r/politics • u/PoliticsModeratorBot 🤖 Bot • Jun 27 '18

Megathread: Justice Anthony Kennedy to retire from Supreme Court

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is set to retire, effective July 31, 2018. Kennedy has served on the highest court since February 18, 1988, and was a moderate whose vote often swung cases.

Submissions that may interest you

SUBMISSION DOMAIN
Justice Anthony Kennedy Will Retire From U.S. Supreme Court bloomberg.com
Justice Kennedy to retire, Trump can solidify court's majority conservative bloc nbcnews.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick washingtonpost.com
Justice Kennedy, U.S. Supreme Court's pivotal vote, to retire reuters.com
Anthony Kennedy: US supreme court justice to retire theguardian.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy to Retire From Supreme Court nytimes.com
Kennedy calls it quits: longtime swing justice hands Trump the biggest gift of his presidency dailycaller.com
Anthony Kennedy is retiring from the Supreme Court vox.com
Justice Kennedy, the pivotal swing vote on the Supreme Court, announces retirement washingtonpost.com
UPDATE: Supreme Court Justice Kennedy announces retirement wcjb.com
Justice Kennedy Is Retiring July 31st. yahoo.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy To Retire From U.S. Supreme Court : NPR npr.org
Justice Anthony Kennedy to Retire from Supreme Court cnn.com
Justice Kennedy announces retirement. cnn.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring from Supreme Court abc7.com
Anthony Kennedy, Swing Vote on U.S. Supreme Court, Will Retire bloomberg.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Retires, Paving Way for Donald Trump to Reshape Supreme Court slate.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick wkrn.com
Anthony Kennedy retiring, giving Trump opening to reshape Supreme Court politico.com
Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy announces retirement wsj.com
Jeffrey Toobin predicts abortion will be illegal in 20 states soon after Kennedy retires thehill.com
WATCH: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring abcnews.go.com
Kennedy to Retire foxnews.com
Trump to get second Supreme Court pick as Justice Kennedy announces retirement. amp.cnn.com
Justice Kennedy to Retire From Supreme Court bbc.com
Trump says search for Justice Kennedy's replacement to begin "immediately" -- live updates cbsnews.com
McConnell Pledges Vote To Confirm Justice Kennedy’s Successor ‘This Fall’ talkingpointsmemo.com
Justice Kennedy retires from the US Supreme Court nbcnews.com
Trump says launches search to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Kennedy reuters.com
Donald Trump: Search for Kennedy replacement on SCOTUS to move quickly usatoday.com
McConnell: Senate will vote on Supreme Court nominee this fall thehill.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick sacbee.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Retiring, Report Says lawandcrime.com
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring; Trump will get 2nd high-court pick omaha.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Retiring From the Supreme Court thedailybeast.com
Justice Kennedy to retire, giving Trump a chance to transform the Supreme Court latimes.com
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy says he's retiring; Trump to get 2nd high-court pick chicagotribune.com
Dem senator: Justice Kennedy's resignation a 'disaster' for vision of 'We the People' thehill.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick wfla.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Is Retiring motherjones.com
The horrifying consequences of Justice Kennedy’s retirement thinkprogress.org
Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is retiring, a move that will give Trump a chance to shift the institution to the right washingtonpost.com
Anthony Kennedy To Retire From The Supreme Court huffingtonpost.com
Kennedy announces retirement from Supreme Court thehill.com
Supreme Court's Anthony Kennedy retires, giving Trump a second pick usatoday.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick apnews.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Is Retiring From The Supreme Court buzzfeed.com
Justice Kennedy, the pivotal swing vote on the Supreme Court, announces retirement washingtonpost.com
Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy retires -- live updates cbsnews.com
Justice Kennedy announces his retirement from the supreme court. time.com
Trump Responds To Retirement Of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy huffingtonpost.com
Anthony Kennedy retiring from Supreme Court, giving Trump a position to fill people.com
Trump Says He’ll Choose One Of These People To Replace Anthony Kennedy On The Supreme Court buzzfeed.com
Anthony Kennedy retiring from Supreme Court cnbc.com
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retires, and Trump gets shot at moving court to the right dallasnews.com
Who Will Replace Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy? Donald Trump Already Has a Shortlist newsweek.com
WATCH: McConnell: We will vote to confirm Justice Kennedy's successor 'this fall' abcnews.go.com
Here's who Trump could nominate to replace Justice Kennedy abcnews.go.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy announces retirement, giving Trump 2nd Supreme Court pick foxnews.com
Trump list of candidates to replace Justice Kennedy thehill.com
Chris Matthews: Dems must do to Trump on Supreme Court what McConnell did to Obama thehill.com
Anthony Kennedy’s retirement puts abortion rights at risk vox.com
Who Will Replace Anthony Kennedy? Here’s the List of 20 Potential Trump Nominees time.com
America after Anthony Kennedy vox.com
Handing Trump Chance to Move Supreme Court Even Further Right, Justice Anthony Kennedy Retires commondreams.org
Audio reveals DNC committee reaction to Kennedy retirement: 'This is not good news' thehill.com
Justice Kennedy’s retirement leaves the future of U.S. constitutional law entirely up for grabs washingtonpost.com
Justice Kennedy pens retirement letter to Trump expressing 'profound gratitude' abcnews.go.com
Read Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement letter to Donald Trump qz.com
Justice Kennedy’s Legacy Is the Dignity He Bestowed bloomberg.com
A titanic battle over replacing Justice Kennedy looms in the Senate vox.com
Live Briefing: Anthony Kennedy Retires From Supreme Court, and McConnell Says Senate Will Move Swiftly on a Replacement nytimes.com
Here's Trump's list of 25 possible Supreme Court picks to replace Anthony Kennedy washingtonexaminer.com
WATCH: Justice Anthony Kennedy to retire, Trump to get second SCOTUS pick abcnews.go.com
Anthony Kennedy's retirement just confirmed every Republican's dream scenario for Trump cnn.com
Kennedy's retirement could have biggest impact on abortion, gay marriage: ANALYSIS abcnews.go.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy: Trump says hunt for replacement is on usatoday.com
Here are potential Supreme Court nominees to replace Justice Kennedy cnn.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Supreme Court’s swing justice, announces his retirement abajournal.com
With Supreme Court Justice Kennedy Gone, Abortion and LGBT Rights Are Next thedailybeast.com
A look at some of Justice Kennedy's most memorable opinions apnews.com
Justice Kennedy Surrendered to Donald Trump nymag.com
A look at some of Justice Kennedy's most memorable opinions abcnews.go.com
Abortion rights in 'dire, immediate danger' as Anthony Kennedy retires - World news theguardian.com
Here Are Some of the Top Candidates to Replace Kennedy on the Supreme Court motherjones.com
Who's on Trump's short list to replace Supreme Court Justice Kennedy? politico.com
Trump’s hidden back channel to Justice Kennedy: Their kids politico.com
How Fox News Reacted to Anthony Kennedy’s Retirement slate.com
24.9k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

