He needs to push hard and fast.
Incrementalists don’t do that.
You mean conservatives, but I agree. Our less-fascist conservative party doesn’t like to even attempt too much progress; it would upset their owners.
You mean conservatives
Incrementalists believe in doing as little as possible and would do nothing if they thought they could get away with it. Conservatives believe in fascism and will implement it as quickly as we let them. Incrementalists believe in letting them.
Just pack the goddamn court. There’s ONE conservative justice on the Supreme Court who was appointed by a president who came to power having received more votes than his opponent, and that’s Clarence Thomas, the man whose loyalties can be bought with a luxury vacation and whose wife aided and abetted insurrectionist traitors.
The ENTIRE conservative wing of the Supreme Court is illegitimate. Every single one of them. And you know what? Thanks to the GOP, it only takes 50 votes to approve a supreme court justice. It used to be sixty, but they changed the rules so they could more conveniently destroy America.
Easier than a constitutional amendment, but it still requires 60 votes in the senate to expand the number of justices in the court.
add ranked choice
Only if the ranking is applied at the state level AND the national level. I’m not going to throw away my vote or my delegate’s vote.
Why not get rid of delegates altogether while we’re at it?
Yes please. As someone who isn’t in a swing state, I would like my vote to matter.
And a popular vote means citizens in other countries could vote (Puerto Rico).
Also, prisoners should get a vote.
And a popular vote means citizens in other countries could vote (Puerto Rico).
I just want to point out that Puerto Rico is not a separate country, it is part of the United States. The people there are US Citizens just like those in the 50 States. However, as a territory they do not have the same representation in government or federal support as a full State.
A lot of people get this wrong. Including some Border Patrol officers. They don’t exactly hire the most educated for the Frontline positions, that’s pretty clear from the stupid clearly wrong or illegal shit CBP ends up doing.
Thank you. I meant to say other territories (hence citizens), since they don’t get a vote. But yeah, a lot of people don’t realize they are part of the U.S.
deleted by creator
Isn’t ranked choice like straight up banned in like 12 states or something? You’d have to flip each of those states first before even going down that road right?
Well, theoretically federal law would supercede state law. But current SCOTUS is kinda wack right now.
Doesn’t the constitution explicitly grant states the right to decide how they hold their elections?
The Constitution is so vague on the point, it doesn’t even require that states hold elections. It just says that the legislature decides how the state’s presidential electors are appointed. That didn’t stop the Originalists on the Best Supreme Court Money Can Buy™ from ruling in the Colorado ballot case that, well, akshually, legislatures aren’t allowed to decide how to run their state’s elections.
Now, you’d think that a ruling that federal law supersedes state control of elections means that federal law supersedes state control of elections, but that principle may only apply to who appears on the ballot. It may only apply to whether their guy appears on the ballot. Don’t pin down the Best Supreme Court Money Can Buy™, man! They need to know who’s going to benefit from ranked-choice voting before they know what the Constitution actually says. Hell, the Constitution may actually contain a list of which states are allowed to have ranked-choice voting, and which are not. We just don’t know yet!
“Biden says more things he’ll immediately abandon on day one to appeal to a left he’s actively working to undermine with multiple bills in congress right now”
Demonstrably false.
Please demonstrate. He still owes me $600.
Wrong
Here ya go: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/biden-promise-tracker/?ruling=true
Edit: I know, you’ll bitch and moan and complain but the facts remain facts
…my brother in Christ,.thats a pretty fucking low number to be out here flexing and saying anyone who disagrees with you is “bitching and moaning.”
Since you’re obviously on the blue MAGA game I’m just going to go ahead and block you now.
- I’m not your brother
- I don’t believe in your sky god
- Nobody’s flexing, merely saying not all promises were broken
- Kindly fuck off
his “top 5” is actually just 3. The other 2 marked ‘compromised’ and ‘stalled’. lmfao Blue MAGA Only-Bidens crack me up.
