11 hrs after this was submitted: 1627 points and 1263 comments yet no longer on the front page. A moderator, please explain.
they didn’t feel like dealing with the users freely expressing themselves and causing fights
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
981–990 of 1001 posts
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#982Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like you are depressed. You should talk to someone about it.
Thank you. I concluded the same and have begun to look for a therapist. RBG has been a hero of mine for 15 years. The impact of her death was my first thought when Trump won. For me, at this time, the glass has 10% of its capacity. But I will find help to see that as 10% full.
I am pleased you are looking for a therapist.
Always keep in mind you are not responsible for, nor could you change, RBG's lifespan. You are not responsible for the outcome of an election. If Trump is reelected it is not because of you, if Biden wins it is not because of you.
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#983Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Senate wasn't setting a precedent, they were simply blocking the nomination from the opposite political party....as is their right. Would have played out the exact same way if political tables were turned.
I think the political tables have been turned that way quite a few times, but it never happened until that time.
Any references and/or dates?
Or just gonna stop there since that's what you'd like to believe?
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#984I wonder if he will go down in American history as a more poisonous senator than McCarthy.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24523218.
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#985Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think my problem with statements like this, is that while I can totally imagine the liberals I know taking this viewpoint, there are very few conservatives I know that do. The response will be something like: “Why would I listen to these whiners? I already know what I want.”
That type of response may result more from lack of education than from political ideology. Where I live, there are a fair amount of educated liberals and conservatives. I run into liberals and conservatives alike who give a similar response to what you listed; I also run into liberals and conservatives alike who have wonderful conversations about politics without getting riled up. From my observations, there doesn't…
All the educated conservatives I’ve met have been pleasant people. It’s just that the far majority have not been educated (as opposed to liberals, which seem to be pretty much all educated, to the point where I feel education and liberalism might as well be the same thing :/).
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#986Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#987Earlier quoted context omitted.
McConnell is pretty transparent about his hypocritical political bullshit: > "Oh, we’d fill it,” McConnell told supporters in Kentucky on Tuesday when asked what he would do if a Supreme Court justice died in 2020 while President Trump was still in office > https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/29/oh-wed-fi... edit: Am I really getting downvoted for pointing out how the current administration already said i…
McConnell has done more harm to the USA than any other politician I can think of in recent memory.
It's beautiful to see someone like McConnell, who understands political power and is able to use it fully and legally w/o overstepping. If Democrats had someone his equal then they would be pleased too.
Please remember that luck (chance) is an important and sometimes decisive component in conflict. Today it seems the Republicans are lucky; who knows what the future will bring.
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#988I think we can all be certain that whoever is appointed by the Federalist Society and approved by Mitch McConnell will make sure Trump wins a second (or third, or fourth, or fifth) term. The American experiment as a free and democratic country is over. Unless you want to live in a real world version of The Handmaid's Tale, get the fsck out if you still can.
Stop with these kind of comments. Do you honestly think the Supreme Court would allow a President to win a 3rd term? “We can all be certain” should be translated to “I feel like making a crazy rant here”. “Experiment is over” - the election is in 7 weeks, let’s hold off on the “get out while you can” comments until it’s over. How confident are you in your statement that the “American experiment is over”? Care to bet…
> Care to bet $10k on there being a free and fair election in 2028? I get “Yes”, you can have “No”.
Coming back to this because we don't have free and fair elections today: https://twitter.com/AnthonyTilghman/status/13073605445597061...
And the Electoral Integrity Project gave North Carolina's 2016 elections the rating you'd give if it didn't have free and fair elections, and more people were wrongly denied the ability to vote in Georgia's gubernatorial election (overseen by the eventual winner) than decided the election, and so forth.
So, I'm interested in potentially taking this bet. Can you define what you mean by "a free and fair election"? (The EIP's conclusions were widely contested, so I'm not saying we should accept them as a standard, but I would like to set an objective standard.)
Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died
#989Earlier quoted context omitted.
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_...
You don't have to agree with it but his point was that the WH and Senate shouldn't contemplate a SCOTUS nominee in an election year if they are controlled by opposite parties. Not hypocritical as that's not the case this time. Also what happens if the election is contested and needs to be decided by the Supreme Court? Can't have a Supreme Court without a justice till January 20th.
> Also what happens if the election is contested and needs to be decided by the Supreme Court? Can't have a Supreme Court without a justice till January 20th.
Strangely enough that same Supreme Court spent most of 2016 without a justice with no issue.
Also, in what world the Supreme Court deciding on the validity of an election with a deciding member having been appointed to it just before that same election by one of the participants does not consist of a massive conflict of interest?