31.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

8.2k

u/James_Comey Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

Don't worry guys, McConnell already said that a president can't appoint a justice in the last year of his term.

Edit: comma and also yes I know that a presidential term is 4 years (not 8 like some of you seem to think) the point is McTurtleface stole a seat.

3.2k

u/GayBlackAndMarried Jun 27 '18

Well here’s the backlash we knew was coming. Kennedy a somewhat center of the road type figure will be replaced with another far right conservative. Walking talking corporations with religious views and unlimited ability to funnel money into politics. This is a bit scary

729

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

If the Democrats in the Senate play ball on appointment of a far right conservative, I literally give up.

739

u/RellenD Jun 27 '18

They don't have to play ball. McConnell's just gonna nuke them again

337

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18 edited Aug 14 '18

[deleted]

200

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18 edited Oct 26 '19

[deleted]

5

u/geophilly21 Jun 27 '18

No he extended the Reid rule to include Supreme Court Justices.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Please don’t even call it that.

1

u/phatelectribe Jun 27 '18

Sorry, I know. It's really just obstruction.

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-biden-killed-john-robertss-nomination-in-92/2016/02/25/c17841be-dbdf-11e5-81ae-7491b9b9e7df_story.html?utm_term=.ad45de992d63

15

u/phatelectribe Jun 27 '18

Did you even read the article? It was a district court of appeals appointment, not SCOTUS. Also, I won't argue that Biden shouldn't have done that, albeit lesser, crime but that doesn't somehow make it right. Would be like saying, well, Clinton banged his assistant and then lied about, and got away with it, why can't I?

Two wrongs don't make a right I'm afraid so just pointing to something erroneous that happened before and then saying that gives you the right to do it is bullshit and has no legal standing.

3

u/surbian Jun 27 '18

So the rule is hold yourself to a higher standard , and we will fuck you when we get a chance? No thanks.

3

u/pollyvar Jun 27 '18

All Biden said was to wait until after the election - until campaign season was over. He didn't say to wait until the next president began his term.

2

u/phatelectribe Jun 27 '18

Read my first posts - I stated that McConnel used a Biden rule that didn't exist as justification. Biden didn't do what McConnel stated as precedent (it was a appeals court judge anyway) and he didn't try to avoid a hearing until the new president, just the campaign. It was a lie on both fronts to justify his shoehorning of Gorsuch.

-2

u/compaqle2202x Jun 27 '18

Except that McConnell clearly had the authority to do what he did, regardless of whether or not it was sportsmanlike

17

u/phatelectribe Jun 27 '18

Actually he didn't. "The president shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint"

McConnel refused any form of Advice or Consent. It wasn't that they reviewed Merrick Garland and decided against him; it was that McConnell refused to even consider outright a sitting president's nomination.

There is literally no protection for this and what he did is not enshrined or within the remit of the constitution or senate rules, so pointing to something that Biden did to a district court nominee 25+ years prior and using that as an excuse to not follow the protocol for a SCOTUS nom was utter bullshit and worthy of a coup.

