Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 1001 posts

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#501

Post by danielheath »

slg wrote: post #455
op03 wrote: post #188

Remove the Publicly visible Like Count and those kind of conversations and connections are easy. The Like count makes people defensive or aggressive especially when they are called out in public leading to never ending reaction and counter reaction cycles. Without that dumb random signal interfering in conversations all kinds of strange connections are possible. I see it at work meetings between highly competitive pe…

I'm sorry, but this is wildly naive. It isn't "likes" that are causing the problem. It is things like the fact that one side appears to be in the early stages[1] of a UN defined genocide[2]. I'm not going to be friendly to you if you think lower taxes or some other excuse is more important than the human and civil rights abuses that party supports. [1] - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/09/17/hyster...…

The whole reason most people join that side is that it’s no longer safe to publicly express any opinion that isn’t either anodyne or extreme. This generates constant, subtle pressure which - over years - drives increasingly extreme behaviour.

Yes, I think the far right have gone much further than the far left in that regard; however, IMO its a question of when, rather than if, social progressives take up arms (given the path I see social media taking).

We need to get off public-by-default platforms that feel semiprivate. Everyone gets bad/wrong ideas; talking about them with our friends is how we stop them before they become part of our identity, but it’s no longer safe to do that.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#502

Post by SN76477 »

BooneJS wrote: post #492

Unsurprising. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/09/18/reaction-... > Breaking: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who refused to consider President Obama’s choice months before the 2016 election, said in a statement Friday hours after Ginsburg’s death: “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

Such a lack of empathy from him.

I am deeply disappointed at anyone celebrating her loss.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#503

Post by patcon »

seibelj wrote: post #178
theshadowknows wrote: post #162

Absolutely. My family is feverishly working on how to leave this hellscape of a country we’re in. The United States is dead.

I’m sad to say you may find the grass is always greener on the other side - government corruption exists everywhere that government exists.

Honestly, no. The USA is uniquely fucked up. Seriously, everyone else in the rest of the stable world-leading countries is looking in with disbelief every week

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#504

Post by ianai »

tomjakubowski wrote: post #352
cwhiz wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Senate doesn’t actually have to vote to confirm a Supreme Court justice. > and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court There is nothing except precedent to say the President can’t just directly appoint justices. And then when the appointments are inevitably challenged, who would ultimately rule on it? The Supreme…

Proposed patch: in cases like this where all of SCOTUS has an obvious conflict of interest, the decision is made by a single judge who is elected to an N year term by a national popular vote for only this purpose. Democracy saves the day?

I think the patch including a general election is good. But I think say every 5 or 10 years a justice is given an approval vote-have it rotate across the bench and one or two per year, not many. I’d they get less than 67% approval then they’re removed until after the next general election-no fillers until then. Give a time lag to let people consider their first choice before the second choice is made.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#505

Post by JacobAldridge »

bonzini wrote: post #8

Of course a president should not appoint a judge on the last few months of his term, should he?

At what point should a President, especially in their first term running for re-election, stop being able to fulfill parts of their duties?

Declaring war? Responding to an attack? Talking to other world leaders? Advocating Congress to act on matters? Signing bills into laws? Naming post offices? Being allowed into the Oval Office?

Independent of this specific situation, there has to be a line drawn somewhere. And that line is Inauguration Day. (A case could be made that some powers cease on Election Day for a lame duck President.)

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#506

Post by awb »

alex_young wrote: post #122
adzm wrote: post #26

> According to her granddaughter Clara Spera, Ginsburg said, “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/13071014175225610...

There would seem to be precedent for this now. Justice Antonin Scalia died in February of 2016, a replacement was nominated in March of 2016, and because Scalia's seat had become vacant during an election year, the Senate would not even consider a nomination from the president [0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...

McConnell is on the record saying he would seat a justice during Trump's reelection.

There are no principles, just power struggles.

If HRC was president, McConnell would follow his 2016 policy. With Trump president he'll make a new policy.

There are no repercussions for bringing home the bacon to your constituents at any cost.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#507

Post by rectang »

rayiner wrote: post #451
notafraudster wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McConnell immediately clarified his position was "the Senate shouldn't consider a nomination in an election year if it's controlled by my party and the president isn't in my party" -- no kidding, this was his actual clarification.

That is, in fact, the actual practice. The constitution splits the appointment between the presidency and the senate. When the same party controls both, vacancies are filled immediately. Otherwise, the party controlling the senate can exercise its heckler’s veto: https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-sid... What happened with Garland had happened numerous times before: > In short: There have been t…

The proper response to this cynical argument is to pack the court.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#508

Post by kilroy123 »

theshadowknows wrote: post #162

Absolutely. My family is feverishly working on how to leave this hellscape of a country we’re in. The United States is dead.

I've been living abroad for almost 6 years. I definitely recommend anyone interested to try the same. It's not without challenges.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#509

Post by chris11 »

tyre wrote: post #411
zanny wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obama didn't assume anything. He was a senator for 12 years (federally for 4) and had plenty of experience by that point to know how partisan legislative bodies are and how members will die for their parties perceived glory. I don't believe for a second that in the aftermath of Clinton's impeachment & Gore's 500 vote loss in the state being governed by his opponents brother with tens of thousands of votes lost or mis…

I agree on Obama. Biden played a large part as well. Remember that they got rid of a public option in negotiations to win Republicans over. And got zero Republican votes. Obama was many things, but he was not good at congressional politics. He saw himself as about the fray, and it showed.

Joe Lieberman killed the public option in Obamacare. He threatened to vote against the bill if a public option was included.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#510

Post by [deleted] »

DenisM wrote: post #424
jagger27 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that widespread conflict is exactly what Trump republicans want. Just this weeks' news: mass hysterectomies in ICE camps, Trump's tirade on rewriting school history books on slavery, overt mail service destruction, more anti-mask rhetoric, and the list goes on and on. They're putting the pedal to the metal.

>mass hysterectomies in ICE camps It seems quite a bit over the top. Do you really think it's true?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN