I'm losing hope

[SHRED]

Was there simply no way to stop the Grosuch nomination?
He appears to be Scalia on steroids.

The SCOTUS is so devastating that all else pails in comparison.
Why did even one Democrat vote for him??

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. The criminal violation of the constitution by McConnell with Garland was the end of

America for me.

It was at that point I realized even when we win elections, doesn't matter, the cons will find a way to fuck us and fuck us big time.

If you work for a living, the GOP not only doesnt care about you but finds you to be an inconvenience if you do anything but work.

[SHRED]

3. I'm not sure many understand the seriousness here

I certainly have been trying to suppress my feelings via denial.

[Hortensis]

23. Here's another fact to consider: Our constitution leaves the number of SCOTUS positions open.

Congress legislates the number of seats. At first they decided 6, then 5, then 6, then 7, then 9, then 10, then 7, then 9 again.

It's been 9 since the 1800s now, embedded in tradition, but an ultraconservative Koch-packed court could be blasted open at any time by a congress that decided we needed 11, or 15.

We've actually been here before. FDR had to deal with a supreme court which had been strongly conservative for 2 or 3 generations.
At one point over more than a year all the most important parts of his New Deal were struck down as unconstitutional. So he hatched a plan for him, the president, to appoint more justices, which caused a political firestorm. He eventually lost but not before SCOTUS self protectively started upholding some parts of the New Deal, which we have today, and eventually FDR got to appoint a replacement for someone who'd died, changing the balance.

Just something to keep in mind. Every action always causes reactions, every change causes new changes. And there is a fix if it gets too bad.

[rzemanfl]

32. +1 n/t.

[Amishman]

59. The number of justices is defined by the Circuit Justices Act, and would need to be changed.

So easier than changing the constitution, but still would take control of the house, Senate, and white house. Difficult but doable.

[CrispyQ]

11. We're hijacked by people who don't believe in use of government but for themselves (VIDEO)

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029646200

We’re hijacked by people who don’t believe in use of government but for themselves (VIDEO)

https://egbertowillies.com/2017/09/28/people-hijacked-government-use/

"Leaders set a tone," said Anand Giridharadas. "We all know Donald Trump lived until recently in a house with a stuffed lion and gilded every inch. So they live in a world in which people live in gold and don't see the realities which other people live. The amazing thing to build on your point about the jets, there's an unseemly quality to them being in jets. But that's actually not the real issue. The real issue is these people don't believe in the use of government to help people with cancer. They don't believe in the use of government to help people from going into bankruptcy because their kid got a relatively minor illness. But they do believe in the supreme power is a necessity of the United States government flying them places for thousands of dollars, tens of thousands of dollars that you can get, you know, for a hundred bucks on Expedia. So our government has been hijacked by people who don't believe in the use of government except for themselves."

It is imperative that one continue to point out the hypocrisy of this sect. Their words neither matches their actions or the policies they propose.

Everyday the Con stays in office, I have less hope that we'll get our government back. Even if they take the Con down, if GOP leadership stays in place, we're still fucked.

[Hortensis]

24. +1000.

They're the wealthy versions of the conservative neighbor who insists everyone steals from the public kitty so grabs the first chance to do so himself, calling it a chance to "get some of the money I've paid in back." Before others steal it.

Never vote for anyone who says he doesn't believe in government or that all politicians are crooked. Not just a red flag, but a red flag on fire.

[DFW]

20. McTurtle denying Garland was the first knot in my stomach early in 2016

If they were so sure Hillary would nominate a more left-of-center justice than Garland, then the ONLY reason to squash his nomination, beyond thwarting Obama, which was routine at that point, would have been because they KNEW Hillary would not be allowed to take office, even if elected--something they are getting good at arranging.

[davekriss]

38. That's exactly what I thought

I told my partner and friends that the fix is in, McConnell would only block centrist Garland if he knew with near certainty that a Republican would be in office now. It was not a far fetched notion, considering I believe the Republicans stole 2000, congressional races in 2002, and 2004. Funny how exit polls, when wrong, are almost always wrong in favor of Republicans.