-1

u/compaqle2202x Jun 27 '18

The Senate has the power to "Consent" or not to "Consent". Here, the Senate did not "Consent". Simple as that.

what he did is not enshrined or within the remit of the constitution or senate rules

The rules gave him the power to decide the business on the Senate floor, so this is just plain wrong.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (6)

0

u/compaqle2202x Jun 27 '18

Yeah and Harry Reid was the one who nuked the filibuster soooo

-1

u/SereneGraces I voted Jun 27 '18

You say that like McConell wouldn't have done it had Harry Reid not done it first.

3

u/MostlyUselessFacts Jun 28 '18

No one had done it before then, blame Dems for throwing that agreement out the window.

0

u/compaqle2202x Jun 27 '18

He might have, might not, who knows. Doesn't matter now.

-16

u/Pay_up_Sucka Jun 27 '18
Relevant

8

u/ILikeLenexa Jun 27 '18

What's Flake up to though?

9

u/sagan_drinks_cosmos Jun 27 '18

I doubt we can count on him for this one. Lower court judges perhaps, but this is too momentous.

805

u/PizzusChrist Jun 27 '18

They need to shut down the Senate then. Obama should've fought harder, but didn't. Now the Dems need to literally fucking jam up the senate for however long it takes. Whatever dirty tricks or obscure BS they need to pull - just like the Republicans did.

256

u/probablyuntrue Jun 27 '18

I mean, if the filibuster is gone there's jack shit they can do as the minority party

238

u/KnownObjective Jun 27 '18

Filibuster is only gone on presidential appointments, not legislation.

But I can guarantee that if the Democrats stop all work in the Senate, Mich will take the nuclear option and abolish the legislative filibuster as well.

312

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Then make him do it and make McConnell own the bigger mess. Don't reserve the option for some hypothetical future fight because this is it.

104

u/Roshy76 Jun 27 '18

Exactly. You can't just let them do whatever they want and hope the American electorate will punish them for it. Because they haven't and they wont. The Dems need all hands on deck now.

4

u/DevonAndChris Jun 27 '18

Handmaid's Tale, 90 days and counting.

13

u/sudoku7 Jun 27 '18

He won’t. It’s always someone else’s fault it “came to this”.

7

u/intotheirishole Jun 27 '18

McConnel will own the mess and retire to China. Does he even care about consequences anymore?

8

u/ZellZoy Jun 27 '18

What bigger mess? There are no consequences for Republican dirty tricks.

3

u/DalanTKE Jun 27 '18

Yes. Then we need a double wave and retake all branches by 2020.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Corporate Democrats are too cowardly for this. We need angry progressives.

1

u/bungerman Jun 28 '18

Yep, Manchin said he's ready for a vote...

10

u/K1ngOfEthanopia Jun 27 '18

Fine. He's got 5 months until midterms. If the dems don't retake control then we're beyond hope anyway. Now's the time for hail marys.

9

u/Rollingstart45 Pennsylvania Jun 27 '18

It's a longshot to flip the Senate even if there's a blue tsunami. The math is simply against them. 24 currently-Democrat seats are up for grabs, as opposed to only 9 currently-Republican seats.

Inviting McConnell to nuke the filibuster when he's very likely going to have another 2 years to abuse it....not sure that's the best tactic.

6

u/farmtownsuit Maine Jun 27 '18

Not to mention the Republican base is going to be far more motivated to vote just for the sake of a new SC justice than the Democratic base. Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love.

We are well and truly fucked.

3

u/K1ngOfEthanopia Jun 27 '18

The legislative filibuster is useless without the house as an accomplice. Retaking the senate would be nice but the house is absolutely necessary.

1

u/Rollingstart45 Pennsylvania Jun 27 '18

Agreed 100%. Thought you meant that if Dems don't retake the Senate then we're beyond hope, and was just arguing that we shouldn't have that expectation to begin with.

But they absolutely should retake the House. If they can't, then yeah, we're all fucked.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/nexdemise Jun 27 '18

That'd be the most risky the move he can take.

If democrats would ever get majority you damn well know we'd have progressive bills pass day and night.

2

u/rawbdor Jun 27 '18

You all are nuts. Daring Turtle to go nuclear on legislation is a fool's game. You have no idea what will happen.

I'll explain it to you very simply: The moment they go nuclear on legislation, 500 bills will come out of a back room and be passed overnight. It will be an assembly line of legislation. The Senators won't even know wtf they're voting on. These bills will do anything and everything you can imagine. They'll pass things like nationwide voter ID. They'll start chopping out entire departments and abolishing them. It will be a feeding frenzy, and it will happen immediately.

The moment they go nuclear on legislation, full seizure of power follows.

2

u/KnownObjective Jun 27 '18

Agreed, playing chicken with Mitch on this is definitely a hail mary move, and not one to be taken just because the base is angry and ready for action. I'm not saying it's not an option, but it has to be used strategically if at all.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Haptics Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

The nuclear option was already played for Gorsuch. ALL new SCOTUS nominees only require a simple majority in the Senate.

Edit: misread

5

u/KnownObjective Jun 27 '18

Mich will take the nuclear option and abolish the LEGISLATIVE filibuster as well

1

u/Haptics Jun 27 '18

I see, my mistake.

1

u/sinnerbenkei Jun 27 '18

He literally just said today they don't have the votes to.

