[Discussion] Ruth Bader Ginsburg: What Now? or How to stand on the shoulders of a diminutive GIANT.

Pages

Discuss her achievements, the consequences of the lack of RBG, and what we are going to do about it.

In memoriam thread is here.
Reminder of the scope: Discuss her achievements, the consequences of the lack of RBG, and what we are going to do about it. Oh and 2020 can die in a fire.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead at 87.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dead.

RBG wrote:

"Fight for the things that you care about, but do it in a way that will lead others to join you."

"Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time."

"My mother told me to be a lady. And for her, that meant be your own person, be independent."

"Women belong in all places where decisions are being made. It shouldn't be that women are the exception."

IMAGE(https://www.funko.com/craftmin/products/44336_Icon_RuthBaderGinsburg_POP_RENDERS_GLAM_WEB-98412fe26777071f4b1db6347c428ba8.png)

I put one in the general forum, I can pull it if you think that best.

She deserves all the threads. What a woman.

This one in this forum seems like the best place to say things like I assume Republicans are Not going to name someone because we’ve got to allow the election to happen, right? because that’s what we did last time this happened so close to an election.
Or will they just be more bloody hypocrites that totally do something different when it suits them
Who am I kidding I don’t think it’s even a question.

McConnell already said earlier this year that he will fill a seat that opens no matter how close to election. His rationale is that voters only need a say when the presidency and Senate are split.

I hate that man so much.....

If you wanted to galvanize Dem turnout, that would be a real f*cking effective way to do it.

The question is whether we'll see 4 Republicans break ranks if they try and do it. I'm guessing that Romney and Murkowski would probably not confirm. I'm less certain on Collins, who I think has been knowingly using her unearned reputation as a moderate to advance a far right agenda. Other than that? You still need one more so that Pence can't break the tie. I'm not sure I see that fourth person. Maybe Tim Scott? Grassley's had reservations about it in the past.

Jonman wrote:

If you wanted to galvanize Dem turnout, that would be a real f*cking effective way to do it.

If the chance to flip Scalia's seat didn't galvanize turnout what makes you think the threat of flipping this seat will?

This is like dropping a truckload of uranium into an out of control forest fire. This election is going to be a nightmare.

She was a great woman and will be missed. 2020 finds new ways to get worse.

Amazing woman. She fought and fought. RIP.

I hate to say it but I think flipping seats is more galvanizing for the right wing. This would be the clear path to overturning Roe v Wade and I think it would get out the anti choice and Christian vote in droves. I don’t think young voters care much about the SC but I could be wrong.

While I didn’t always agree with her politics, I was always impressed with RGB’s courage and dedication to public service. This is a very sad day indeed.

Odds on how long and how many times Mitch will manage to use the word "unprecedented" with zero shame/self-awareness should Democrats try to push to block a nomination? Just how completely blank will his face goes when journalists start repeating his words, word for word, noting that there is precedent, because he created it?

Sigh, she deserves all the rest and accolades and I wish her soul, spirit, energy, whatever well on whatever journey should exist beyond this mortal ken. But I gotta say, anxiety and dread the likes of which I haven't felt since 2016's election night are hitting me hard tonight.

kazooka wrote:

The question is whether we'll see 4 Republicans break ranks if they try and do it. I'm guessing that Romney and Murkowski would probably not confirm. I'm less certain on Collins, who I think has been knowingly using her unearned reputation as a moderate to advance a far right agenda. Other than that? You still need one more so that Pence can't break the tie. I'm not sure I see that fourth person. Maybe Tim Scott? Grassley's had reservations about it in the past.

Murkowski has already confirmed she will not vote to confirm any nomination made now.

Edit: Never mind, she apparently said this today before the news of RBG passing hit. Unsure if she was speaking in reference to information she'd already received or speaking generally and seeing if she keeps that commitment now that it's real.

Edit: Grassley, however, has apparently already confirmed he's against advancing any new nominations now... and sitting on the Senate Judiciary committee... that could actually be a much bigger deal.

Docjoe wrote:

I hate to say it but I think flipping seats is more galvanizing for the right wing. This would be the clear path to overturning Roe v Wade and I think it would get out the anti choice and Christian vote in droves. I don’t think young voters care much about the SC but I could be wrong.

This, I feel like it almost guarantees four more years of President Trump. Either by simply straight up winning the electoral college due to conservatives showing up in greater numbers, or having enough races be close enough that they go in front of the Supreme Court, which ends up ruling in his favor 5-3.

IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EiPTy9-WsAEPEO_?format=jpg&name=medium)

Well, that didn't take long. 'This time is different.'

*eyeroll*

I’m reading a book of essays on 100 years of ACLU work (The Fight of the Century).
It was rough yesterday to read.
I will not be picking it up again until after election.

I will be working hard to take care of myself.
This hits hard. Very hard.
May donate in her memory.
Did donate. ACLU has banner of her on main page.

If they had any political sense or need to play politics, they would vet and float the candidate out there for awhile and then dangle their nominee in front of the public as a political play to the GOP and anti-abortionists as an impetus to drive them to the polls to vote for them. If it fails and they lose control of the executive or senate, then they shove the nominee through anyway during the lame duck period, if they win, they shove the candidate through during the lame duck period. That way, if some allegations come up a out their candidate raping someone, then they have time to discard and prop up the next one.

