A slew of decisions that are killing democracy might have lit a fire under some of the most powerful Democrats. I got them to say that they'll do something about it.
The way things stand right now, Brian we can call The Supreme Court “The Supremacy Court” (white supremacy to the point) since it’s obvious that’s who they cater to. That way we can still keep the acronym SCOTUS if so inclined.
They don't cater to white supremacists. White supremacists are their "useful idiots." They cater to the plutocracts who can now bribe politicians with impunity. Since antitrust law, and the fairness doctrine are long gone, plutocracts will now control, without limits, the media, the government, and the economy.
I love how the magrats all say that Clarence Thomas can't be a racist because he is white. They don't want to listen to anything or any reasoning about how that is false because not only is Thomas corrupt, he is also racist even though he is black. He so desperateky want to be a rich white man, so he takes bribes from billionaires and refuses to remove himself off of cases that comes in front of the supreme court and rules in their favor, he married a fat white racist lady, he has made it clear that any rights that have anything to do with people of color, he rules in favor of getting rid of those rights and freedoms of black people, in fact Clarence Thomas has been very horrible for any person of color, for instance getting rid of the voting rights act of 1964 among other rights he also made sure that corporations are ruled as people and have the same constitutionam rights as we do but at the same time they can not be prosecuted for any crimes that they commit meaning that corporations have more rights than we do which is why now corporations can kill us even if they know that their chemicals that they use may cause cancer which is hella ridiculous but giving Thomas a vacation or a yacht isn't a bribe but done out of friendship which is why these mother fuckers need to follow the same ethics that the lower courts have to follow. These magarats sitting on the court say that they follow the original meaning of the constitution but yet the ones that are inherently racist or illegal have been made be upheld by these rat bastards. No where In The constitution does it state that we shall allow corporations to be considered people nor does it state that black districts should only be represented by rich white rapeilican
"Magarats". I like that, since they call the opposition dumbocrats, it's only fair. Not terribly productive to lob insults back and forth, but satisfying,,,
Personally I like the rapelican party since they defend a child raping president who also rapes women which is why he still has to pay E. Jean Carol all that money, I find it hilarious that those magarats try to defend him saying that he would never do that but once you show them all the evidence including him not wanting to take the DNA test that would prove that was either his DNA on that dress or not even they don't have a defense for that action but they still say that she is a liar who just wanted money from him. Same with the Russia investigation, they say it was a whole hoax but none of them read the documents or even know that everyone including his own lawyer went to prison because of it and if they had read it they would have known that the feds didn't have enough to convict without a doubt but it stated that more likely than not trump did colluded with Russia and he still is colluding with russia
There is a dress??? I haven't heard that one. Or are you mixed up with the Monica Lewinski affair? Because that one did have a dress. (I suspect she kept it to have leverage over him, and she did try to get a job)
Yes the very same dress that Trump ejaculated on that she was wearing in that department store. She wanted him to take a DNA test and he refused. Why? If someone said that they had your DNA on their dress because he raped them, I would definitely take that test to prove that it wasn't me but that is most innocent people, Trump knows that he raped her and that's the reason why he didn't want to take that DNA test which is why he lost his trial, that had a really huge part during the trial even though the judge gave Trump a bunch of wins during the trial and he still lost because every single jury member said he was guilty and now he is trying to not pay her and while he is at it he has his doj investigating her for no reason at all
I wasn't aware of this very important detail, but I'm not surprised, unfortunately. I wonder if he can be compelled or if hospitals could be made to release a sample.
Excellent sources of DNA include blood (specifically white blood cells), saliva , semen, skin cells, bone marrow, organs (like the kidneys, brain, and heart), muscles, and bones.
Maybe someone at Mar-a-Lardo can get him to give a saliva test, like on a glass? Maybe some survivors have semen samples?
Truth... He's so abhorent that I can NOT understand how he's managed to Stick it out as a JUROR....He's slime..and a disgusting human...Remember the suit brought against him years ago...he should've been ousted then!! Anita Hill???? Can't remember ..I'll look it up...Clinton Era..I looked it up...on Wikipedia...As Thomas started out he came out of an extremely poor family but was the first to be university eucated ( much more info on Wikipedia) but apperently ( if anyone remembers his sexual misconduct with Anita Hill, whom he threatened with ruin if she complained. ) So Thomas career was off to a bad start in the nineties and they should've 86t him then.. Thanks!!
