Amy Coney Barret confirmed and sworn in.

[SAJ-99]

Its never been to hunky dory on the Supreme Court nomination. Thru history its pretty much been politics as usual with a few exceptions.

The NCC article doesn't really support that. I points out when it has happened and when it hasn't and blah, blah, blah. The data doesn't show typically partisan politics. To reveal, don't look at the who controls what, look at the vote totals. A senator's party might not be in charge, but they don't have to vote to confirm. Examples from late 80s and 90s Kennedy 97-0, Souter 90-9, Thomas 52-48, Ginsburg 96-3, Bryer 87-9, Roberts 78-22. About 2005 stuff gets more political Alito 58-42, Sotomayor 68-31, Kagan 63-37. Then most recently, just ugly Gorsuch 54-45, Kavanaugh 50-48, Barrett 52-48.

If you sleep better thinking things have always been this way, I say go fo it. But they haven't. The reason politicians do anything is because they want people to vote for them. It is a reflection of us (voters) and our preferences.

 

[VikingsGuy]

The NCC article doesn't really support that. I points out when it has happened and when it hasn't and blah, blah, blah. The data doesn't show typically partisan politics. To reveal, don't look at the who controls what, look at the vote totals. A senator's party might not be in charge, but they don't have to vote to confirm. Examples from late 80s and 90s Kennedy 97-0, Souter 90-9, Thomas 52-48, Ginsburg 96-3, Bryer 87-9, Roberts 78-22. About 2005 stuff gets more political Alito 58-42, Sotomayor 68-31, Kagan 63-37. Then most recently, just ugly Gorsuch 54-45, Kavanaugh 50-48, Barrett 52-48.

If you sleep better thinking things have always been this way, I say go fo it. But they haven't. The reason politicians do anything is because they want people to vote for them. It is a reflection of us (voters) and our preferences.

Agree. Pre-Bork it was largely a check the box process. Post-Bork it has become a full contact sport. It is interesting that more GOP voted for the very liberal Ginsburg and Sotomayor than Dems did the very conservative (Bork) Thomas or Alito. There is no doubt the Dems have had sharp elbows on this topic for some time - it is not a McConnell invention. This shift initially resulted in GOP presidents being cowed into fairly liberal nominations of Kennedy, Souter (and a little bit Roberts). You do not see the Dem presidents putting up middle of the road nominees during this time. Things have gone to 11 once the GOP started not apologizing for having the right to appoint a conservative just as Dems don't need to apologize for appointing liberals. As Obama pointed out (and the GOP is likely to learn next year) elections have consequence.

 

[VikingsGuy]

The reason politicians do anything is because they want people to vote for them. It is a reflection of us (voters) and our preferences.

This is both so true and so essential to our understanding that it worth a +1 all its own. Americans are getting the very government and divisive politics they want.

 

[Elkoholic]

Whatever happened to hunting topics?
Hopefully Big Fin will put out another notice "stick to hunting related threads" soon.

 

[SAJ-99]

Whatever happened to hunting topics?
Hopefully Big Fin will put out another notice "stick to hunting related threads" soon.

Just don't read it and go find a hunting thread if you don't like this one. There is some relevance with the conservative majority and Originalism being a theme. You hunt public land and a pervasive ideology on SCOTUS could make the transfer of those lands to states much easier. You could also see other States, with a different ideology, create a more onerous process in obtaining a firearm or ammunition.

 

[Carbon]

Seriously

Whatever happened to hunting topics?
Hopefully Big Fin will put out another notice "stick to hunting related threads" soon.

Seriously? You open and read a thread entiltled "Amy Coney Barret Confirmed and Sworn in" and want to complain that it has political overtones? Did you think it was going to be about how well deer and elk are managed in MT (another political topic)? Really? She will have a direct effect on our lives and ability to own guns and hunt.

Jim

 

[antlerradar]

I like the EC because it makes Presidential Candidates pay attention to the people in the flyover states. Makes a lot of sense to me.

You and I can both agree that if we get rid of the EC candidates would concentrate on big population centers and forget about smaller states. I wonder if the proponents of scrapping the EC have ever thought about the consequences for campaign financing. Instead of only having to concentrate on a hand full of states, candidates would have to worry about dozens of high dollar major media markets. If you think that too much money is spent on campaigns now, it is not going to get better when the EC is gone. Getting out your message and voter turn out operations would cost billions more when you are competing in every big market across the country . This will result in big corporations and the very wealthy having even more influence.

 

[hank4elk]

A corperations wetdream,and US workers nightmare.

 

[BigHornRam]

You and I can both agree that if we get rid of the EC candidates would concentrate on big population centers and forget about smaller states. I wonder if the proponents of scrapping the EC have ever thought about the consequences for campaign financing. Instead of only having to concentrate on a hand full of states, candidates would have to worry about dozens of high dollar major media markets. If you think that too much money is spent on campaigns now, it is not going to get better when the EC is gone. Getting out your message and voter turn out operations would cost billions more when you are competing in every big market across the country . This will result in big corporations and the very wealthy having even more influence.

Bloomberg tried to buy his way into the Whitehouse this year and it didn't get him far. Money isn't everything, but I completely agree, get rid of the EC and it will become more of an issue, not less.

 

[VikingsGuy]

A hidden benefit of the EC is that every precinct in the country is not a recount battleground. California and WY are rarely close enough to trigger a presidential recount - big wins in the majority of states settle those votes quickly. Can you imagine every precinct in the US, every one of 100,000,000+ individual votes, back in 2000 being pulled, reviewed, challenged, and litigated - it would be a catastrophe of biblical proportions for our democracy.

