Are democrats making a strategic error?

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
by focusing on the RBG replacement issue too much? It seems like they could have waited for a little while to see how things play out and stay on message with Covid until it got closer to the election to really push the issue. Threatening impeachment on the first news cycle day after he death seems like they are overplaying their hand. Why not wait until the Republicans make a strategic error and then pounce on it closer to election day?
 

fried-chicken

Diamond Knight
Jan 27, 2011
10,047
4,816
113
by focusing on the RBG replacement issue too much? It seems like they could have waited for a little while to see how things play out and stay on message with Covid until it got closer to the election to really push the issue. Threatening impeachment on the first news cycle day after he death seems like they are overplaying their hand. Why not wait until the Republicans make a strategic error and then pounce on it closer to election day?
RBG replacement is a winning move for the Senate races.

Look at Susan Collins race. She's done and it's almost all because of supreme court vote 2 years ago.

Democrats have raised millions of dollars in just a few days since RBGs death. It was already likely they would win the Senate but if Republicans ram a justice through, after all the 2016 sound bites we have for Garland, it probably swings 1 or 2 more seats and locks the Senate up.
 

sk8knight

Diamond Knight
Gold Member
Jun 23, 2001
11,681
8,113
113
Are we really asking elected officials to stop doing their jobs when an election is coming up? Where do we draw that line?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
Are we really asking elected officials to stop doing their jobs when an election is coming up? Where do we draw that line?
Texas's legislature only meets every other year. Let's do that with congress.
 

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
Weird how now the "vast majority" agrees with what McConnell did in 2016. I could have sworn it was a constitutional crisis back then.
 

firm_bizzle

Todd's Tiki Bar
Gold Member
Jul 24, 2008
20,432
16,553
113
People don't want to lose their health care or live under "conservative" minority rule. This pick will change everyone's life.
 

firm_bizzle

Todd's Tiki Bar
Gold Member
Jul 24, 2008
20,432
16,553
113
Weird how now the "vast majority" agrees with what McConnell did in 2016. I could have sworn it was a constitutional crisis back then.
McConnell should have let Garland get a vote. The fact that you are going to not vote on someone during an election year means that you can't vote for someone 25% of the time. However, since that is the "rule" McConnell put in place, we should stick to the same rule as a matter of consistency.
 

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
McConnell should have let Garland get a vote. The fact that you are going to not vote on someone during an election year means that you can't vote for someone 25% of the time. However, since that is the "rule" McConnell put in place, we should stick to the same rule as a matter of consistency.
Or we take that as a mistake and return to normal as opposed to treating it like irreversible precedent. It was nothing more than a political move to protect purple state senate seats. I dont think we want to make that part of how we appoint justices ever again, and McConnell should be ashamed that he did it. Its hilarious that 4 years later his chickens are coming home to roost.
 

PhDee

Five-Star Recruit
Sep 8, 2019
951
971
93
by focusing on the RBG replacement issue too much? It seems like they could have waited for a little while to see how things play out and stay on message with Covid until it got closer to the election to really push the issue. Threatening impeachment on the first news cycle day after he death seems like they are overplaying their hand. Why not wait until the Republicans make a strategic error and then pounce on it closer to election day?
Not a strategic error. If Trump gets in his person for SC and wins the election, he is going to have the votes to modify or over turn Roe v Wade. This is a serious threat to democrats who are pro abortion.
 

fried-chicken

Diamond Knight
Jan 27, 2011
10,047
4,816
113
Or we take that as a mistake and return to normal as opposed to treating it like irreversible precedent. It was nothing more than a political move to protect purple state senate seats. I dont think we want to make that part of how we appoint justices ever again, and McConnell should be ashamed that he did it. Its hilarious that 4 years later his chickens are coming home to roost.
Well the easiest way to correct this mistake is to let Biden pick one and then we'll be all squared away never to make that mistake again.

Right?
 

fried-chicken

Diamond Knight
Jan 27, 2011
10,047
4,816
113
Not a strategic error. If Trump gets in his person for SC and wins the election, he is going to have the votes to modify or over turn Roe v Wade. This is a serious threat to democrats who are pro abortion.
No Democrat is pro abortion.
 

Cubs79

Silver Knight
Jan 4, 2014
3,554
1,152
113
Or we take that as a mistake and return to normal as opposed to treating it like irreversible precedent. It was nothing more than a political move to protect purple state senate seats. I dont think we want to make that part of how we appoint justices ever again, and McConnell should be ashamed that he did it. Its hilarious that 4 years later his chickens are coming home to roost.
It wasnt a mistake, it was an intentional political move, and you damn well know if this situation were to come up in 4 years if Biden is president, McConnell would go back to the 2016 standard if he has any power to do so. It isnt too much to ask for consistency from the most powerful people in the country.
 

PhDee

Five-Star Recruit
Sep 8, 2019
951
971
93
It wasnt a mistake, it was an intentional political move, and you damn well know if this situation were to come up in 4 years if Biden is president, McConnell would go back to the 2016 standard if he has any power to do so. It isnt too much to ask for consistency from the most powerful people in the country.
Being consistent isn't a law.
 

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
It wasnt a mistake, it was an intentional politive move, and you damn well know if this situation were to come up in 4 years if Biden is president, McConnell would go back to the 2016 standard if he has any power to do so. It isnt too much to ask for consisentency from the most powerful people in the country.
It was a mistake. I'm not saying it was an honest mistake, or that McConnell was mistaken in his action, I'm saying it was a bad move and shouldn't be a precedent.