That was supposed to say that Clarence Thomas is black instead it say that he is white, he isn't but wants to be so much, which is why he rules against anything that gives people of color any rights and freedoms
Most definitely because he really wants to be a white person and by siding with rich white billionaires he thinks that he is,like how the fuck did he even become a judge in the first place
I agree Mike! It is the Supremacy Court instilled with the help of Mitch McConnell, the Federalists Society and the Heritage Foundation, decades in the making. They found their useful idiot in trump to divert eyes away from their agenda with his nonsensical vanity projects, corruption, and self-enrichment. It's why they gave him immunity. This goes much deeper than what we see on the surface.
Independents do not support packing the court. Campaign on that, and you will lose. You cannot argue for changing the structure of the Supreme Court and also argue for abiding by our constitution.
I do agree with possible impeachment for any justice appointed by a convicted felon.
If they are people they can commit crimes so who in corporations can be criminally charged with theft, murder, tax evasion? CEOs and Board members come to mind. Stockholders possibly?
Yeah I never understood why they would have done that unless they were bought out by corporations and with this new ruling that these horrible justices made by saying that we the people don't have the right to sue this corrupt corporations because they know that they were poisoning us and or causing us cancer is hella fucked up. I hope that those magarats 6 get poisoned by those very same corporations and get cancer but we know that they will have free healthcare thanks to our tax dollars
13 justices. Democrats are in power they get to nominate 4 new judges. If the republicans don’t like it they can just fuck themselves because that’s the way it is now. First order of business should be to stack the court AND put term limits on these bastards. This will normalize it over time. Next on the list is to make Puerto Rico and Washington DC states that will undoubtedly elect 4 more Democratic senators and 2-4 representatives. Think DC is too small to be a state? More people live in Washington DC than live in the entire state of Wyoming. Wyoming has about 430,000 people total. Alaska isn’t much more than that too. They get 2 senators. Every state get 2 senators it doesn’t matter what the population is. The house seats are by population. And another thing I would do that would get more things done is to elected Representatives terms to 3 or 4 years. Every 2 years you get a year of work and one year of running for office all over again. There is nothing in. The constitution that says the supreme court can only have so many judges or that the terms of representatives should be just 2 years. And the number of Supreme Court justices HAS BEEN CHANGED BEFORE. Wanna find out? Pick up a book or look it up on Wikipedia.
In addition to adding four more justices, Congress should pass a law that no president will ever choose a Supreme Court Justice again. Each justice instead serves a 10-year term, except the ones that are already there. The 9 existing justices can eventually retire on their own terms. But the 4 new justices, and all new ones after them will only serve 10-year terms on the highest bench. Secondly, all new justices will be chosen by a lottery of the appellate justices in the circuit of the justice who is leaving the bench. If you’re an appellate judge who has been on the bench at least 10 years in the first circuit, for example, then your name will be put in the hat. A name will be pulled out, and that judge will move up to the Supreme Court for the seat that covers that circuit. The Supreme Court justice who is termed out can either retire and leave for good, or can rotate back down to the appellate court to sit on that bench again. There will be no term limits on appellate or district court judges, but there will be age limits. The statute can also classify the new justices into groups of two so that no more than two new justices are rotating into the Supreme Court bench each year. This way, it’s literally the luck of the draw as to the make up of the court, and it can change from year to year. No president or senate will have control over the make up of the court except to the extent that — over decades — they choose the lower court judges and approve them to sit on the bench. It would go a long way to return trust back to the court. While any court in the US will always have a political element, it will make it harder for any one interest group to capture, corrupt, and “guide” future justices for the long term.
This critical move got buried in your thoughtful post: “Next on the list is to make Puerto Rico and Washington DC states that will undoubtedly elect 4 more Democratic senators and 2-4 representatives.” At least, D.C.
Thank you for thinking about this in such a constructive way, and for taking the time to 'spell it out' to those of us willing to listen to the ideas that could help us restore the intentions of our violated constitution. It's a bit complex for me to give a solid "yea or nay" response after the first reading, but I just have to say THANK YOU! Obviously, something significant needs to change, and your ideas here seem like an excellent starting point to work toward to help shape the future.
