Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

Oh, no, no, no, hon. We know what Mitch did. The gloves are off.

Oh sweetie, if your party put forth policies Americans wanted, you wouldn’t have to legislate via the judicial system.
Be 👏🏾Better👏🏾

Sort of like how conservative AGs are whining to the Sixth Circuit to overturn all those nasty laws conservatives don't like? What else is that Texas judge's decision other than legislating from the bench?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

Oh, no, no, no, hon. We know what Mitch did. The gloves are off.

Oh sweetie, if your party put forth policies Americans wanted, you wouldn’t have to legislate via the judicial system.
Be 👏🏾Better👏🏾

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

While you are "fixing" things, how about more Presidents? Three seems like a good number but five would good too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

McConnell is about to further politicize the court right now. He can choose not to.

LOL, no. Republicans finally realized that they need to play the game that Democrats started. We helped you vote in Obama, you then turned around and called us racists for 8 years.

Not again.

You're still trying the gaslighting. It won't work this time.McConnell swore to make Obama a one-term president the moment he won.

We see the hypocrisy and disregard for the Constitution.



This former independent is voting in democrats up and down the ballot. And donating and organizing for Dems. There are many of us.

Thank you

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

McConnell is about to further politicize the court right now. He can choose not to.

LOL, no. Republicans finally realized that they need to play the game that Democrats started. We helped you vote in Obama, you then turned around and called us racists for 8 years.

Not again.

You're still trying the gaslighting. It won't work this time.McConnell swore to make Obama a one-term president the moment he won.

We see the hypocrisy and disregard for the Constitution.



This former independent is voting in democrats up and down the ballot. And donating and organizing for Dems. There are many of us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

McConnell is about to further politicize the court right now. He can choose not to.

LOL, no. Republicans finally realized that they need to play the game that Democrats started. We helped you vote in Obama, you then turned around and called us racists for 8 years.

Not again.

Uh, who were the birthers, and the people who objected to tan suits and white house gardens and sleeveless dresses? Don't talk to us about the racists, when McConnell put roadblocks up from the drop of the first hat.

Anonymous wrote:Why do we have to have crazy right wing and crazy left wing decide everything for us. Why can the middle moderate exist?

Biden is the middle moderate.

That's the thing - there are extremes in both parties. It's just in the Republican party, the extremists have the wheel - and they are driving us all over a cliff. For Dems, the more extreme sides get a lot of attention but don't have a lot of actual power.

Biden is a moderate. We voted overwhelmingly for him to be our candidate because so many of us want calm moderation. Don't get distracted by the noise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

McConnell is about to further politicize the court right now. He can choose not to.

LOL, no. Republicans finally realized that they need to play the game that Democrats started. We helped you vote in Obama, you then turned around and called us racists for 8 years.

Not again.

Anonymous wrote:Why do we have to have crazy right wing and crazy left wing decide everything for us. Why can the middle moderate exist?

Because gerrymandering combined with the primary system, benefits the fringes. Install IRV - ranked voting, and this would be mitigated.

Why do we have to have crazy right wing and crazy left wing decide everything for us. Why can the middle moderate exist?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

McConnell is about to further politicize the court right now. He can choose not to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

Oh, no, no, no, hon. We know what Mitch did. The gloves are off.

Anonymous wrote:10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

They do have a choice. They can move back towards a non-politicized SCOTUS, undoing the damage that RBG did in this regard. Undo the Ginsberg Rule.

10:06 again.

In the current environment, Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden have no choice but to expand SCOTUS to 11 or 13 judges and nuke the filibuster should the Senate fall into Dem hands.

We have a Senate that cannot get things done and is unrepresentative of the population.

Structures that were designed to allow consensus are now being used to prevent anything from being done.

There is no penalty for stonewalling anymore. McConnell can seek to make Obama and Biden a one-term President and Schumer can seek to make Trump a one-term President. Their legislative arsenal is legion.

Indeed, there can be a greater price to pay in many states for attempting to compromise than in just holding firm.

The Supreme Court has become the nation's un-elected supreme legislature, and any time a law is passed that one side or the other doesn't like they run crying to the Ninth (liberal) or Fifth (conservative) circuits, citing their imagining of the Constitution.

A Convention of States seems to be an excuse to cram a Tea Party wish list down our throats. Of course, the rural states fear some sort of NYC cramming their agenda down their throats.

I suppose the best hope now is some sort of two systems, one nation solution where the creation of new states is made much easier (but governed so there are equal numbers of "red system" states and "blue system" states), and states elect to join one or the other.

In Canada there is a fair bit of difference between provinces, and the constituent countries of the United Kingdom have even more power.

Of course the problem with radical systemic changes is something like the Yes California movement where the main proponent really did seem to be a Russian plant.