Put a fork in it, American democracy is done. Unless we fight to get it back.

[elehhhhna]

52. Well now we know that they knew that the Russians were going to Jack are voting systems

Well now we know that they knew that the Russians were going to Jack are voting systemswhich makes sense of this unprecedented move

[DFW]

54. OK, help me out here

What are you saying/Что ты сказала?

[elehhhhna]

57. They knew the fix was in and decided to go for broke

They knew the fix was in and decided to go for broke. They're criminals, and if they weren't confident they were going to win, they been terrified of who Hillary would have nominated.

[DFW]

60. OK, that I can understand.

I agree that they did not want to contend with any of Hillary's nominees, as they would have been experienced people who would have truly been on our side, AND would have known what to look for.

[Demsrule86]

31. Had we not lost the Senate, it would not have happened so there are things we can do...if some here

and elsewhere would support Democrats instead of blaming them for the sins of Republicans, it would be a start...and no I don't mean you.

[Eliot Rosewater]

33. We lost it and the house because Obama wasnt perfect from the get go so they punished him

He was only able to do something NO prior prez could do, no other prior WHITE prez, by the way, and yet STILL not good enough even for progressives.

[shanny]

35. horse feathers

[Demsrule86]

44. That is the crux of the problem...we have some who are never happy...and the strange thing is...one

would think electing Republicans and losing the courts would make them think...but they are right back at it...blaming Democrats...I have no patience left for these folks.

[Bettie]

53. Makes you wonder

if a Dem president will ever get to choose a SC nominee going forward.

I can see them holding it up forever with secret holds and the like. Even if we have a majority, I doubt any president with a D after his name ever gets an appointee again.

[Chasstev365]

2. Even if they couldn't stop GOP obstruction, they should have raised holy hell over Merrick Garland

It still sickens me that the smug McTrutle, not only got away with it, but now self righteously lectures Democrats about obstructing Trump nominees.

One of the hottest places in hell awaits Mitch McConnell

[CrispyQ]

13. I don't recall much outrage from the dems, at all.

The media reported on it for a week, maybe, & then it was just, "Okay, McConnell gets to do whatever the fuck he wants, rules be damned." I wonder too, how much the dems assumed HRC would win, so they didn't fight this battle. The dems have played by the rules, while the GOP has cheated & lied & stolen their way into power, &now they have their boot on our neck. But hey, we went high when they went low.

[davekriss]

39. This so true

[mountain grammy]

58. I'm afraid you're right about this.

I wrote letters and called the Senate daily for a couple of months.. attended 2 rallies along with a few other people. There should have been thousands of us in the streets. I believe there's plenty of shared blame for this. Republicans will always do what they can get away with and they got away with wrecking America because we don't protest enough.

Nothing good will happen.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

4. I could not understand why Obama wasn't out there

just about every single day talking about how Congress wasn't doing its job, how never before had they completely refused to consider a Supreme Court nomination. But he just rolled over and let them get away with it. No matter how confident he was that Hillary Clinton would win the election, he was still President and his nominee should have gotten a hearing.

I was incredibly disillusioned by Obama's behavior over that.

[enough]

7. I agree. I also think this was a situation in which the assumption that HRC would win

the election made the danger seem less dire at the time.

[Demsrule86]

29. That is total crap..many of us warned about Trump and that those who planned a protest vote

during the General could elect Trump and the response was ...she is worse, and he will bring on the revolution. Trump is a self inflicted wound. I worked my heart out to elect Hillary and would have done the same for Bernie...I understood what it would mean should Trump be elected. Welcome to Trump university...the national version...hope we all survive.