What do other countries do? I believe that Prior to Trump, the Supreme Court was not so egregious in politiczing decisions and hollowing out Voting Rights, Civil Rights, Abortion (definition is way too broad), and executive power limits.
I would make this 39 . This would make the ability for a truly randomized internal en banc system giving teeth to the dissent process in egregious miscarriages of justice and power
This could happen. But democrats won’t stop nominating women in areas where voters prefer men as leaders, so it never will happen. And if it’s suggested enough, Trump will just pack it on the way out the door.
Bullshit. Both Hillary and Kamala were screwed over; Hillary by a mysterious halt to a recount with a subsequent demand that Michigan give all their electoral votes to tRUMP, and Kamala was screwed over by Mu$krat jiggering the voting machines, which tRUMP openly bragged about.
Biden and Harris would have never let that happen. They oversaw that election and did so fairly.
She’s a black woman - and not just a black woman, she's on the progressive side, a three strikes scenario. America is sexist. And racist. And far more conservative than democrats will acknowledge.
Mysteriously, Trump couldn’t “cheat” in 2020, even when he was in office. You know, when a white man showed up running for president on the democratic ticket.
Did Trump just mysteriously lose the will to cheat 2020? lol Democrats ran a man for office. If they'd run a man in 2016 and 2024, we wouldn't be having this talk, sadly.
Remember J6? THAT was cheating. The oligarchs ginned up a questionable narrative that women are not “electable” and you, and too many other ppl, fell for it.
Remember J6? THAT was cheating. The oligarchs ginned up a questionable narrative that women are not “electable” and you, and too many other ppl, fell for it.
Remember J6? THAT was cheating. The oligarchs ginned up a questionable narrative that women are not “electable” and you, and too many other ppl, fell for it.
The oligarchs didn't have to say anything. The entire south and just about every rural area in America already has a book that taught it women shouldn't lead. It's called the bible. 45% of women voted for Donald Trump in 2024, flat out knowing he was a rapist.
If your voters believe this, you nominate a man. Republicans get it. Democrats still don't. You are dangerously close to not existing as a party. And that would be a shame.
It would seem you agree with a book that has caused more misery to humanity than all the secular empires and societies combined. The paradigm that is on the way out is yours. Science has shown us that all your hysterical scare tactics are bullshit. Men and patriarchy have brought the planet to the brink of being completely unable to support life, and they WILL end, mostly by shooting each other in the foot.
That is a no brainer. AND ethics laws that apply to the justices. AND retirement age. Like I said, a No Brainer. All practices in many many countries in the world have. We are so fucking behind, it’s embarrassing.
Which many of the “ruling” Dems are: Schumer, Jeffries…Newsom. Worthless. Cuddle up and make nice to Rethuglicans who long ago tossed any notion of bipartisanship into the abyss and became Rethuglican-light. Time to toss these LOSERS into the abyss.
Dems have toyed with incrementalism and played nice for too long. And look where we are.
About damn time. I've been harping about this ever since McConnell pulled his crap with Obama. We need to emphasize to voters that, going forward, agreeing to prioritize SCOTUS reform must be a non-negotiable for any candidate who wants to go to Washington.
Alas, corporate Dems like Newsom have tarried too long in finally agreeing to “do something” in this failing democracy experiment of ours. I no longer CARE or even concern myself with what they are “finally agreeing” to do. I will support Dem Socialists. Period. More Mamdanis, no Rethuglican-lights, like Newsom.
If you don't end up with any other choice you will not vote? I get it, but there is no damn reason to think that Kam Harris would not have been 1 million times better than Trump. Weigh your choices. Primaries push the dems progressives, on the election GET RID OF ALL MAGA. You can't make change without winning. Corp money must go. The Supreme Court must go. Losing a on a split ticket is a Trump bonus we can not afford.
Kinda depends, if you must judge my position. Did I say anywhere in my response that there were not other measures to be taken? But if you must know, I will not vote for any corporate Dems sycophants who also take AIPAC or other Israel-aligned PAC dollars. I have notified my AIPAC-loving Senator of same.
We have too many voters who choose to vote single issues that are sideways of the important vote for qualified, candidates. Parties also owe us full vetting of their candidates rather than the ones who bring in money.
Nah, we do need some vets! These new kids are great, but the evil lurking in the WH and behind will take effective policy guys like Newsome! I love the David and Goliath, but David did have God behind him!!