Cramming one through so quickly is politically stupid because of how many Republicans are on the hot seat for re-election and the one thing Mitch doesn’t want to be is demoted from Dear Majority Leader; however, I have a feeling that he will assume the spin machine and false narratives that are going to get tossed around will provide enough cover for him to cram it through in two weeks, even if he can’t drum up a lock-step GOP Senate vote.

Ideally, in my perfect world head, they nominate Cotton, he resigns his seat, the vote gets blocked and that empathy-less, hate-spewing gremlin is without a vote anywhere — but 2020 has been bad, like 2008 ARM loans coming due bad, and it’s only going to get worse.

PiP wrote:
Jonman wrote:

If you wanted to galvanize Dem turnout, that would be a real f*cking effective way to do it.

If the chance to flip Scalia's seat didn't galvanize turnout what makes you think the threat of flipping this seat will?

The 2016 election and the 2020 one aren't even in the same ballpark, politically.

Most of the political commentary aside, what an amazing trooper she was to stay in that seat until she passed away. In a saner world, she'd have resigned months ago, but did her damnedest to make it to the next Presidency. I can only imagine how uncomfortable those court sessions must have been.

She led an amazing life and, even if she didn't make her final goal of service to this country, she died trying. The last full measure of devotion, indeed.

I've tried and tried and keep deleting everything I write because nothing is good enough.

So sad. So angry. Despairing right now. She is a titan of US history and godsDAMMIT f*ck 2020.

She was a giant.

I hope we as a nation don't let her down.

~mod~

I think that it may be best to have a memorial-type thread typical of RIP threads outside D&D, which already exists here. I think it would be best, if this is to be a d&d thread, to perhaps focus on the fallout of the vacancy. Mixing the two seems somewhat callous in the context of where the conversation is currently heading, especially regarding someone with a body of work like hers. May we change the title or topic to something that doesn't seem to be a typical RIP thread and adjust the topic in the OP accordingly?

People can honor over there, and people can debate over here. I'm not keen on mixing the two. If people want to argue the political ramifications of her passing, keep it out of the RIP threads. Assuming it's going to fall into chaos assumes we're not going to even attempt to have a standard here, and that can easily be resolved by setting ground rules of topic scope.

Docjoe wrote:

I hate to say it but I think flipping seats is more galvanizing for the right wing. This would be the clear path to overturning Roe v Wade and I think it would get out the anti choice and Christian vote in droves. I don’t think young voters care much about the SC but I could be wrong.

Also this shifts the news cycle away from coronavirus and Trump’s incompetent and uncaring response. That was probably the main thing with any potential to dampen enthusiasm and cause some right-leaning voters to stay home.

Now I expect Fox News to be all Supreme Court all the time (with a smattering of residual “oh no, antifa!”) Trump’s incompetence isn’t as apparent in this issue since all he has to do is let other people tell him who to nominate, then let McConnell go to work while he takes unwarranted credit.

People would have kept the really political stuff here anyway, Amoebic. You may have killed both threads by preventing the natural flow of conversation in this one.

I suppose this might end up being the new nomination catch-all, though.

Malor wrote:

People would have kept the really political stuff here anyway, Amoebic. You may have killed both threads by preventing the natural flow of conversation in this one.

I suppose this might end up being the new nomination catch-all, though.

To be fair, I was particularly disappointed in the universe when I started this thread. This fed my cynicism and placement of said thread. There is likely room for both discussions, but I suspect that in order to discuss what is to come, we also need to discuss what RBG brought us (new nomination included). Anywho, thread title and scope updated.

Anti-Choice voters were already engaged and going to vote for Trump no matter what.

Hopefully, pro-choice, pro health care, pro women/civil/LGBTQ voters and non-voters are now motivated even if Biden wasn't their guy.

Otherwise, the door to Dumb Giliad is wide open.

So much this....
IMAGE(https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/119676069_10221172221089330_3305075467740637453_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=lDpmQ6wfhQwAX_RDcdu&_nc_ht=scontent-bos3-1.xx&oh=1af360b1c4e75cf638414591e7197a02&oe=5F8D4403)

Badferret wrote:

Anti-Choice voters were already engaged and going to vote for Trump no matter what.

Hopefully, pro-choice, pro health care, pro women/civil/LGBTQ voters and non-voters are now motivated even if Biden wasn't their guy.

Otherwise, the door to Dumb Giliad is wide open.

You’re not wrong, but there has been some wavering of Catholics and certain Evangelical groups about the behavior of the president, this administration, and what the cost is for their anti-choice stance over all others. With a possible ‘end’ in sight, as they might see it, they might consider the question as settled as they can stomach currently and vote against the sh*tshow of an administration or representatives that brought them forced hysterectomy, massive covid malfeasance, and ever-growing wealth divide.

Telling constituents that you’d better vote for us to keep those gains isn’t as enticing as ‘a vote for us and we will have those gains’ with regards to abortion because of the nature of the court.

The swamp wasn't drained, Trump and McConnell made it worse.

Pages