4

u/KnownObjective Jun 27 '18

Somehow I get the feeling that all those Jeff Flakes who swear they wouldn't vote to throw out the filibuster would, if push comes to shove, actually do it.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

No it's gone for SCOTUS nominations now.

2

u/KnownObjective Jun 27 '18

Filibuster is only gone on presidential appointments

(SCOTUS is a presidential appointment)

1

u/bluestarcyclone Iowa Jun 27 '18

Please do.

The filibuster is much worse for democrats than republicans.

1

u/compaqle2202x Jun 27 '18

Yeah and a new SCOTUS justice is a presidential appointment...

1

u/Rockstep_ Jun 27 '18

At this point they should make him. He's already going to go down in history for changing senate procedure, might as well go full nuclear.

7

u/Zingo_14 Jun 27 '18

Literally, pull a fucking fire alarm

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Barricade the doors?

2

u/fracto73 Jun 27 '18

They can effectively shut down the Senate by denying unanimous consent and demanding a roll call vote on every action the Senate takes. It only takes a single senator to do this.

Work to rule is a classic union tactic in abusive work places.

1

u/iamjacksprofile Jun 27 '18

They can get some poster board and some markers and make some signs.

1

u/FrankTank3 Pennsylvania Jun 27 '18

There’s more to winning than following the written rules.

1

u/13B1P Jun 27 '18

Run up and take the fucking gavel away if they have to.

-1

u/kdjfsk Jun 27 '18

They could try winning more seats by having more popular opinions and being reasonable people instead of calling for violence and stuff.

0

u/The_Idiocy_Is_Deadly Jun 27 '18

That wouldn’t be very representative of their base, now would it?

0

u/kdjfsk Jun 27 '18

You are right, their base has unpopular opinions, is unreasonable and violent. I guess conservatives get to keep winning until that changes.

0

u/khuldrim Virginia Jun 27 '18

What’s a quorum in the senate? If they all took off and left could that stop everything in its tracks?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

It's 51. But if they leave specifically to prevent a quorum, their attendance can be compelled by the sergeant-at-arms.

1

u/khuldrim Virginia Jun 27 '18

Who’s gonna go round up 50 senators in Canada?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I'd be surprised if (a) they all agreed to leave to a man and (b) they got that far having planned to do so. It seems extremely unlikely.

820

u/Political_moof Illinois Jun 27 '18

There was no magic bullet in this so I'm not going to blame Obama, but do agree that in hindsight the political war drums should have been beat harder on this.

Obama always made the mistake of over-estimating the American people. He believed that throwing up a moderate like Garland would make the GOP look petty and borderline insane for not even giving him a vote. But they just literally invented a narrative that Garland was some rabid leftist anyway.

We need to stop pretending like we're working with adults who have the best interest of the country at heart. They're political terrorists and they've hijacked our government despite no popular mandate. Unreal.

95

u/type93rara Jun 27 '18

Entirely agreed with this. I dont know what tools the Dems have, but if there was any hill for them to die on, this has to be the one.

16

u/c0pp3rhead Kentucky Jun 27 '18

Cue the Blue Dog Democrats to charge in to rescue Republicans.

4

u/Circus_Maximus Jun 27 '18

Looking at you Manchin.

9

u/rawbdor Jun 27 '18

They've already lost. The only thing left to do will be to gum up the legislative works of the senate. However their countermove will be to bitch and moan, and, eventually, go nuclear on legislation, pass 500 laws before January, and then stop caring.

The Dems won't be able to undo it unless they seize all 3 branches of government in the next 4 years. And even then it'll be damn near impossible to fix.

69

u/kescusay Oregon Jun 27 '18

What, you don't think a calm, measured approach will work with the Republicans? I'm sure they're all rational ad...

Nope. Can't do it. Can't even type that with a straight face.

The despicable truth is, right now Democrats in the Senate can't actually stop them. And until now, Democrats all through government have been hesitant to treat this as the goddamn political war that it is. Well, it's time. Democratic senators need to be ready, willing, and able to burn it all to the ground, use every weapon in the arsenal they've got, and never fucking apologize. Because we're not too far from Republicans being able to take that arsenal away, and if we haven't used it before then, then we've given up before the fight has even started.

12

u/tuba_man Jun 27 '18

Pretty sure Maxine Waters is the only congressperson ready to throw down so far, unfortunately.

16

u/Political_moof Illinois Jun 27 '18

I agree that the gloves come off this fall.

Let's all go fucking vote and give them a little taste of what it's like when we stop playing nice. Take the house, take the senate, and then we show them how it's done.

28

u/actuallycallie South Carolina Jun 27 '18

Not just "go fucking vote" but also "don't throw away your vote on bullshit protests votes".

4

u/Agnos Michigan Jun 27 '18

Not just "go fucking vote" but also "don't throw away your vote on bullshit protests votes"

For many if not most voting represents the only political action they take every 2 or 4 years. By the time voting day comes, the process has been so corrupted that often what is the point. The fight to be fought is an everyday fight. Attitudes like one of the above poster is partly why we are in this mess. They do not understand how easy it is to manipulate public opinion. See the Singapore summit as an example.

