Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Those who refused to vote for Hillary in 2016, and VP Harris in 2024, are complicit in the Supreme Court we have today. [View all]Eliot Rosewater
(34,286 posts)31. Oh don't go and mess up the attempt to derail
A very important thread about a very important issue that will end up in the imprisonment, deportation or death of most people who are not maga.
Please dont confuse my sarcasm and anger that Im talking about you, Im very glad you posted this and Im just using your post to respond to how absurd it is that this thread was almost derailed by another person.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
61 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Those who refused to vote for Hillary in 2016, and VP Harris in 2024, are complicit in the Supreme Court we have today. [View all]
lostincalifornia
Aug 2025
OP
Those who encouraged others to vote third party, or to vote "uncommitted" and not vote in the general...
Oopsie Daisy
Aug 2025
#2
That ideology's First Commandment is Both Sides Corrupt, so it doesn't matter who's president.
betsuni
Aug 2025
#48
And that by not voting for Kamala Harris the court will get even worse.
Eliot Rosewater
Aug 2025
#30
Absolutely, and we would have a different DOJ also. What seems to be missing is that many of the same folks that
lostincalifornia
Dec 2025
#59
That is exactly right, and if I was a betting man, they will before the sociopath leaves office.
lostincalifornia
Dec 2025
#60
Yes and since I am looking back at a pattern, let me point out Bush v Gore, bollixed up by Nader & decided by SCOTUS
Hekate
Aug 2025
#40
Simple, it will include any SC court judges in the next two years, and
lostincalifornia
Aug 2025
#10
I think you are right. They sure don't want a possible Democrat in the WH when they retire.
lostincalifornia
Aug 2025
#38
Thanks. If you're new you're lucky you weren't here for the great purge of 2015
LT Barclay
Aug 2025
#18
Welcome to DU. I, for one, am pleased to have you here. It was a bete noire with me, some decades ago.
NNadir
Dec 2025
#61
This has been the goal of the Federalist Society for the last 25 years since Leo took over.
paulrevere2018
Aug 2025
#22
Once I might understand (although really dumb) but twice - just plain ignorance.
walkingman
Aug 2025
#27
True. They can't say they "didn't vote" just because they didn't cast a ballot in those races.
Beartracks
Aug 2025
#50
The makeup of the Supreme Court was/should have been reason enough to vote for Hillary Clinton.
3catwoman3
Aug 2025
#51