right, celebrating too soon sends the ghouls on the court a signal that they had the wrong strategy and gives them a chance to adjust.

 

[Delvo]

The problem is that, {dudalb}'s interpretation of Beelzebuddy's stance seems to be a product of the poster's paranoid fantasy more than anything else.

...like any other Republican propaganda from any other Republican propagandist.

(misread the quote at first; fixed now)

 

[Susheel]

The problem is that, this interpretation of {dudalb}'s stance seems to be a product of the poster's paranoid fantasy more than anything else..

I don't know why you corrected my original and replaced "Beelzebuddy" with "dudalb". Since it was "dudalb" who was creatively (dare I say dishonestly?) interpreting what Beelzebuddy was saying.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Yes, shutting out charismatic, passionate young party members on the off chance people will end up liking them more than you is a much more sensible approach.

I mean, if the Dems have some political forecast showing that they can win by leaning on older voters and totally alienating the youth, that's fine I guess. It's pretty obvious this isn't the case though.

The problem is more that they continue to get their asses kicked and keep blaming the voters for being insufficiently loyal, rather than doing the least bit of introspection about whether their own policies and tactics are politically viable.

The Democratic party cannot fail, it can only be failed by ungrateful young voters who refuse to do their duty to the party.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The Institutionalist's Dilemma
On trusting the process after it's openly failed

...

To paraphrase our former president, I want to be clear: “Vote harder” is not a bad message because it’s untrue. If more people voted for Democrats they would win more elections, and my preference is that Democrats win more elections than Republicans. “Vote harder” is a bad message because it’s annoying, and annoying people is a bad way to make them want to vote for you. At this point, it’s also clear that it’s bad messaging because it’s insufficient. A larger Democratic majority next year might pass a law protecting abortion rights. Barring a massive sea change in how Democrats govern, that hypothetical Congressional majority has no hope whatsoever of protecting that law from the existing Supreme Court majority.

One of the more consequential contradictions of the Democratic Party is that the vast majority of its staffers, consultants, electeds, and media avatars, along with a substantial portion of its electoral base, are institutionalists. They believe, broadly, in The System. The System worked for them, and if The System’s outputs are bad, it is because we need more of the right sort of people to join or be elected to enter The System. But when the party does manage to win majorities, it depends on support from a substantial number of anti-system people. Barack Obama defeated the Clintons with this sacred knowledge, before he started reading David Brooks.

https://theap.substack.com/p/the-institutionalists-dilemma?s=w

The Dem establishment faces a real problem, because even if their current "vote blue" strategy actually works, it won't matter to the right wing SCOTUS that will still force their minoritarian will onto the population.

Over and over again we're seeing that being defenders of the political system as it exists and being a defenders of liberal (small L) values are at cross purposes. The system itself is failing, and the Democrats refuse to acknowledge that or act accordingly.

The problem that the Dems face in future elections is that even if they are successful at the ballot box, they are doomed to fail due to the constraints they are placing on themselves in service of a wholly corrupt and inadequate system. You can't blame people for not being enthusiastic about such a pointless exercise.

Institutionalists, in my experience, have trouble reaching an anti-system person, because they think being against The System is an inherently adolescent and silly mindset. But believing in things like “the integrity of the Supreme Court” has proven to be, I think, much sillier, and much more childish.

 

[Delvo]

even if their current "vote blue" strategy actually works, it won't matter to the right wing SCOTUS that will still force their minoritarian will onto the population.

They can rule, but they can't enforce. There have been times in American history before when the Supreme Court's decisions were taken as advisory, not The Way It Must Be. We need to do the same again now, not only because the way they'll vote is minoritarian and crazy and destructive, or because two of the the votes for abortion in this latest case were the rapist and the sexual harasser married to a seditionist, but also because the last couple of them were appointed/approved illegitimately anyway.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

They can rule, but they can't enforce. There have been times in American history before when the Supreme Court's decisions were taken as advisory, not The Way It Must Be. We need to do the same again now, not only because the way they'll vote is minoritarian and crazy and destructive, or because two of the the votes for abortion in this latest case were the rapist and the sexual harasser married to a seditionist, but also because the last couple of them were appointed/approved illegitimately anyway.