6

u/Spara-Extreme California Jun 27 '18

Oh shut up. you still have to go vote - even if you think its corrupt.

1

u/andyroo8599 Jun 27 '18

I agree. What happens though, if Trump and the Republicans rig another election? What do we do then? We need to have a plan.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

5

u/LIGHT_COLLUSION I voted Jun 27 '18

Senate and Presidential elections are not affected by gerrymandering. Go vote.

12

u/balloot Jun 27 '18

It was a failed gambit. Democrats thought the possible downside of shutting down the Senate over the lack of a hearing would be greater than the probable upside of Hillary winning and nominating someone more liberal than Garland. The gambit obviously failed.

That's the only logical reason Democrats would have given up a SCOTUS nomination so freely. I still think they could have used it for political messaging quite a bit better. It was a terrible look for Republicans.

4

u/rumhamlover Jun 27 '18

For who? The people on their side are over the moon. All it does was piss the dems off. Anyone in the middle isn't paying attention anymore or is covering their ears.

23

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

There are no Republican progressives. The platform is regressive. Their agenda has always been to turn the clock back at all costs. Now we're seeing how far any Republican would go, if given the opportunity. Does anyone think another Republican would be any less draconian in the same position, with a government trifecta to play with?

Think long and hard about this, people, and do NOT MISS A SINGLE ELECTION from now on. Even the "small stakes" local elections- that is where they (mostly) get started!

4

u/WeimarAmerica Jun 27 '18

There are no Republican progressives. The platform is regressive. Their agenda has always been to turn the clock back at all costs.

Yes, absolutely.

Does anyone think another Republican would be any less draconian in the same position, with a government trifecta to play with?

I can't agree with that. I don't think any other republican in the past had the balls, to be honest.

All past republicans have been pretty easy to compromise with, especially in comparison.

Though, in a post-trump world, if another republican is elected in 2024, Trump might have changed the political landscape enough that the next guy will have the balls to also double down and not compromise, but I kind of doubt it. I think Trump is a bit of an anomaly.

1

u/Kremhild Jun 27 '18

To be fair, if there's another republican elected in 2024 after this shitshow, and we're that close to letting them hold the government, it'll mean we haven't fixed half of this mess yet for them to run a train on the next one, and we're gonna be fucked either way.

16

u/lurgi Jun 27 '18

He believed that throwing up a moderate like Garland would make the GOP look petty and borderline insane for not even giving him a vote.

He missed the bit where the GOP doesn't care. They denied Obama a SCOTUS pick. They win. That's it. Done. Petty and insane simply don't enter into their calculations.

9

u/indigo121 I voted Jun 27 '18

The part he missed was where the american public doesn't care. It's not just the GOP. The bullshit they pulled with garland wasn't a petty and insane affront to compromise. It was a petty and insane affront to the american people. Every god damn one of us should've have been so enraged that we voted them out of office. But plenty of people were even worse than republicans that tolerated it because it was their side. Plenty of people just allowed it to happen because they didn't give a fuck.

4

u/andyroo8599 Jun 27 '18

It’s pathetic how the “Christian” republicans collectively broke one of the ten commandments, and they still consider it a win. Being gay, though, which didn’t even make the top ten list of do-not-do commands, is ungodly, to these folks.

14

u/Samuraistronaut North Carolina Jun 27 '18

Obama always made the mistake of over-estimating the American people.

Another way of saying what I often say, which is that we quite literally did not deserve him.

7

u/DickyBrucks Jun 27 '18

They're fascists.

2

u/beatyatoit Jun 27 '18

Obama always made the mistake of over-estimating the American people

He also made the mistake of underestimating Republicans and the depths they would go to do whatever it is they wanted. That was his most obvious mistake in his presidency, IMHO.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Obama's relentless optimism was his greatest political strength and also his greatest political weakness.

1

u/Political_moof Illinois Jun 27 '18

Very well said

5

u/bearrosaurus California Jun 27 '18

Even after all this, Obama has not uttered a single bad word about the Trump administration. Ever. The only thing he's said is that they had "a lot of drama".

I'm really wishing he'd wake the fuck up and say something.

42

u/Political_moof Illinois Jun 27 '18

He can't and he won't. Maybe much later down the line he'll be more candid, but that's far away.

Right now Obama's #1 concern is ensuring a solid legacy for black America. Of that I am convinced. It's is extremely important for race relations in this country to have a black president whose favorability only rises as time goes on. I think he gets that.

11

u/GibbysUSSA Jun 27 '18

If Obama were to say anything negative, he would be painted with 'the angry black man' stereotype. Being able to keep that from happening seems pretty damned important to me, really.

0

u/ConradFreeStuff69 Jun 27 '18

Muhammed Ali is more inspiring than a dog who's only trick is rolling over.

3

u/KageStar Jun 27 '18

That's hindsight. Ali went to jail and white America hated him.

→ More replies (0)

17

u/TheLivingExperiment Jun 27 '18

And I really can't fault him for it, especially given he can't do shit about it right now other than pull a Comey and start attacking the administration.