[enough]

47. For gods sake, I have a slightly different view from yours. Of course there were many people

who understood that Trump could very well win. I was one of them and was a strong supporter of Bernie partly because I could see that writing on the wall. My point was and still is that the general mainstream view was that HRC was going to win. My point is that Obama also thought that, which may be an explanation for why he did not fight on this issue. Why go around spewing words like "total crap" among people who agree with you and are carrying the same fucking rage and despair that you are.

[Demsrule86]

49. I am not enraged...I can not discuss the primary as you know.

I will just say that one must win a primary before one can be a presidential candidate...and since I have come to believe the election was stolen... no Democrat would have won.

[SHRED]

8. Me also

I concur.

[LenaBaby61]

10. I could not understand why Obama wasn't out there.

I hear you. Pres. Obama's not really out there NOW.

But anyway ....

I've heard that Pres. Obama could have appointed Garland during a recess appointment, and if he could have why didn't he?

A friend changed his party affiliation from Democrat to Independent a week after the election because he said that Pres. Obama could have done a recess appointment, but he didn't. To be honest, I just don't want to check this out (Don't need to be disappointed if I find out that he could have done a recess appointment) but if anyone off-hand knows if Pres. Obama could have done a recess appointment with Garland

IF he could have, why didn't he? Did it have something to do with that "Flying high when they go low" nonsense?

[yardwork]

14. It would have been undone when Congress was back, so no.

The only way to protect the Supreme Court was for people to elect a Democratic Congress and a Democratic president.

[LenaBaby61]

16. Thanks !!!!

I just didn't want to find out, but to know that he couldn't have makes me feel a bit better

I'll for sure tell my friend what you told me

[Demsrule86]

28. Congress never went into recess during the Obama administration. And the courts ruled against his

one and only recess appointment...I can't believe that criticizing the best president (who was also knee capped by the left left Green riffraff in 10) seems like a good idea.

[LenaBaby61]

37. Sorry .....

But I don't do sheeple very well, and you should know that nobody's perfect.

[Demsrule86]

43. Sorry it is that sort of an attitude...that causes us to lose elections...not supporting Obama is

why we have a gerrymandered congress, lost the Senate and didn't get our judicial pick. And folks who don't want to be sheeple had much to do with it...all that protest voting that the GOP loves so so much...not you of course. Our democracy is being destroyed by Trump and the GOP and some sit here blaming Pres. Obama ...mind boggling.

[LenaBaby61]

46. Whose blaming Pres Obama for everything?

I happened to have had disagreements with him on a several things during his 8 years as President. You're never going to agree with anyone on everything. I never agreed with my late parents on everything, and they were my PARENTS who I loved dearly. I voted for Pres. Obama 2 times, but just because he's president doesn't mean I have to co-sign with everything that he said or did. I agreed with most of what he did during his 8 years in office but not with every single thing. As you know, there was a time when Pres. Obama wasn't on board with marriage equality. HE eventually came around to the decision that I thought was right, which was supporting marriage equality. What, I should have just agreed with him even when he didn't support marriage equality? I guess you were on board with him when he didn't support marriage equality, correct?

Again, NO ONE is immune from criticism. NO ONE. This is not North Korea, this is America and if I disagree with something concerning Pres. Obama or with ANY president or elected official that I vote for that's my right to do so. I've told you already that I won't do sheeple for you or for anyone. Sorry. Now, you're welcome to do sheeple if you like.

[CrispyQ]

15. And where was he when he learned of the Russian collusion?

Oh, that's right. McConnell threatened to accuse him of making it political & we couldn't dare look like we were "tipping the scale" in HRCs favor. Why the fuck not? She was the dem candidate, for fuck's sake. Why wouldn't the WH try to tip the scales in her favor?

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/12/why-didnt-obama-reveal-intel-about-russias-influence-on-the-election/510242/

The dems have been outplayed at every turn. And we're the fucking smart party? This is the root of a lot of anger toward the Democratic Party. Where the fuck is their spine, their fight? They may not have just dropped the ball, they may have lost the game.