What Biden should do is come out and say he would nominate Obama to replace RBG. That would make him a defacto running mate.
 

Cubs79

Silver Knight
Jan 4, 2014
3,554
1,152
113
It was a mistake. I'm not saying it was an honest mistake, or that McConnell was mistaken in his action, I'm saying it was a bad move and shouldn't be a precedent.

What Biden should do is come out and say he would nominate Obama to replace RBG. That would make him a defacto running mate.
YOu cant keep saying it was a mistake, when it is clearly intentional and clearly politically motivated, and none of the Republicans consider it a mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: firm_bizzle

RobUCF

Four-Star Recruit
Jan 12, 2011
127
62
28
Democrats are largely pro abortion. Not sure what you're trying to say.
I didn't make the original statement, but I believe what he means is that those in favor of a woman legally having the option to abort a fetus in certain circumstances are know as "Pro Choice" just like the other side refers to itself as "Pro Life". There is a huge difference between this belief and actually being in favor of more abortions (i.e. Pro Abortion), which I don't think anyone supports.
 

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
YOu cant keep saying it was a mistake, when it is clearly intentional and clearly politically motivated, and none of the Republicans consider it a mistake.
Are you just arguing to argue? Ive said it was wrong. Just replace "mistake" with the word "wrong" if you're going to obsess over a word.
 

Cubs79

Silver Knight
Jan 4, 2014
3,554
1,152
113
Are you just arguing to argue? Ive said it was wrong. Just replace "mistake" with the word "wrong" if you're going to obsess over a word.
I am not just arguing to argue. I am arguing because by using "mistake" over and over you are downplaying that it was the exact opposite of a mistake. It was an intentional move that gave them the desired results they wanted. You cant just wash over that and act like Democrats should just move on because of a simple "mistake".
 
  • Like
Reactions: firm_bizzle

PhDee

Five-Star Recruit
Sep 8, 2019
951
971
93
I didn't make the original statement, but I believe what he means is that those in favor of a woman legally having the option to abort a fetus in certain circumstances are know as "Pro Choice" just like the other side refers to itself as "Pro Life". There is a huge difference between this belief and actually being in favor of more abortions (i.e. Pro Abortion), which I don't think anyone supports.
Fair point. Pro Choice and Pro Abortion are synonymous to me. By Pro Abortion, I was just referring to individuals who support laws allowing abortion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crazyhole

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
I am not just arguing to argue. I am arguing because by using "mistake" over and over you are downplaying that it was the exact opposite of a mistake. It was an intentional move that gave them the desired results they wanted. You cant just wash over that and act like Democrats should just move on because of a simple "mistake".
No shit Sherlock. I know it was intentional, and it was a mistake. Kinda like Hitler starting a 2 front war was a mistake, or Japan bombing the US was a mistake. They knew what they were doing and it was a bad idea (mistake)
 

firm_bizzle

Todd's Tiki Bar
Gold Member
Jul 24, 2008
20,432
16,553
113
I am not just arguing to argue. I am arguing because by using "mistake" over and over you are downplaying that it was the exact opposite of a mistake. It was an intentional move that gave them the desired results they wanted. You cant just wash over that and act like Democrats should just move on because of a simple "mistake".
Exactly. An planned "mistake" that resulted in the taking of 2/9 seats for 30 years.
 

firm_bizzle

Todd's Tiki Bar
Gold Member
Jul 24, 2008
20,432
16,553
113
The only way to fix this is for the democrats to term limit everyone with they get control. House, Senate and SC.
 

Cubs79

Silver Knight
Jan 4, 2014
3,554
1,152
113
No shit Sherlock. I know it was intentional, and it was a mistake. Kinda like Hitler starting a 2 front war was a mistake, or Japan bombing the US was a mistake. They knew what they were doing and it was a bad idea (mistake)
Except in those situations they didnt get the end result they wanted. Republicans got the exact result they wanted, so where is the mistake? You might personally think it is wrong, but the people who actually carried it out dont think it was wrong, and get exactly what they were looking for.
 

PhDee

Five-Star Recruit
Sep 8, 2019
951
971
93
There is no trust if there is no consistency. How do they ever work together again?
I completely agree with you. What I'm trying to point out is that consistency is a losing stance. Currently, politicians have nothing to gain from being consistent, so why do it? Republicans and Democrats run a duopoly and so they have power to be consistent or inconsistent as they please. McConnel made his point about not appointing a SC judge because he republicans had no hand to play. And now it seems the tables are turned. If republicans have 50 votes, then the democrats have no hand to play.

If there is no law prohibiting something, then I think we should learn to expect that politicians are going to use it to it's full advantage. That's how companies, business, and the real world operates. Maximize at every opportunity.
 
Last edited:

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
Fair point. Pro Choice and Pro Abortion are synonymous to me. By Pro Abortion, I was just referring to individuals who support laws allowing abortion.
Weird that saying pro-abortion is offensive to some people. Thats what pro-choice is, so why not own it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDee

DaShuckster

Golden Knight
Nov 30, 2003
7,625
3,181
113
Nobody is trying to take away a woman's right to not have a baby, so there is no "anti" there.
No "anti'?

Taking away a woman's right to choose by eliminating the option of an early abortion from the picture is most definitely anti-abortion.
 

Crazyhole

Diamond Knight
Jun 4, 2004
13,371
6,756
113
No "anti'?

Taking away a woman's right to choose by eliminating the option of an early abortion from the picture is most definitely anti-abortion.
Again. Nobody is trying to take away a woman's right to not have a baby.