Oh, I don't mean to say there's nothing a Democratic majority could do about this problem, just that there is nothing they would do. Even now we have Manchin and Sinema refusing to do away with the filibuster that is preventing a majority of the Senate from passing a federal pro-choice law. Absolute madness.

The Democratic party may be the last group of people in this country pretending that the system (registered trademark) is legitimate. The Republicans rightly understand that we're playing calvinball and the rules don't matter.

The party simply refuses to acknowledge that there is a growing legitimacy crisis in our political system, which only exasperates the problem.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The DOJ could (after all, it's been asked to by McConnell) start poking around the Supreme Court, especially Alito's office (where the ruling was written) to look for anything and everything "suspicious".
Shouldn't be long before they find something that requires a constant DOJ presence in the offices of all right-wing judges.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Biden doing a photo op with Christian Smalls (the amazon union organizer) and other union reps unironically kicks ass.

Shining some Presidential star power on union battles could really do a lot of good, and it requires no cooperation from the paralyzed legislature. Here's hoping more of this from Biden in the future.

https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1522304054084390914

 

[Venom]

I've seen a couple of takes on the Supreme Court's anti-abortion decision that it might actually harm the Republican cause, by pissing off so many people, including many who weren't even really following politics because it seemed like nothing would ever change but would now be snapped out of it and realize that things are changing for the worse.

I doubt it. They might be underestimating the extent to which the Democrats' constant uselessness has already made people completely give up and beaten out of them any hope, not just that things will ever get better, but that they won't keep getting worse. If they're already at the latter position, then they can't be "snapped out of it" from the former to the latter.
Also, even if they're right, celebrating too soon sends the ghouls on the court a signal that they had the wrong strategy and gives them a chance to adjust.

It is astonishing to me how easily Republicans seem to be able to bounce back from what should be irredeemable setbacks.

 

[Tero]

They can rule, but they can't enforce. There have been times in American history before when the Supreme Court's decisions were taken as advisory, not The Way It Must Be. We need to do the same again now, not only because the way they'll vote is minoritarian and crazy and destructive, or because two of the the votes for abortion in this latest case were the rapist and the sexual harasser married to a seditionist, but also because the last couple of them were appointed/approved illegitimately anyway.

It's rare. There is an incident from 1942 with Roosevelt ignoring the court.

But with abortion, the power falls on the states now so there is almost nothing the feds can do. Texas with the vigilante law may see that they cannot do anything about abortions in other states or act on residents of other states.

 

[Delvo]

I've seen a couple of takes on the Supreme Court's anti-abortion decision that it might actually harm the Republican cause, by pissing off so many people...

I doubt it. They might be underestimating the extent to which the Democrats' constant uselessness has already made people completely give up

And now there's a poll confirming my suspicion: https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/07/politics/republicans-midterms-roe-v-wade/index.html

The news hasn't affected the coming electoral picture. People are angry about it, but that's not generating Democrat votes because people know the Democrats didn't do anything about it before when they had the chances and aren't doing anything about it now either, or even bothering to put on a show of pretending to try to do anything... or even come up with an excuse that isn't just more servitude to the Republican machine. The Republicans did hand them something for free on this, but it wasn't votes; it was an opportunity to earn votes. And the Democrats have steadfastly refused, again, as always.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

And now there's a poll confirming my suspicion: https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/07/politics/republicans-midterms-roe-v-wade/index.html

The news hasn't affected the coming electoral picture. People are angry about it, but that's not generating Democrat votes because people know the Democrats didn't do anything about it before when they had the chances and aren't doing anything about it now either, or even bothering to put on a show of pretending to try to do anything... or even come up with an excuse that isn't just more servitude to the Republican machine. The Republicans did hand them something for free on this, but it wasn't votes; it was an opportunity to earn votes. And the Democrats have steadfastly refused, again, as always.

