The Cook Report says there are some Republicans and Indies who do NOT want their access top abortion, a ‘woman ‘s right’ taken away….
That Trump says he will try running on a conservative Supreme Court pick may be a mistake for him….
Joe Biden is moving to make the court an extension of Trump’s virus policy , which majority of Americans have a problem with….
Although Trump downplayed the abortion issue in 2016 in favor of more populist economic messages on trade and immigration, voters with mostly pro-choice attitudes made up more than a fifth of his support in plenty of battleground states: 25 percent in Iowa, 24 percent in Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania, 21 percent in Arizona and 20 percent in Ohio and Wisconsin.
For decades, many of these blue-collar, pro-choice Trump supporters had voted for Democrats because they saw Republicans as a coalition of corporatists and “Bible thumpers” who sermonized against abortion and same-sex marriage. But in 2016, many of them yearned for an anti-elite outsider and when Trump came along, they didn’t mind him as much.
Today, there may be an opportunity for Joe Biden to win back many of these Obama-to-Trump defectors by tying Trump to the “DC swamp:” Sen. Mitch McConnell and the establishment Republicans who want to “end Roe v. Wade, cut taxes for billionaires and strike down the Affordable Care Act during a pandemic.” In fact, polls show Biden already winning a robust share of these blue-collar voters.
The populist message Republicans should be most scared of probably goes something like: “In 2016, Trump promised to drain the swamp. Instead, he became the swamp: he let Mitch McConnell and stock-dumping, ultra-far right GOP senators write his entire domestic agenda.” But today, few ads by Biden or Democratic outside groups have attempted to make this link.
….
The bottom line: the millions of Obama-to-Trump voters who will decide the 2020 election in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and elsewhere tend to tune out attacks on Trump as a divisive or bad person. But they’ve long despised McConnell, “establishment” Republicans and the religious right — and a SCOTUS fight gives Democrats an opportunity to rip Trump’s coalition open….
I don’t see much to this line.
Trump already has chosen two justices who are considered anti abortion to join the three other conservatives already there,Roberts, Alito and Thomas.So supposedly there is already an anti abortion “bloc” on the court.
Further, Trumps two other choices enjoyed almost total support from Republicans.Indeed, I cant remember any prominent Republican voices being heard against them.
So why would Republicans all of a sudden express opposition to a choice that would solidify an already anti abortion majority?
I should clarify a remark in the above post.
I meant to say “few prominent Republican voices being heard against them.”
I don’t think the Supreme Court fight will “split” Republicans–but I don’t think a focus on the future of abortion rights and marriage equality does them any favor in the suburbs. Trump held his own in the burbs in 2016 because the supposedly liberal media callrd him a “different kind of Republican” then.
Trump’s pick to replace RBG will be anti choice and likely have rulings or comments against LGBTQ equality. There won’t be any getting away from. it this time.
*If* there were any softening of rural or evangelical support for Trump I could see this stopping that bleeding. But I don’t think that vote was anything other than solid Trump anyways.
I think one of the points is that these people are also totally against universal health care and will completely dismantle the ACA.
Somehow these voters who are referred to as “pro-life” when they are actually pro-birth and uninterested past that point (see Betsy DeVoss) will be even more enthusiastic about voting for a bloated piece of shit in November if Mitch McConnell installs another crazy on the Court. Especially since it should be obvious that that piece of shit has paid for abortions himself.
Those voters, after every depravity, insult, lie, and contradiction are much more enthusiastic about voting for their Great White Hope today than they were four years ago. Every poll says so. I don’t see how they could get any more enthusiastic. In fact that fat woman in Cleveland I met four years ago who presumably has been waiting for Trump to grab her pussy For four years is, if she hasn’t succumbed to her various obese related issues, ready to go to those polls and own those Libs.
Last night Trump regaled his fans by celebrating the shooting of a reporter. Can his glee over Ruth’s death be far away, after all we all know he can’t help himself. The Republican Party, with few exceptions, remains silent in the face of his narcissistic incompetence.
However, the group that is now more energetic about voting are those who only reluctantly supported Biden. The Democrats have raised, almost all organically, close to $100 million in the past two days ($1,000 of it was mine). That type of response, since the vast majority of those contributing are first time folks, will translate into enthusiasm at the polls.
People really don’t need to be reminded that Trump will always make the wrong decision for his Country. The National emergency remains. Anyone voting for anyone else other than the candidate who can remove him from office remains misguided and unpatriotic.
As far as the so-called court packing goes, I think the size of any government appointed or elected body has always changed. There have been fewer and more than nine justices in the past, and fewer than 435 Representatives. I am for both expanding the Court, and adding more Congressional seats to make each district more responsive the respective constituents (something that would also make the electoral college more reflective of the popular vote).
But, first things first, let’s get Joe Biden elected.
So I read CG’s commebts on here yesterday. I agree with a lot of what he said even though I’m sure he considers me a “hypocrite” since he said 99% of Republicans and Democrats were hypocrites and he is one of the 1% of pure ones.