[Demsrule86]

27. Quit blaming the Democrats..voters whining about emails like that troll Sarandon helped put Trump in

the White House...the Democrats were basically knee capped so how about supporting the party for a change and that means everyone. All hands on deck to elect Democrats who are the only ones who can stop Trump...stop screwing around with Our Revolution and even Move On...who have decided to primary Tim Ryan in Ohio...the voters betrayed the Democratic Party and are going to pay a price for this...electing Republicans always has a price. You would think after the debacle of 2000, some would have learned their lessons...but alas no they didn't. Vote for the candidate with the "D" next to his/her name and support them once in office. It is the only way and stop criticizing. The Dems have been miracle workers this year. Remember, they have no power at the moment.

[CrispyQ]

40. Why was he quiet?

Why didn't President Obama mention the collusion? Especially after Comey threw his wrench into the works.

The dems have run scared of the fucking media for forty years! It's partly how we got in this mess - fear of being called a liberal. That's why we are now progressives instead of liberals. Note, how once the party hopped on the corporate gravy train, economic/worker policy started to change in favor of the corporations. And now we have a contingent in the party that prefers the label moderate & to keep them happy, choice is no longer a litmus test for party backing. Got it. Let's keep running from our roots - it's worked so well. The fact that the dems lost almost 1,000 state seats & governorships during Obama's term is alarming! WTF! The party totally dropped the ball. This is why the dems have no power & telling long time dems to shut up isn't going to change that fact.

[Demsrule86]

30. Nothing Obama said would have made any difference, and he was out there...so

McConnell refuses to seat our guy which was our right, and somehow it is Pres. Obama's fault? This is why we lose. We turn on our own for foolish reasons instead of fighting the true enemy...Republicans. And some here say the Democratic Congressional members are weak. I would argue that the voters are weak and without their support , there will be no Democratic majorities, and there is no 'magic' issue that can save us.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

41. Obama was not out there pushing for his nominee to get a hearing.

It briefly did that in the early days, and then went silent. He should have been shaming Republicans for their inaction every single day.

And no matter how confident he or anyone else might have been that Hillary would win the election, it was still Obama in office for a year, while that seat remained vacant. HIS nominee deserved a hearing.

So to me, Obama was completely weak in this instance.

[Demsrule86]

42. Stop blaming Obama...they were never going to allow him a pick...don't you think possibly Republican

should be blamed ...just a bit. This had nothing to do with Hillary either. Tired of seeing Dems blamed... why not blame Jill Stein...the Russian princess while you are at it. God knows she and her supporters deserve it.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

45. While the Republicans certainly deserve some blame,

Obama deserves even more because he simply never pushed very hard for his nominee. He basically shrugged his shoulders and said, "Okay. Whatever."

He didn't step up. He didn't fight for his nominee. I was angry at the time, but maybe even angrier now because of what we got instead.

[Demsrule86]

50. Why would he waste his time?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

51. He rolled over and let them get away with it.

He should not have. He should have made it as clear as possible to everyone in the country that the Republicans were (perhaps unconstitutionally) refusing to give his nominee a hearing. He should have been listing on a daily basis every bit of obstruction they were putting up to his agenda. Instead, by saying nothing, he made what they did perfectly acceptable.

[Demsrule86]

55. Not true...honestly the Obama hate demonstrated on this sight is ridiculous.

We the voters let Obama down period...and all the rest is merely excuses.

[GoCubsGo]

5. What little hope I had left evaporated on election night.

Well, except for the hope that the ignorant rubes who elected these assholes will fully suffer the consequences of doing so. Which I believe they will. I only wish that the rest of us would not be suffering them, as well.

[J_William_Ryan]

6. The problem isn't Grosuch

The problem is Trump replacing a liberal on the Court.

[FiveGoodMen]

18. I don't see why it can't be both

[Madam45for2923]

9. All this was foreseeable, but people like Susan sarandon did not give a f*ck!

[VOX]

12. Democracy has pretty much toppled. Concentrated wealth did it in.

And Russian tampering and hacking. We've got our own oligarchs now, and they have the millions/billions to lean on and destroy our republic.