QED
Lmao You think his top 5 being only 3 real things he’s done is helping your point? That’s crazy.
There’s more to the list, sure. But they could name 3 that were significant enough? Wild.
You can’t reason a person out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.
I’m not sure I’ve read a single political post by facebones that has ever been actually thoughtful. It’s also just “muh both sides!”
QED
This would be amazing if he can do it. At least he’s promising good changes vs trump promising judgment day on day one…
Didn’t he literally say he would take vengeance on all his political opponents day one? Then the Supreme Court gave him absolute immunity?
Yes. He said both what I wrote and wanting revenge, saying he will be a dictator for one day, day one. This video has both clips, if you want to skip to 8:17 for the revenge and judgment day after that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNzzOwiebvM
Hmmm, genuinely improving the lives of Americans vs fire and brimstone and a dictator. Tough choice for Americans in November /s
Get everyone you can to vote in November, seriously. Trump’s faction is barely scraping by. We can do this.
It is weird that they dicked around for 4 years on this, though.
Still, vote blue, your vassals beg you (Australian here).
4 years of daily Republican sabotage of the US government. Democrats are not perfect. They are also not the problem at hand.
inb4 the Supreme Court rules that new laws made about the Supreme Court are illegal. Why even stop there. They can simply rule that ACKTCHUALLY the US is a monarchy and Clarence Thomas is in charge of it all.
I’m down to commit regicide
Become ungovernable instead, whatever that means to you. Refusing to have kids and then living as flat as possible so you can smoke weed is one example of social behavior that harms their agenda a lot more than committing suicide does.
I respect the decision. We all gotta go our particular ways
Imagine shit hitting the fan if Congress passed a law limiting a clearly corrupt court and then the court “ruled it unconstitutional”.
That isn’t going to fly.
It’s not even in the constitution that the supreme court can rule something unconstitutional, they just did it once early on and everyone went with it.
This needs to happen.
There needs to be a true check to the complete corruption of the supreme court.
deleted by creator
No talkie talkie. Fucking do.
Explain how.
Oh Captain my Captain!
Needs the Congress to make them amendments
And if they’re going to do that, they should add all federally elected or appointed people. If you hit the federal retirement age during your term, you’re ineligible to run again. For SCOTUS, if you hit it, you begin the process to step down while a replacement is vetted and approved.
Make every US citizen a Supreme Court justice when they turn 18. There’s nothing in the constitution that says you can’t do that. Put cases up to popular vote every year or two. Also, whatever law passed to do this would count as senate approval because who’s going to strike it down… the Supreme Court?
This is hilarious. I’m sure someone with more bandwidth than me can point out a dozen reasons why this is bad, but fuck if it isn’t funny and appealing.
Yeah but what we have no is clearly bad too.
We’ve already got a partisan court and the decisions affect us all anyway, so…
There’s nothing in the constitution that says dogs can’t play basketball.
There is that basketball court that’s on top of the Supreme Court…does that mean another Air Bud sequel but this time he’s a justice?
This meme is great but it drives me crazy. There are certainly multiple eligibility requirements to play on a school basketball team, including age and being a registered student, which would prevent a dog from qualifying.
Don’t stomp on Air Bud’s dreams.
Hey Biden, why don’t you work on giving term limits for the house and Senate first And then work on term limits for the court.
Honesty kinda conflicted on representative term limits. Longer term people can be out of touch, but they also have a lot of experience and know how to collaborate to get laws passed 🤔
I think congress critters should be seated and dormed together by state, not by party. They would be less vile towards each other. Think of the pizza parties!
What a nice thought, too bad Biden didn’t do anything over two years ago when it would have actually mattered.
What would you have recommend he do?
Not an American, but increasing SC members would seem like a good thing to do. The more people on it, the harder it is to stack.
The number of SCOTUS justices is set by law. The President can’t* appoint more without Congress passing a law adding more.