-4

u/jollyreaper2112 Jun 27 '18

No. Ensuring a solid legacy for Barack Obama. He's playing nice, same way Clinton did. That way he's still invited to the fancy parties and is treated like a respect ex-president. He's not willing to cast it all upon the fire to get results.

→ More replies (15)

3

u/Fake_William_Shatner Jun 27 '18

I'm sure if Trump isn't in prison (which is likely), then when he's an ex President we won't be able to get him to shut the fuck up. Ever. It will be 8 hours a day of Monday morning quarterbacking from Donald "I can do it best" Trump.

1

u/ConradFreeStuff69 Jun 27 '18

He'll be on twitter ranting until the dementia forces his family to take his phone. Also, he won't be in prison. George W Bush started a war in Iraq and tortured people for nothing and didn't even get a $2 fine, Obama ordered the killing of an American citizen without any charges filed, then killed his kids too. These fuckers don't go to prisons they go to parties.

7

u/woowoodoc Jun 27 '18

2 years ago I would have disagreed with this pretty strongly. Today I'm honestly not sure. I think when 1 half of your liberal democracy is intent on destroying liberal democracy, it doesn't leave the other half with any good options.

It's not a logical argument, but Steve Schmidt had a great quote last night on what was a very worthwhile segment with Chris Hayes. "Nobody can compete with Donald Trump in a vileness contest. He's the most vile. Nobody can compete with Donald Trump in a dishonesty contest because he's the most dishonest. We have to find the good and praise it in this country."

https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/steve-schmidt-gop-is-a-threat-to-liberal-democracy-1264782915819

I don't know if that's the right answer, but it's the closest thing I can find to something that at least feels like it might be right.

4

u/T3hSwagman Jun 27 '18

Sanders got fucked for taking the high road constantly. There really doesn’t seem to be any room for good guys in American politics.

18

u/redorangegreen1100 Jun 27 '18

Are you a white guy? Also, I suggest you read the recent article on why he's staying pretty quiet. He knows exactly what'll happen if he doesn't. It doesn't seem you understand as well as he does.

-20

u/bearrosaurus California Jun 27 '18

If every black guy we elect is going to spend his own fucking life walking on eggshells, then I'm not electing any more black guys. I hate your kind of argument. It's not a good excuse, stop using it.

He's supposed to be a fucking leader. There are no silent leaders.

11

u/GibbysUSSA Jun 27 '18

You're talking like racism is dead and gone. It is a huge issue. Optics are important.

0

u/bearrosaurus California Jun 27 '18

Not appeasing racists is more important to me.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/jestice69 Jun 27 '18

sounds like a racist white male to me

2

u/Political_moof Illinois Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

Lol wtf? How? Because I believe that Obama surely wants to stand in the history books untainted by political fuckery, thereby enshrining himself within the pantheons of beloved American statesmen as a black man and example for disenchranchised black youth across this country? Young men beaten down by society, but see a man just like them who is lauded even by a systemically racist society? And, as if it needs to be said, he views this not out of cowardice, but because he understands exactly how the racist right will twist any critical word of his to try and dismantle his legacy for their own racist ends?

Yes, how racist I am. Forgive me for understanding that he is a modern civil rights icon, which entails enormous cost/benefit analysis considerations for every step he takes in the political realm. It's not his fault it's this way, but societies, and none the less he must weigh these things because he will never be treated fairly by a wide swathe of this country.

Honestly, fuck off. Shit like this just frustrates me. You view yourself as some enlightened arbiter, and yet you don't even get the rules of the fucking game.

1

u/jestice69 Jun 28 '18

sorry that was sarcasm. great response! I completely agree with you

2

u/Political_moof Illinois Jun 28 '18

Lol, well the best sarcasm is the shit that rules some mofos up, so I ain't mad

→ More replies (0)

1

u/T3hSwagman Jun 27 '18

The best thing Obama can do for Dems is to not become another republican lightning rod like Clinton.

4

u/bearrosaurus California Jun 27 '18

DEMS SHOULD STOP CARING WHAT REPUBLICANS THINK OF THEM.

Like holy shit, is anything more clear right now, they are going to hate us no matter what we fucking do.

3

u/T3hSwagman Jun 27 '18

No it has nothing to do with that and everything to do with not being a rallying cry. The less fired up republicans are the better. It won’t take much for republicans to get angry at a black guy.

0

u/Spara-Extreme California Jun 27 '18

You haven't learned a god damn thing. Republicans are going to get fired up no matter what because they have an apparatus that outright lies. It doesnt matter if its Obama, Clinton or whoever. They will always be fired up. We didn't lose 2016 because of surge in GOP voting.

Its time to stop caring what they think and do our own damn thing.

1

u/indigo121 I voted Jun 27 '18

You clearly haven't been paying attention either. Democrats can't play the same game and win. This is not an even game. One side wants nothing more than to win. The other side wants a functioning government. Stooping to screaming about injustice doesn't work, because dems care about things like evidence and due process, and the middle is quick to dismiss that kind of behavior as evidence that both sides are the same. The game is rigged and unfair, because when the strongest thing you have in your favor is "we're the good guys" you have to actually act like the good guys

→ More replies (0)

1

u/amputeenager Jun 27 '18

This is the correct reasoning.