 

[BigHornRam]

A hidden benefit of the EC is that every precinct in the country is not a recount battleground. California and WY are rarely close enough to trigger a presidential recount - big wins in the majority of states settle those votes quickly. Can you imagine every precinct in the US, every one of 100,000,000+ individual votes, back in 2000 being pulled, reviewed, challenged, and litigated - it would be a catastrophe of biblical proportions for our democracy.

Would be like the Iowa Democrat caucus on steriods.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I propose a Constitutional Amendment whereby elections are decided by ordeal. Candidates must traverse the length of Yellowstone on foot while wearing bacon pants. Survivors will be allowed to govern. In the event more than one candidate survives, the winner will be determined by pugel sticks over the thermal hot springs at Crested Pool.

"Do you feel lucky, punk?"

 

[Losing_Sanity]

Whatever happened to hunting topics?
Hopefully Big Fin will put out another notice "stick to hunting related threads" soon.

Just as a note, you have to put an "@" before the name. Then Randy will get a notice that you referenced him. Then you will get the attention you are looking for. However, If you or anyone else thinks for an instant the Randy is not aware of this thread already, you are most likely mistaken....

 

[noharleyyet]

I propose a Constitutional Amendment whereby elections are decided by ordeal. Candidates must traverse the length of Yellowstone on foot while wearing bacon pants. Survivors will be allowed to govern. In the event more than one candidate survives, the winner will be determined by pugel sticks over the thermal hot springs at Crested Pool.

"Do you feel lucky, punk?"

Ma Nature's Festivus....

 

[Gerald Martin]

Ma Nature's Festivus....

Time to clean up the political gene pool.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Just a little context for those that like to think the US system of not having a nationwide popular vote to determine the head of our government is somehow an irrational anomaly, here is the G20 and how they selected their top executive branch official.

tl;dnr - Direct popular vote: Argentina, Brazil, France, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, South Korea and Turkey
NO direct popular vote: Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, Australia, India, Spain and the US.
No vote at all: Saudi Arabia, China

G8
-----
Canada - No (selected by House of Commons)
France - Yes (national popular vote)
Germany - No (president selected by Federal Convention and chancellor by parliament)
Italy - No (president selected by an elector college and prime minister by parliament)
Japan - No (prime minister selected by both chambers of legislature)
Russia - Yes (theorectically elected by a national popular vote)
United Kingdom - No (selected by parliament)
United States - No (electoral college)

Rest of G20
----------------
Australia - No (selected by parliament)
Argentina - Yes (national popular vote)
Brazil - Yes (national popular vote)
China - No (selected by un-elected National People's Congress)
India - No (president selected by an electoral college and prime minister selected by parliment)
Indonesia - Yes (national popular vote)
Mexico - Yes (national popular vote)
Saudi Arabia - No (monarchy)
South Africa - Yes (national popular vote)
South Korea - Yes (national popular vote)
Spain - No (selected by parliament)
Turkey - Yes (national popular vote)


Cross-referencing the "freedom index" shows that NOT using direct popular vote is heavily correlated with the most free nations and not so much for the ones that do.

And for those who always like to ask why don't we run our country like Sweden and Norway -- they also do NOT use a direct popular vote for head of govt.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Time to clean up the political gene pool.

It seems like a 2020 consistent approach would be to lock Trump, Biden and the Tiger King in a cage - last one standing is president and the pay-per-view proceeds would go towards the deficit

 

[MTLabrador]

It seemed like a 2020 consistent approach would be to lock Trump, Biden and the Tiger King in a cage - last one standing is president and the pay-per-view proceeds would go towards the deficit

Carole Baskin wins that fight 9/10 times.

 

[Irrelevant]

Just a little context for those that like to think the US system of not having a nationwide popular vote to determine the head of our government is somehow an irrational anomaly, here is the G20 and how they selected their top executive branch official.

tl;dnr - Direct popular vote: Argentina, Brazil, France, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, South Korea and Turkey
NO direct popular vote: Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, Australia, India, Spain and the US.
No vote at all: Saudi Arabia, China

G8
-----
Canada - No (selected by House of Commons)
France - Yes (national popular vote)
Germany - No (president selected by Federal Convention and chancellor by parliament)
Italy - No (president selected by an elector college and prime minister by parliament)
Japan - No (prime minister selected by both chambers of legislature)
Russia - Yes (theorectically elected by a national popular vote)
United Kingdom - No (selected by parliament)
United States - No (electoral college)

Rest of G20
----------------
Australia - No (selected by parliament)
Argentina - Yes (national popular vote)
Brazil - Yes (national popular vote)
China - No (selected by un-elected National People's Congress)
India - No (president selected by an electoral college and prime minister selected by parliment)
Indonesia - Yes (national popular vote)
Mexico - Yes (national popular vote)
Saudi Arabia - No (monarchy)
South Africa - Yes (national popular vote)
South Korea - Yes (national popular vote)
Spain - No (selected by parliament)
Turkey - Yes (national popular vote)


Cross-referencing the "freedom index" shows that NOT using direct popular vote is heavily correlated with the most free nations and not so much for the ones that do.

And for those who always like to ask why don't we run our country like Sweden and Norway -- they also do NOT use a direct popular vote for head of govt.

funny how we can compare other countries when it suits a particular narrative, but let's not look at health care in those countries, because that's apples and oranges.

If votes aren't going to be equal, and the founders were infallible, then let's go back to women can't vote, blacks are 3/5 of a person (and can't vote), and senators are chosen by the state legislators.

I'm just as GD American as anyone else in this friggin' country, and my vote should carry the same weight.

 

[Gerald Martin]

It seems like a 2020 consistent approach would be to lock Trump, Biden and the Tiger King in a cage - last one standing is president and the pay-per-view proceeds would go towards the deficit

I fully support this on the condition that the tigers are allowed in the cage. ( Having not eaten in a week.)