My position in 2016 was that Merrick Garland was appointed to a vacancy of the Court by the legitimately elected President whose term was still going for another 7 months. I believed Garland should have been given an up or down vote. He was not. If he were I would be supportive of Trump bringing his nominee to the floor for a vote.
The President’s term is either four years or it’s not. The Republicans made clear in 2016 that they do not believe it is. Asking them to stick to their principles does not make ME a hypocrite.
CG’s long (but not over-long) commentary is now on his blog:
http://cgpolitics.blogspot.com/
…from CG’s piece on the court….Romney…It IS LONG but covers just about ALL of the bases
…As long as Mike Pence remains Vice President and Lap Dog, the party cannot afford to lose more than 2 other Senators. Already, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski (who wrongly refused to confirm Kavanaugh) has said “fair is fair” and that she would not go along with anything before the election or seemingly if Trump loses. Kudos to her for having character in that regard. Moderate Republican Susan Collins of Maine, who already looks to be in big trouble this year, has said she will wait until the election results are in as well. Saying otherwise right now in her state would seal her doom. I think she will keep her promise, win or lose.
That sort of means that there would just be one more Republican Senator to vote no and which would cause the nominee to be rejected on the floor 49-51. I sort of think that will happen, at the minimum. My thoughts turn to the junior Senator from Utah, the Honorable Mitt Romney, whom despite many on the left swearing he could never do it, became early this year the first Senator to ever vote to convict a President of his own party. The pressure on Romney, a genuine conservative from a staunchly conservative state, will be immense. I think he needs to be publicly non-committal and keep his cards close to his proverbial vest at least until the election. Despite the fact he has made it clear he cannot vote for Trump, many have been confused why he has said publicly that he expects Trump to win and Republicans to hold the Senate. Might he have been giving himself cover for precisely a moment like this? If Romney is the swing vote on a SCOTUS nominee, he will have immense power. He might have to use it to cut a deal with incoming Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and President-Elect Joe Biden. In doing so, he could earn the enmity and hatred of conservatives in the short-term, while at the same time perhaps saving conservatism in the long-run. What a legacy that would be….
More….
No Scott it makes you in agreement with at least 58% of your fellow Americans.
It’s a false equivalency to compare the two vacancies. Totally different. But since we have broken every norm for four years, why not this one?
Besides, we all know that this is Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy’s fault.
The Republicans’ barely-plausible excuse for gross inconsistency is also fallacious.
They claim that they have a “mandate” from the people in the results of the 2016 and 2018 Senate elections in which the GOP kept their majority in the Senate.
But (as with the 2016 presidential vote), the aggregate vote for Democratic Senate candidates was greater than that for Republican ones.
If you sum those with the 2014 results in order to cover all 100 Senate seats at least once, there’s still a Democratic majority or plurality over the Republicans.
Here are the slightly different but unadjusted aggregates from the FEC and the Clerk of the House.
[For some reason (that perhaps Keith can explicate), the FEC numbers put the votes for Kevin DeLeon (D-Calif.) in the GOP column in 2016, while they keep the 2014 votes for Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) in the Democratic column. The House Clerk’s numbers include both in the D column. Since California had two jungle primaries that each qualified two Democrats and zero Republicans in the general, there’s no ideal solution, although you could, I suppose, replace the general election votes with those in the primary.]
Federal Election Commission
[Total; D; R; other]
2014 47,493,119 20,865,858 24,613,889 2,013,372
2016 97,261,445 51,653,808 41,324,322 4,283,315
2018 90,473,222 46,712,691 39,333,695 4,426,836
2016-18 187,734,667 98,366,499 80,658,017 8,710,151
2014-18 235,227,786 119,232,357 105,271,906 10,723,523
Clerk of the United States House of Representatives
[Total; D; R; other]
2014 43,974,587 19,302,133 22,598,628 2,073,826
2016 96,866,509 51,315,969 40,841,719 4,708,823
2018 86,291,533 50,433,508 33,140,380 2,717,645
2016-18 183,158,042 101,749,477 73,982,099 7,426,468
2014-18 227,132,629 121,051,610 96,580,727 9,500,294
https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/election-and-voting-information/federal-elections-2014/
https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/election-and-voting-information/federal-elections-2016/
https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/election-and-voting-information/federal-elections-2018/
https://history.house.gov/Institution/Election-Statistics/Election-Statistics/
Of course, I should add the obvious: that Pres. Trump’s own “mandate” to nominate Justices, although entirely constitutional, is also not the reflection of the American people who gave Hillary Clinton more votes in 2016.
So the people vote for a Democratic President in 2016 and Democratic Senators in 2016 & 2018. Voilà! A Mandate from the American People Vox Populi Vox Dei
The Republicans ARE gonna do this because they simply ‘can’….
Trump has made it so that ‘rules’ and ‘norm’s ‘ do NOT MATTER….
It will be interesting to see how a President Biden would deal with this ,…
He IS going to be under YUGE pressure to work with Schumer to add another 4 justices and also confirm more lower federal court justices…
BTW?
Trump and Republicans see this as a Win-Win situation getting their control of the court and having the media stop taking about the virus….
BUT?
If money is pouring into the Biden and Dem accounts?
THAT should worry the GOOer’s