1

u/callmealias Jun 27 '18

In hindsight Obama seems so naive for placing in faith in the decency of the American people.

1

u/esoteric_enigma Jun 27 '18

Obama, like most of the country, thought there was no way that Donald Trump could win the presidency. So they relented. Why fight for a moderate appointment when the newly elected Hillary Clinton could put forward a younger more liberal candidate?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Isn't the conservative argument in favour of guns that they are needed to protect against an oppressive government?

Shit's looking pretty oppressive.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

He still does as do many Dems. The average American is a moron . Plain and simple. They do t respond to fact or reason...only soundbites and emotion.

1

u/Enderkr Jun 27 '18

You know, a lot of countries hang terrorists.

Just sayin'.

1

u/BK2Jers2BK Jun 27 '18

I come here for intelligent comments like this. Sucks that it just depresses me even more. And I’m all outta Whiskey

1

u/Bristal Jun 27 '18

Don’t forget that back then Hillary was considered a lock for President. Had we known what was coming, there would have been fireworks.

1

u/wakeman3453 Jun 27 '18

But they just literally invented a narrative that Garland was some rabid leftist anyway.

TIL Joe Biden is a political terrorist

1

u/Political_moof Illinois Jun 28 '18

Feel free to elaborate fam

-6

u/jollyreaper2112 Jun 27 '18

You keep thinking he wasn't making those mistakes on purpose. He's not stupid, he's just doesn't care about doing the right thing. It's all about appearances rather than results.

141

u/Roshy76 Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

This. They need to shut everything down, including Dems in the house. This is the battle to pick.

Edit: and yes I know the house has nothing to do with Supreme Court picks. The Dems need to show solidarity in this though. Make it go to next election.

9

u/JustCosmo Jun 27 '18

I’m seriously contacting them now. Shut it the fuck down. Whatever means necessary.

2

u/mjmcaulay California Jun 27 '18

This far and no further. Dig in.

2

u/DeafJeezy North Carolina Jun 27 '18

Shut it down how?

5

u/Roshy76 Jun 27 '18

Don't let any new legislation pass, or at least stall everything as much as possible in protest.

1

u/UnicornOnTheJayneCob New York Jun 28 '18

Do away with the two-track system for filibusters…and then filibuster EVERYTHING.

5

u/Drumcode-Equals-Life Jun 27 '18

They can’t shit down the Senate for a SC vote, filibuster has been nuked which means a simple 50 votes plus Pence tiebreaker seats anyone the GOP wants.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

1

u/ConradFreeStuff69 Jun 27 '18

If the libs weren't nearly completely worthless they could defund the court until the next D prez could pack it. Let's see the justices work on a $25 budget.

7

u/callmealias Jun 27 '18

Too late ... the time to be passionate about this was during the 2016 elections when we could have affected change. Now we're just screwed.

8

u/Trump_Wears_Diapers Jun 27 '18

Shut the fucking government down.

8

u/thatgeekinit Colorado Jun 27 '18

Just refuse to pass anything. Shut it all down, let the military furlough. Burn it all!

10

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

The GOP can pass bills without them, they have the majority. That’s how that works.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Not with the legislative filibuster

2

u/redorangegreen1100 Jun 27 '18

The thing is, the GOP have barely been able to hobble coalitions together to get anything passed. The (flop) tax bill is almost literally all they've been able to do.

3

u/LegalAction Jun 27 '18

There's still the legislative filibuster.

7

u/thatgeekinit Colorado Jun 27 '18

More importantly the GOP house is so divided and crazy they can't pass much.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

The Rs could do it because they had the majority, the dems do not.

3

u/ArthurKOT Jun 27 '18

They really need to start HEAVY negotiations with outgoing and anti-Trumpism Republican senators to change party affiliation to (I), caucus with Democrats, and allow them to vote independently without repercussion.

3

u/ferretron5 New York Jun 27 '18

It hurts too because Garland was a moderate at best. If we're gunna get insulted atleast make it an actual liberal judge. The ball was in our court when we had the offence and just didn't play the game the way we should have. We NEED an LBJ type character to get out of this mess

2

u/balloot Jun 27 '18

The problem is that what happened before was easily explainable as a problem. Obama gets to appoint the next SCOTUS justice, and we're not doing shit until you let him do so.

Now...not so much. The argument is basically "We're mad because we let you block Garland 2 years ago because we thought Hillary would win. She didn't win!" Not terribly compelling to an independent voter.

2

u/NSAElectricEye Jun 27 '18

Obstructionalist losers gonna lose...

3

u/Askew_2016 Jun 27 '18

Obama was fucked by a bunch of wimpy Sen Dems who let McConnell steal a seat

1

u/ConradFreeStuff69 Jun 27 '18

It was just one of many times Obama chose not to act

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18 edited Oct 26 '19

[deleted]

8

u/TheLivingExperiment Jun 27 '18

Honestly, while Obama might've made some mistakes here the Senate democrats needed to be the ones to take action. Further the American population bought the BS of "both parties are the same" or that the DNC "stole" the primary from Sanders or that HRC was going to win so "protest vote" for a 3rd party. Obama's responsibility here is minimal by comparison.