*Of course, that was before they ruled that Presidents are totally immune from any prosecution, so who the fuck knows now.
The number of SCOTUS justices is set by law.
This is false, there is no law stipulating the number of justices. There have been as few as 6 before, and we could have easily increased that to 23 during the first 2 years of Biden’s presidency if Dems were interested in preserving justice and willing to remove the filibuster.
I’m not sure why you believe this is false? From https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/faq_general.aspx : “Who decides how many Justices are on the Court?: The Constitution places the power to determine the number of Justices in the hands of Congress. The first Judiciary Act, passed in 1789, set the number of Justices at six, one Chief Justice and five Associates. Over the years Congress has passed various acts to change this number, fluctuating from a low of five to a high of ten. The Judiciary Act of 1869 fixed the number of Justices at nine and no subsequent change to the number of Justices has occurred.”
Oh I see, I think it was a misunderstanding. I just meant there’s no law stipulating a particular number. Perhaps the OP could have said it better that it’s “set by Congress,” and they did correctly point out Congress can change it further.
Push for Supreme Court ethics reform, term limits and add amendment to make even the president not above the law.
Like he’s doing
Yeah, but because he only did so after it became obvious that it was a problem because conservatives stacked the court, basically both sides are the same!
it’s almost as if there were barely 50 senators in the senate and it takes 60 to pass anything.
Not that it will get passed now, but if he did that 2 years ago, everyone would be saying that there isn’t any good indication these things are truly a huge issue. Now that it is out that they are taking bribes, working directly in conflicts of interests, and clearly doing things in contradiction to duty, there is a much stronger case.
Making a change with the fundamental design of the of the separation of powers will always be, nearly, impossible, and completely so without strong demonstration of why they need to be changed.
The Supreme Court has always been susceptible to corruption and bribery, which is how corporate power and influence has been expanded to the virtual oligarchy we have today. That said, the current court outed itself as biased and broken when they wrongly handed the 2000 election to W Bush. I don’t believe corrective actions at any point during the Biden presidency could have been legitimately questioned, and certainly not after the SC stripped women of the right to bodily autonomy over 2 years ago.
Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema already said they weren’t going to support that, so what do you suggest the President do without a Senate majority?
Those two should’ve been kicked out of the party a long time ago. Both are up for reelection this year and are not running as a democrat.
What would that have solved exactly? Those seats wouldn’t have been won by anyone further left anyway. The problem is that North Dakota and California get the same number of Senators, despite the former having literally 50x more people.
Which is why keeping the filibuster has generally been in the best interest of the left, even if it’s not ideal right now. I think the Democrats are absolutely fooling themselves if they think the R’s will respect the filibuster if it’s in their way at this point though.
You don’t have to replace them next election with a far left candidate, just one that won’t betray the party like those two shit-heads. You run the risk of losing the seat to the GOP but it was half GOP anyways and its worth it to maintain party discipline. Kick two senators out and no other senator is going to risk their career disobeying the party.
Also what this utter nonesense about maintaining the filibuster? It can be removed with a simple majority and the GOP does so whenever they have that majority. Its been that way for decades. Saying “It’d be nice if the GOP kept the filibuster when they were in power so we will keep it when we’re in power.” is absolute bullshit. Democrats aren’t naiive idealists, they just want excuses to not do what their voters want.
It’s crazy how often I see people doing this; they’re ardently against Trump’s efforts to turn the presidency into a dictatorship, while at the same time complaining that Biden didn’t do x y, or z when those aren’t things that fall under his purview.
What do they want?? Dictatorship is ok if it’s the neo-liberal I like?
Oh then it’s okay he didn’t even try anything until he realized he was so unpopular people are asking him to step down.
That’s not what I said bro.
People need to be upset at Biden not doing things he has the ability to do, not things he doesn’t. Fixing SCOTUS isn’t going to happen without either a major legislative change or now (thanks to SCOTUS) Biden doing some major unsavory things he has absolute immunity for.