Exactly!!! And for all of us who are "NON" religious...(and we're seeing the far right "Christians" trying to evolve this country into THEIR beliefs)..it should scare everybody!!! Church and Politics Separate!!! Believe what you want...but keep it to yourself...out of government!!!
I have a deep suspicion of those who bring God into politics. Those who refuse to separate church and state in this country are riding rough-shod over the Constitution. My personal religious beliefs aside, I am a Constitutionalist. The Constitution is the actual North Star of the U.S., not God.
I am a member of the ACLU and AUSCS. The Constitution is the guidepost for our government. But individuals absolutely can be informed by their personal religious beliefs.
They surely CAN be informed by their personal beliefs.They just can’t force OTHERS to adhere to their beliefs. Teaching Biblical scripture and posting the 10 Commandments in Texas classrooms goes beyond being informed by personal beliefs. You deny that this is occurring?
No, I don't. I'm against the posting. And teaching the Bible as "truth" rather than literature or culture is wrong. But I'm not anti-religion. I'm pro-separation of church and state.
If you look at the context Sharon, I only used it to demonstrate the fact that the progressives need some experience at politics behind them, nothing to do with politics! I would use that for any new venture!
The fact that five fat white guys (o.k, Clearance Clarence is kinda not totally white, even though the ladies have bigger cojones), can decide what's legal, legislate from the bench and the damn! dem's keep letting appointments slide and Merrick Garland is a complete and utter fool.
Yeah, all for it, give that bench greater depth, and some folk who don't have to ask the grandkids how to use 'That InterWeb."
I was amazed that Biden didn't take advantage of his opportunity to expand the court before his term ended. I think that was my biggest source of disagreement with him, and I am solidly behind that happening. For all the influence I have...
Newsom is not the candidate for the job. He tried to stop the ballot initiative to tax billionaires and now you had to coax him into saying that he’ll expand the Supreme Court? The candidate will be who wins the primary.
Number 1 has to be impeachment of the entire Trump administration based on Article II, Section IV to get rid of Trump and Vance so the Democrat Speaker of the House (hopefully someone other than Jeffries) can become president...Then SCOTUS reform (same ethics standards as federal justices and term limits) and then expansion to 13 members (we can't expand it before impeachment, only to have Trump nominate another 4 pieces of shit)...Finally campaign finance reform making it illegal (min 10 year federal prison sentence) to keep any campaign money (it can only be rolled into a future campaign or to a subsequent candidate if incumbent retires)...There must be rational strategy at every step or things could get even worse than they are currently!!
We'll see what it looks like in Nov but finding 10 Republican Senators to stand up to Trump may be required...Otherwise by 2028 we'll have either a banana republic or a full-on idiocracy
I wish but money creates power and we need the Newsomes to get the Bill Gates etc. to jump on board and fund the battle that they stand to lose as well!!
The way things stand right now, Brian we can call The Supreme Court “The Supremacy Court” (white supremacy to the point) since it’s obvious that’s who they cater to. That way we can still keep the acronym SCOTUS if so inclined.
More like SCROTUM.........
Supreme Court Racists Of The United Maga? Just askin' for a friend...
SCROTUM??
But none of the male justices have any balls, so…prolly not SCROTUM.
(probably) not.
They don't cater to white supremacists. White supremacists are their "useful idiots." They cater to the plutocracts who can now bribe politicians with impunity. Since antitrust law, and the fairness doctrine are long gone, plutocracts will now control, without limits, the media, the government, and the economy.