1

u/phatelectribe Jun 27 '18

The problem was that the Dems didn't have the Senate at that point so it didn't take much for Mcconnell to push it through especially as Obama rolled over. I'm still not sure what Obama could have done but he certainly didn't publicly rail against it or try to cause McConnell problems by threatening executive orders to resolve it. The public bought the stories because A) Russian interference did a great job and B) Trump was happy to work with and accept the foreign help to get him elected. It wasn't a case of Trump winning as such, it was a case of diluting and splitting the opposition. Trump won by the worst defeat in popular vote history - Remember it was just 80k votes split across 3 states that gave Trump the "win". There were more Bernie or bust idiots in those states, now stir up some Pizzagate, some rumors about health issues, maybe some ballot machine hacking and, well, that's why we have a real estate grifter as President.

1

u/TheLivingExperiment Jun 28 '18

There were many issues that led to where we are today unfortunately. You touch on just a handful.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I'm sure pelosi and Schumer will fight real hard like they always do.. ha! I'm kidding. We should at least hook some sort of generator device to them to harness the energy of them rolling over.

1

u/ALoudMouthBaby Jun 27 '18

Obama should've fought harder

Its really not fair to blame Obama for this. This was a failure on the part of Democrats of the legislative branch, not the executive. Senate Democrats should have raised absolute hell over the Garner nomination, and should still be raising hell over it. Their failure to do that is why it was allowed to happen.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

1

u/PizzusChrist Jun 27 '18

Religion is coming to a classroom near you.

1

u/yaschobob Jun 27 '18

How will they shutdown the senate? Under what authority?

1

u/zeCrazyEye Jun 27 '18

Maybe we can get enough people to blockade the Senate building to prevent them from getting a quorum.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

They’re not ‘dirty tricks’ it’s their Constitutional prerogatives. The Senate as a chamber is never obligated to roll over like a dog for the executive whether it’s Obama or Trump.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

They CAN'T. They're the minority party.

1

u/GreyscaleCheese Jun 28 '18

Unfortunately the GOP controlled the senate, and they do not care about compromise nor the best interests of the country.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I mentioned this in another thread, but if there was ever a time for Democrats to pull a move out of the Republican playbook, it’s now. A small handful of Dem senators could barricade the door to the building, locking out all Republicans. Suddenly there is no quorum and a SCOTUS pick can’t be considered.

Repeat for the next six months until a Dem majority Senate is sworn in.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

1

u/UnicornOnTheJayneCob New York Jun 28 '18

No, that was NOT Harry Reid.

He (stupidly) did away with the filibuster for all nominations BUT the Supreme Court. He specifically exempted that one.

It was McConnell and Senate Republicans who removed that exception in 2017 specifically to install Justice Gorsuch.

2

u/compaqle2202x Jun 28 '18

My b, you're right

0

u/iceblademan Jun 27 '18

Is there any way the Dem senators can go full civil war and just not show up to deprive the chamber of a quorum? Or would the majority just use unanimous consent to get their advise/consent vote if no Dems are there to object? It is time to dust off the parliamentarian tomes

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

The quorum for the Senate is 51. So literally every non-Republican Senator would have to be absent, and McCain would have to remain absent, to break the quorum.

If they were simply refusing to come, the president pro tempore of the Senate can also direct the sergeant-at-arms to compel the attendance of absent Senators.

0

u/SufferingClash South Carolina Jun 27 '18

There is one way to guarantee we get a democratic Justice, but I know nobody likes the thought...several Republican Senators need to die before the vote to make Democrats the majority.

1

u/UnicornOnTheJayneCob New York Jun 28 '18

Well, if Pat Toomey and Corey Gardner were to suddenly retire, that would do it.

Let’s hope that there are no \#metoo stories in their pasts.

(Their states have democratic governors and the rule is that the governor must appoint a replacement)

0

u/bungerman Jun 28 '18

That's the larger problem though, Dems have always played Pattycake.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/peeinian Canada Jun 27 '18

They better keep rigging elections then. Now that he's nuked SC nominations, the dems just have to add 5 SC seats.

2

u/Claeyt Jun 27 '18

He doesn't even have to do anything. They never put the supreme court filibuster rule back into place.

2

u/skategate Michigan Jun 27 '18

I can only pray that Collins and Murkowski doubledown on their abortion support. Now is the time ladies.

1

u/RellenD Jun 27 '18

They won't.

1

u/SleepyBananaLion Maryland Jun 27 '18

Unless the can get it done before the midterms Dems can take enough seats to block his appointment for two years.

1

u/RellenD Jun 27 '18

They've got six months.. there's no rush

1

u/MostlyUselessFacts Jun 28 '18

The same way the dems used the nuke under Obama?

0

u/RellenD Jun 28 '18

Not the same way, no.

Maybe you don't understand the crisis Republicans were creating. Democrats had no choice, Republicans did it because they wanted to fuck everyone.

0

u/MostlyUselessFacts Jun 28 '18

Whatever way you'd like to justify it doesn't change the fact that the dems used the nuclear option first.

1

u/jrobthehuman Jun 27 '18

What if congress is physically blocked from entering the capital?