It's under attack by Russia, and it's implications are worldwide and couldn't be more serious.

[SHRED]

17. Summed up

[VOX]

21. I hear you. We're witnessing how most empires fall.

Americans have been turned against one another, and the rifts are wide and non-negotiable. Right now, it's an (almost) bloodless civil war, but that could change as well.

And at the top, massive corruption, collusion, incompetence mixed with deliberate malfeasance, and grabbing all available goodies, courtesy of the taxpayers.

Imagine the mainland U.S. looking like Puerto Rico does today. With the oligarchs sitting in their gold-spray-paint-on-particle board-plus-faux-crystal-chandeliers-over-every-toilet mega-McMansions, all tsk-tsk-ing at the masses of starving humanity who "weren't visionary enough to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and grab the American Dream."

I don't have to strain my cortex to envision that. Very dark times, with more to come. Hang in there-- wherever we go, we're probably all going together.

[Demsrule86]

56. Nope...not letting folks like Susan Sarandon off the hook...and those who whined about single payer

let the GOP take over states and the house just before a census in 10...those so called progressive voters who to 'protest' Pres. Obama even though he had a GOP House handed over the Senate in 14 which is why we have Gorsuch today...we did this to ourselves by 'protest' voting and by not sticking by our party and our president and until people start realizing any vote for anyone other than a Democrat is a vote for the GOP, it won't get better...in fact, it could worsen.

[Joe941]

19. Unions are on the brink with Gorsuch on the SCOTUS...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-to-hear-new-challenge-to-labor-unions/2017/09/28/8b63b732-a453-11e7-b573-8ec86cdfe1ed_story.html?utm_term=.471e28a015a1

[VOX]

22. That asshole is now officially a *major* asshole.

Scalia reincarnated in a white-bread body. He'll only be around for what, 40 years or more?

[Demsrule86]

25. Yes...this is why it was so important to elect Hillary...you know to the victors go the spoils.

And of course elections really do have consequences even once we regain power...the courts will stop us from accomplishing much of our progressive agenda...including single payer in my opinion...kind of funny that. Maybe we can take the Senate back and block all nomination in retaliation for Gorsuch. If all he gets is Gorsuch then it is no different than Scalia.

[Baitball Blogger]

26. We can only continue to keep an eye on him and hope to get video of him

doing something that even the conservatives can't defend.

[mountain grammy]

34. I saw a post.

"I found peace by giving up hope." I'm there too.

There should have been thousands of us in the streets daily protesting the stonewalling of the Garland nomination. I blame myself for not being out there.

I honestly believe Gorsuch has been in the works for a while. The family has a history. A victory for Mother Russia. We've been blindsided.

[librechik]

36. That;s a GOOD thing, I'm told. Hope is not a strategy.

They never told me what to hold onto instead. We're out of the box and on our own.

[Ms. Toad]

48. Doesn't mattter -

he's still scalia. It didn't change the balance of the court. He is reasonable by all objective judicial standards and would have been confirmed whether it took 50 votes or 60. That is why some Democrats voted for him. He is politically distasteful, but he is a well-respected right-of-center judge. Elections have consequences.

Unfortunately "we" demanded a political showdown on what was already a lost cause, and forfeited the ability to filibuster on judicial candidates. Had we not forced their hand, it would still have required 60 votes for the next one. Now, when Trump nominates someone truly horrible, irrational, and completely unqualified to fill the next vacancy (kind of like his Trumpcare bills) - all it takes is 50 votes. If it still required 60, we would likely be able to persuade enough Rs to vote to bar someone that would be a complete unmitigated lifetime disaster like Bork, or Harriet Miers. We would still likely have been stuck with a simple disaster - but that would be far better than whoever Trump will be able to nominate and get through now that he doesn't have to worry about the filibuster.