I love how the magrats all say that Clarence Thomas can't be a racist because he is white. They don't want to listen to anything or any reasoning about how that is false because not only is Thomas corrupt, he is also racist even though he is black. He so desperateky want to be a rich white man, so he takes bribes from billionaires and refuses to remove himself off of cases that comes in front of the supreme court and rules in their favor, he married a fat white racist lady, he has made it clear that any rights that have anything to do with people of color, he rules in favor of getting rid of those rights and freedoms of black people, in fact Clarence Thomas has been very horrible for any person of color, for instance getting rid of the voting rights act of 1964 among other rights he also made sure that corporations are ruled as people and have the same constitutionam rights as we do but at the same time they can not be prosecuted for any crimes that they commit meaning that corporations have more rights than we do which is why now corporations can kill us even if they know that their chemicals that they use may cause cancer which is hella ridiculous but giving Thomas a vacation or a yacht isn't a bribe but done out of friendship which is why these mother fuckers need to follow the same ethics that the lower courts have to follow. These magarats sitting on the court say that they follow the original meaning of the constitution but yet the ones that are inherently racist or illegal have been made be upheld by these rat bastards. No where In The constitution does it state that we shall allow corporations to be considered people nor does it state that black districts should only be represented by rich white rapeilican
"Magarats". I like that, since they call the opposition dumbocrats, it's only fair. Not terribly productive to lob insults back and forth, but satisfying,,,
Personally I like the rapelican party since they defend a child raping president who also rapes women which is why he still has to pay E. Jean Carol all that money, I find it hilarious that those magarats try to defend him saying that he would never do that but once you show them all the evidence including him not wanting to take the DNA test that would prove that was either his DNA on that dress or not even they don't have a defense for that action but they still say that she is a liar who just wanted money from him. Same with the Russia investigation, they say it was a whole hoax but none of them read the documents or even know that everyone including his own lawyer went to prison because of it and if they had read it they would have known that the feds didn't have enough to convict without a doubt but it stated that more likely than not trump did colluded with Russia and he still is colluding with russia
Good one, too!
There is a dress??? I haven't heard that one. Or are you mixed up with the Monica Lewinski affair? Because that one did have a dress. (I suspect she kept it to have leverage over him, and she did try to get a job)
Yes the very same dress that Trump ejaculated on that she was wearing in that department store. She wanted him to take a DNA test and he refused. Why? If someone said that they had your DNA on their dress because he raped them, I would definitely take that test to prove that it wasn't me but that is most innocent people, Trump knows that he raped her and that's the reason why he didn't want to take that DNA test which is why he lost his trial, that had a really huge part during the trial even though the judge gave Trump a bunch of wins during the trial and he still lost because every single jury member said he was guilty and now he is trying to not pay her and while he is at it he has his doj investigating her for no reason at all
I wasn't aware of this very important detail, but I'm not surprised, unfortunately. I wonder if he can be compelled or if hospitals could be made to release a sample.
Excellent sources of DNA include blood (specifically white blood cells), saliva , semen, skin cells, bone marrow, organs (like the kidneys, brain, and heart), muscles, and bones.
Maybe someone at Mar-a-Lardo can get him to give a saliva test, like on a glass? Maybe some survivors have semen samples?
Truth... He's so abhorent that I can NOT understand how he's managed to Stick it out as a JUROR....He's slime..and a disgusting human...Remember the suit brought against him years ago...he should've been ousted then!! Anita Hill???? Can't remember ..I'll look it up...Clinton Era..I looked it up...on Wikipedia...As Thomas started out he came out of an extremely poor family but was the first to be university eucated ( much more info on Wikipedia) but apperently ( if anyone remembers his sexual misconduct with Anita Hill, whom he threatened with ruin if she complained. ) So Thomas career was off to a bad start in the nineties and they should've 86t him then.. Thanks!!
We can only hope that he gets what he wants (stripped of rights & lynched) but that it somehow doesn't affect anyone else.
No decent country would put clarence thomas or those other 5 lying hacks on any court .
That was supposed to say that Clarence Thomas is black instead it say that he is white, he isn't but wants to be so much, which is why he rules against anything that gives people of color any rights and freedoms
Truly bizarre !
I read a comment on another post that if it were up to Thomas, he would have only 3/5 of a vote.
Most definitely because he really wants to be a white person and by siding with rich white billionaires he thinks that he is,like how the fuck did he even become a judge in the first place
I agree Mike! It is the Supremacy Court instilled with the help of Mitch McConnell, the Federalists Society and the Heritage Foundation, decades in the making. They found their useful idiot in trump to divert eyes away from their agenda with his nonsensical vanity projects, corruption, and self-enrichment. It's why they gave him immunity. This goes much deeper than what we see on the surface.
SCOTUS, Inc.
Number one! First act when Dems retake control!!!!
And no Dem running should waffle on this issue during their campaigning!
Independents do not support packing the court. Campaign on that, and you will lose. You cannot argue for changing the structure of the Supreme Court and also argue for abiding by our constitution.