Immediately after the news broke they sent out texts and emails asking for donations, now this week they're telling protestors to not be so rude.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

And now there's a poll confirming my suspicion: https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/07/politics/republicans-midterms-roe-v-wade/index.html

The news hasn't affected the coming electoral picture. People are angry about it, but that's not generating Democrat votes because people know the Democrats didn't do anything about it before when they had the chances and aren't doing anything about it now either, or even bothering to put on a show of pretending to try to do anything... or even come up with an excuse that isn't just more servitude to the Republican machine. The Republicans did hand them something for free on this, but it wasn't votes; it was an opportunity to earn votes. And the Democrats have steadfastly refused, again, as always.

WHEN, exactly, did Democrats have a chance to do anything about it?
What chance do they have to do more than they are already doing now?

Voters can't admit that it's their fault for not electing HRC (the SINGLE reason why this happened).

 

[Delvo]

Every time they've had the Presidency & legislature since the original ruling.

That includes not only cases when they said they'd pass a law on it but didn't, but also the present, during which they might not have enough votes but also won't even hold the vote anyway just to be seen trying and Biden won't even say it would be worth sacrificing his precious holy Republican-serving filibuster, even in reponse to this moment when it just became an emergency.

Nevermind fighting for a principled position on a major issue; they won't even put on a below-bare-minimum act at trying ro salvage their own electoral position.

Year after year of doing nothing but help the Republicans and make sure their own promises are never kept because then they couldn't keep dangling them in front of us, and they act like there's some mystery about why their base is giving up... or tell the voters it's the voters' fault, because that's such a brilliantly effective political message.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

WHEN, exactly, did Democrats have a chance to do anything about it?
What chance do they have to do more than they are already doing now?

Voters can't admit that it's their fault for not electing HRC (the SINGLE reason why this happened).

Considering Democrats had a super majority during some of the Obama years, that seems the obvious time. I mean, they passed the ACA into law with 0 Republican votes. It's simply ahistorical to suggest they could not have done so if the Democratic party had the will to do so.

If you're looking for one single individual whose decisions could have averted this current disaster, there's no better candidate than Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who refused to strategically retire and died on the bench allowing a Republican to pick her replacement. The same supermajority in the Obama years could have appointed her successor had she not decided to roll the dice with all our futures.

The coming decision is reportedly a 5-4 to outright overturn. If RGB hadn't blundered, the court wouldn't have 5 votes. They would would have to take a less radical approach in order to woo Roberts, but outright overturning of Roe seems unlikely if RBG hadn't been such an idiot.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Dems are not responsible for what RGB didn't do.

And, given by what flimsy pretext Alito used to cancel Roe v Wade, should we honestly believe that a far-right 5/4 majority wouldn't have overturned an Obama pro-Abortion law?

Seriously, this is NOT the Dems fault.
Plenty is, but not this. This would never have happened if Voters didn't decide that HRC was so bad that throwing away at least two SC seats was totally worth not electing her.

 

[Delvo]

RBG = a former Supreme Court Justice

RGB = a color encoding format (red-green-blue, asopposed to HSV, hue-saturation-value)

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Dems are not responsible for what RGB didn't do.

And, given by what flimsy pretext Alito used to cancel Roe v Wade, should we honestly believe that a far-right 5/4 majority wouldn't have overturned an Obama pro-Abortion law?

Seriously, this is NOT the Dems fault.
Plenty is, but not this. This would never have happened if Voters didn't decide that HRC was so bad that throwing away at least two SC seats was totally worth not electing her.

Somehow I don't doubt conservative justices feel a bit beholden to the Republican party. Perhaps liberal justices should stop pretending they aren't politicians and act responsibly to the party that supports them. Dems are absolutely responsible for the actions of their appointed justices, and any potential candidate that doesn't understand what a monumentally stupid decision RBG made should be instantly disqualified for advancement.

Yes, I've heard it all before. The party cannot fail, only be failed. It's not anyone's fault that HRC was a uniquely unpopular candidate that got trounced by a C-tier game show host, it's the voters' fault.

 

[Delvo]

Countering a pruor court ruling is an entirely different beast from doing it to a passed law.

And the demotivating factor for HRC's potential voters wasn't just about her. It was about her positiins on big-picture stuff, like refusing to admit that we have problems in need of fixing or separate herself from years & years of Democrat uselessness (at best).