On that last part, you’re not understanding the full awfulness of the ruling. The court ruled that the court decides what is and is not an official act. Biden has no immunity because this supreme court will 100% rule that anything Biden does is not an “official act”.
Instead of trodding out the tired old excuses of Sinema and Manchin time and again for doing absolutely nothing, I suggest that instead Biden actually tries something. He could demand they be removed from the party. He could go to their home states in their home districts and loudly campaign for them to come around, all the while screaming from the rooftops how badly their constituents are being screwed by their reprehensible policies and refusal to cooperate. Force them to comply, or ensure their removal from office.
But no, Biden is not this kind of leader. Instead he thinks of them as friends, and would never seek to challenge their positions for a meaningful political agenda. Perhaps this lack of initiative to deliver for the people is why Biden is so wildly unpopular, and hurtling towards a landslide defeat to the criminal traitor Trump in November. Trump may be a totally fake populist, but at least his messaging resonates with the pain and suffering felt at this time by the American people. Of course Trump has no agenda other than self enrichment, but he at least says things that people want to hear. DC insiders such as Biden, Manchin, and Sinema are totally oblivious to that reality.
So, in effect: “idk do SOMETHING”? Or say the magic words that make his opponents agree with him?
There’s an absurd idealism in some circles that saying the right words at the bully pulpit will let you achieve your goals and convince the people standing in your way to acquiesce. It does not work that way.
he has absolute immunity to whatever courtesy of the supreme court.
Biden doesn’t. Trump does. The court ruled that the court decides what is and is not an official act. The court will rule that nothing Biden does is an official act, while Trump could literally murder random people on 34th st, and it would be an official act.
It does not work that way
Sure it does, look at how Trump made everyone bend the knee for 4 years. I’d like to see Biden try is all.
I think I see what you’re saying actually. Because yeah, that did work for Trump. But I think this is a fundamental difference between left and right (or center left and right if you prefer). The right values loyalty above even right wing ideology. The left doesn’t have that same kind of hero worship or allegiance.
What a nice thought, too bad Biden didn’t do anything over two years ago when it would have actually mattered.
He could not have. Nor was he himself convinced of the need, and for good reason, until the SC’s presidential immunity ruling and the more recent evidence of their corruption. I think Laurence Tribe is a good person to get context from, and unless I’m mistaken he has never, before now, called for SC reform despite having written entire books on it. IOW, this is all kind of new.
This might be of interest: How the US supreme court shredded the constitution and what can be done to repair it
Yep, Biden is under the delusion that representatives vote on policies based on what their constituents want.
There’s no way there was enough public support for that notion right after the overturning of Roe v Wade. Even now it’s critical enough to first release he would consider it to test the waters.
I’m wishing he had packed the courts when he had the chance.
Yep, exactly. I remember seeing many warnings in 2021-22 saying that then was the right time to pack the courts. Establishment Dems twiddled their thumbs while insisting that everyone everywhere needs to follow proper decorum and procedure. And now look what happened with the string of terrible Supreme Court decisions.
The fact that the US has to ‘pack the courts’ to get anything through shows how broken the system is.
Not that any other country is better but still, you’d think judges should be impartial and resistant to influence, and yet you get Clarence offering up his chocolate starfish for a vacation in a warm climate
You’re 100% correct.
Plenty of countries are far ‘better’.
Oh probably, but I didn’t want a bunch of Yankees jumping down my throat, and I don’t know enough about other countries’ legal systems to comment
And you think that wasn’t the wanted outcome.
Fuck procedure. Dems need to act instead of just talking about shit. I’m legit terrified for this next election.
He never had the chance, Manchin was pretty outspoken about his opposition to it.
True, I was just dreaming for a minute.
no because that would actually have worked
The skeptic in me says democrats love not being in power cause they don’t have to be responsible for what actually happens.