I do agree with possible impeachment for any justice appointed by a convicted felon.
Maybe after making DC and PR states..
We need to codify Roe v. Wade!!
and eliminate Citizen United.. corps are NOT people.. they are fraud machines.
There are work-arounds on Citizens United
States need to enact limits on corporate donations.
If they are people they can commit crimes so who in corporations can be criminally charged with theft, murder, tax evasion? CEOs and Board members come to mind. Stockholders possibly?
Yeah I never understood why they would have done that unless they were bought out by corporations and with this new ruling that these horrible justices made by saying that we the people don't have the right to sue this corrupt corporations because they know that they were poisoning us and or causing us cancer is hella fucked up. I hope that those magarats 6 get poisoned by those very same corporations and get cancer but we know that they will have free healthcare thanks to our tax dollars
13 justices. Democrats are in power they get to nominate 4 new judges. If the republicans don’t like it they can just fuck themselves because that’s the way it is now. First order of business should be to stack the court AND put term limits on these bastards. This will normalize it over time. Next on the list is to make Puerto Rico and Washington DC states that will undoubtedly elect 4 more Democratic senators and 2-4 representatives. Think DC is too small to be a state? More people live in Washington DC than live in the entire state of Wyoming. Wyoming has about 430,000 people total. Alaska isn’t much more than that too. They get 2 senators. Every state get 2 senators it doesn’t matter what the population is. The house seats are by population. And another thing I would do that would get more things done is to elected Representatives terms to 3 or 4 years. Every 2 years you get a year of work and one year of running for office all over again. There is nothing in. The constitution that says the supreme court can only have so many judges or that the terms of representatives should be just 2 years. And the number of Supreme Court justices HAS BEEN CHANGED BEFORE. Wanna find out? Pick up a book or look it up on Wikipedia.
In addition to adding four more justices, Congress should pass a law that no president will ever choose a Supreme Court Justice again. Each justice instead serves a 10-year term, except the ones that are already there. The 9 existing justices can eventually retire on their own terms. But the 4 new justices, and all new ones after them will only serve 10-year terms on the highest bench. Secondly, all new justices will be chosen by a lottery of the appellate justices in the circuit of the justice who is leaving the bench. If you’re an appellate judge who has been on the bench at least 10 years in the first circuit, for example, then your name will be put in the hat. A name will be pulled out, and that judge will move up to the Supreme Court for the seat that covers that circuit. The Supreme Court justice who is termed out can either retire and leave for good, or can rotate back down to the appellate court to sit on that bench again. There will be no term limits on appellate or district court judges, but there will be age limits. The statute can also classify the new justices into groups of two so that no more than two new justices are rotating into the Supreme Court bench each year. This way, it’s literally the luck of the draw as to the make up of the court, and it can change from year to year. No president or senate will have control over the make up of the court except to the extent that — over decades — they choose the lower court judges and approve them to sit on the bench. It would go a long way to return trust back to the court. While any court in the US will always have a political element, it will make it harder for any one interest group to capture, corrupt, and “guide” future justices for the long term.
This critical move got buried in your thoughtful post: “Next on the list is to make Puerto Rico and Washington DC states that will undoubtedly elect 4 more Democratic senators and 2-4 representatives.” At least, D.C.
Thank you for thinking about this in such a constructive way, and for taking the time to 'spell it out' to those of us willing to listen to the ideas that could help us restore the intentions of our violated constitution. It's a bit complex for me to give a solid "yea or nay" response after the first reading, but I just have to say THANK YOU! Obviously, something significant needs to change, and your ideas here seem like an excellent starting point to work toward to help shape the future.
What do other countries do? I believe that Prior to Trump, the Supreme Court was not so egregious in politiczing decisions and hollowing out Voting Rights, Civil Rights, Abortion (definition is way too broad), and executive power limits.
Truth..we were supposed to have NON PARTISAN Justices..People who worked ETHICALLY...
Bush vs. Gore , showed Republican justices didn't give a damn about the constitution 25 years ago just ever increasing radical right wing power .
We are only human. Merrick Garland was a disaster averted on the Extreme Court bench.
So be careful what you wish for.
I would make this 39 . This would make the ability for a truly randomized internal en banc system giving teeth to the dissent process in egregious miscarriages of justice and power
This could happen. But democrats won’t stop nominating women in areas where voters prefer men as leaders, so it never will happen. And if it’s suggested enough, Trump will just pack it on the way out the door.
Bullshit. Both Hillary and Kamala were screwed over; Hillary by a mysterious halt to a recount with a subsequent demand that Michigan give all their electoral votes to tRUMP, and Kamala was screwed over by Mu$krat jiggering the voting machines, which tRUMP openly bragged about.
Biden and Harris would have never let that happen. They oversaw that election and did so fairly.
She’s a black woman - and not just a black woman, she's on the progressive side, a three strikes scenario. America is sexist. And racist. And far more conservative than democrats will acknowledge.
Mysteriously, Trump couldn’t “cheat” in 2020, even when he was in office. You know, when a white man showed up running for president on the democratic ticket.
Did Trump just mysteriously lose the will to cheat 2020? lol Democrats ran a man for office. If they'd run a man in 2016 and 2024, we wouldn't be having this talk, sadly.
Remember J6? THAT was cheating. The oligarchs ginned up a questionable narrative that women are not “electable” and you, and too many other ppl, fell for it.
Remember J6? THAT was cheating. The oligarchs ginned up a questionable narrative that women are not “electable” and you, and too many other ppl, fell for it.
Remember J6? THAT was cheating. The oligarchs ginned up a questionable narrative that women are not “electable” and you, and too many other ppl, fell for it.
The oligarchs didn't have to say anything. The entire south and just about every rural area in America already has a book that taught it women shouldn't lead. It's called the bible. 45% of women voted for Donald Trump in 2024, flat out knowing he was a rapist.
If your voters believe this, you nominate a man. Republicans get it. Democrats still don't. You are dangerously close to not existing as a party. And that would be a shame.
It would seem you agree with a book that has caused more misery to humanity than all the secular empires and societies combined. The paradigm that is on the way out is yours. Science has shown us that all your hysterical scare tactics are bullshit. Men and patriarchy have brought the planet to the brink of being completely unable to support life, and they WILL end, mostly by shooting each other in the foot.
I’m all for packing the SCOTUS, especially after today’s decisions! No one should be sitting on the fence about this!!!
That is a no brainer. AND ethics laws that apply to the justices. AND retirement age. Like I said, a No Brainer. All practices in many many countries in the world have. We are so fucking behind, it’s embarrassing.
Damn well better be breaking, otherwise the Dems are complete feckless idiot failures.
Which many of the “ruling” Dems are: Schumer, Jeffries…Newsom. Worthless. Cuddle up and make nice to Rethuglicans who long ago tossed any notion of bipartisanship into the abyss and became Rethuglican-light. Time to toss these LOSERS into the abyss.
Dems have toyed with incrementalism and played nice for too long. And look where we are.
So....WHO do you LIKE??? let's get positive..!! We've got a bunch to work with here...I want to hear something POSITIVE!!!
Mamdani. AOC. Talarico. Ossoff.
Great choices!!! They are wonderful...ethical...bright ..Thank you!!
If you are talking about expansion add term limits.
About damn time. I've been harping about this ever since McConnell pulled his crap with Obama. We need to emphasize to voters that, going forward, agreeing to prioritize SCOTUS reform must be a non-negotiable for any candidate who wants to go to Washington.
Alas, corporate Dems like Newsom have tarried too long in finally agreeing to “do something” in this failing democracy experiment of ours. I no longer CARE or even concern myself with what they are “finally agreeing” to do. I will support Dem Socialists. Period. More Mamdanis, no Rethuglican-lights, like Newsom.
If you don't end up with any other choice you will not vote? I get it, but there is no damn reason to think that Kam Harris would not have been 1 million times better than Trump. Weigh your choices. Primaries push the dems progressives, on the election GET RID OF ALL MAGA. You can't make change without winning. Corp money must go. The Supreme Court must go. Losing a on a split ticket is a Trump bonus we can not afford.
Kinda depends, if you must judge my position. Did I say anywhere in my response that there were not other measures to be taken? But if you must know, I will not vote for any corporate Dems sycophants who also take AIPAC or other Israel-aligned PAC dollars. I have notified my AIPAC-loving Senator of same.
Peace out.
I'm a Jewish supporter of Israel who is disgusted with Netanyahu and AIPAC. I'm also disgusted with people like you who hate Israel.
We have too many voters who choose to vote single issues that are sideways of the important vote for qualified, candidates. Parties also owe us full vetting of their candidates rather than the ones who bring in money.
Haters are always losers..BUT Losers do HURT those they do not empathise with. I agree with you.. There's always more than one side to any issue.
Yup!
Nah, we do need some vets! These new kids are great, but the evil lurking in the WH and behind will take effective policy guys like Newsome! I love the David and Goliath, but David did have God behind him!!
You hadda bring God into this….?
Exactly!!! And for all of us who are "NON" religious...(and we're seeing the far right "Christians" trying to evolve this country into THEIR beliefs)..it should scare everybody!!! Church and Politics Separate!!! Believe what you want...but keep it to yourself...out of government!!!
Exactly.
I have a deep suspicion of those who bring God into politics. Those who refuse to separate church and state in this country are riding rough-shod over the Constitution. My personal religious beliefs aside, I am a Constitutionalist. The Constitution is the actual North Star of the U.S., not God.
I am a member of the ACLU and AUSCS. The Constitution is the guidepost for our government. But individuals absolutely can be informed by their personal religious beliefs.
Truth .. but religious beliefs must NOT be forced on others!!!
No, but please don't take what MAGA is pushing as true belief in good things!!
That’s nice.
They surely CAN be informed by their personal beliefs.They just can’t force OTHERS to adhere to their beliefs. Teaching Biblical scripture and posting the 10 Commandments in Texas classrooms goes beyond being informed by personal beliefs. You deny that this is occurring?
No, I don't. I'm against the posting. And teaching the Bible as "truth" rather than literature or culture is wrong. But I'm not anti-religion. I'm pro-separation of church and state.
Yes, and I agree with you it is not correct!
Well-said Daniel!
If you look at the context Sharon, I only used it to demonstrate the fact that the progressives need some experience at politics behind them, nothing to do with politics! I would use that for any new venture!
I don't generalize, period:)
Why not?
The fact that five fat white guys (o.k, Clearance Clarence is kinda not totally white, even though the ladies have bigger cojones), can decide what's legal, legislate from the bench and the damn! dem's keep letting appointments slide and Merrick Garland is a complete and utter fool.
Yeah, all for it, give that bench greater depth, and some folk who don't have to ask the grandkids how to use 'That InterWeb."
I was amazed that Biden didn't take advantage of his opportunity to expand the court before his term ended. I think that was my biggest source of disagreement with him, and I am solidly behind that happening. For all the influence I have...
He would have I believe, in a second term! He had to undo Trump's first term and Covid, the Allies etc.
It requires action by Congress.
Newsom is not the candidate for the job. He tried to stop the ballot initiative to tax billionaires and now you had to coax him into saying that he’ll expand the Supreme Court? The candidate will be who wins the primary.
Well, he didn't want to lose the jobs-overall he has done a great job, for the record!
I won't throw the baby out with the bath water-we need everyone that is decent to be on board!
Number 1 has to be impeachment of the entire Trump administration based on Article II, Section IV to get rid of Trump and Vance so the Democrat Speaker of the House (hopefully someone other than Jeffries) can become president...Then SCOTUS reform (same ethics standards as federal justices and term limits) and then expansion to 13 members (we can't expand it before impeachment, only to have Trump nominate another 4 pieces of shit)...Finally campaign finance reform making it illegal (min 10 year federal prison sentence) to keep any campaign money (it can only be rolled into a future campaign or to a subsequent candidate if incumbent retires)...There must be rational strategy at every step or things could get even worse than they are currently!!
Number 1 has to be explaining how you get to 67 votes to convict in the Senate.
We'll see what it looks like in Nov but finding 10 Republican Senators to stand up to Trump may be required...Otherwise by 2028 we'll have either a banana republic or a full-on idiocracy
Impeach. There is no justice with these evil men.they should wear red to show their alignment with evil.
Tell us how you get to 67 votes to convict in the Senate.
Don't get ahead of yourself. Keep your powder dry. The Democrats are not in a position to expand the Supreme Court. The Republicans are.
Rethuglicans are only in a position to go over a cliff, like lemmings.
I wish but money creates power and we need the Newsomes to get the Bill Gates etc. to jump on board and fund the battle that they stand to lose as well!!