Democrats: Born to Lose

Democrats aren’t used to fighting so they’re understandably nervous about taking on Trump Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch with a filibuster. The good news for them is, it won’t work.

13 Comments. Leave new

  • The Democrat’s leadership of their followers consists in demonstrating the art of following, by example of their subordination to Republicans.
    Democrats gave to the Republicans a Republican health care plan, let it be called Obama Care instead of Romney Care, and still it was rejected by Republicans.

    Democrats give up to Republicans the Supreme Court, which is one of the reasons Democrats give for holding one’s nose and voting for them.

    Obama offered the Republicans the Supreme Court nominee Garland, far to the right in their effort to satisfy them, but the Republicans would not be satisfied with that nominee accompanied by the appearance of a Democratic Party win.

    No, the Republicans wanted a nominee of their choosing along with the appearance of a Republican Party win.

    This is like watching the Harlem Globetrotters beat the Washington Generals again.

    The Democratic Party is a zombie party, a Republican party favor to be beaten like a piñata.

  • The Party, hard at work, defending the American people and what is left of its middle-class!
    With Party’s like this, who needs Republicans?

  • “It won’t work” – well, it won’t if you judge solely by past performance. I haven’t *entirely* given up hope, but I don’t have much. Personally, I’d like to see the filibuster removed from legislative proceedings but I can’t think of a way to do so without also quashing legitimate debate.

    Most likely the Rs will change the rules and squeak the rat in – but that is a double edged sword.

    • Welp, they did it. Now it only takes a simple majority to confirm a nominee to the highest court in the land. They never think ahead to the next vote, do they?

      …but we’ve still got another wingnut ass on that hallowed bench.

  • Do you think that the United States would be in better shape if Clinton had won the election?

    I think McConnell and the GOP would have refused to consider ANY nominee to the Supreme Court, offered by a Democrat.

    They don’t mind changing the rules as long as it’s to their benefit.

    • No! Put the corporate PR for her would have been better!

    • > Do you think that the United States would be in better shape if Clinton had won the election?

      Why yes, yes I do. She would be in far better shape today. Trump’s short term performance has been a disaster, Clinton’s would be much better. Today.

      In the long term Trump’s administration will bring about Regime Change much sooner than Killary’s would have. So he *is* making America great again. (while making Americans grit their teeth again)

  • alex_the_tired
    April 6, 2017 6:48 PM

    The Republicans? Know what they did? They took charge. Know why the Democrats don’t? Because they can’t. Why can’t they, even when they’re in power? For the same reason that talking it out with the neighborhood bully never worked. Because they just don’t GET IT. It’s like someone who can’t dance being told to get out there and shake it. Also, the few dems in charge who do know how to run anything are only interested in keeping the Clinton Corpse animated. I’m waiting for the Chelsea for Congress trial balloon.

    Here’s how the Dems win in 2018 and then in 2020.
    1. Right now. The entire DNC leadership is eliminated. Hand out the cardboard boxes, tell them to pack their shit and hit the bricks.
    2. Bernie Sanders is told. Not asked. He’s told. “Bernie, buddy. You’re gonna run in 2020, so keep taking those vitamins. We need your people out there in the next 30 days beginning the canvassing for progressive candidates. We’re trading in the horse and buggy for a Prius. We have a three-plank platform: universal health care, decriminalization of drugs/amnesty for all non-violent drug sentences, and a complete reworking of how the Democratic Party nomination process works.” The party symbol is changed to a sparrow. “We’ll let the other side be the jackasses.”
    3. Sanders’ people take over the midterm elections and put in some genuine progressive candidates who KNOW HOW TO FIGHT. No crystal waving tree huggers. I’m talking people who have lawyers who will show up with injunctions at Exxon HQ. People who know how to work the press.
    4. After the midterms, roll out the Sanders 2020 campaign: “Sanders. 2020. God help the guilty.” And if anyone tries to set up a tent city, you knock it down. “Get your asses behind a clipboard and start registering the voter drive. Who needs transportation to the polls? Yes, it’s in 18 months, I know that. Do you think the 81-year-old woman who wants to vote for Sanders but has trouble getting down the front steps is NOT going to need help in 18 months? Stop thinking like this is a weekend event. It isn’t.”

    • So true!!!! Most of think about politics only during the campaigns. We should be watching, thinking, and acting all year, every year. They don’t take a break when they are screwing us. Why should we give them as pass and only pay attention when they rarely need us?

  • Stealing the Supreme Court from the Democrats is like taking candy from a baby!

  • Thought for the day. One of the bright boys around here observed that an EVEN number of justices would be better, because if they couldn’t get a 5-3 decision then screw it.

    We could do that one better. Instead of nominating judges who are middle-of-the-road in hopes of getting the other side to approve, we should deliberately nominate a hard-right judge, followed by a far-left judge, hard-right, etc.

    The goal being to stack the court with four lefties, and four righties. Let them fight it out. Even better would be three lefties, three righties and three true middle-of-roadies. But I sincerely doubt that’s achievable.

    • I am soon to be 74 years old (if I don’t croak in the meantime) and NOW I learn that judges (and SCOTUS appointees) have political agendas. All my life I thought their job was to interpret the laws on the books in an impartial manner. Imagine my disappointment at my age.

      • Oh, heck yeah. The Constitution seems pretty straightforward to me – y’d think it’d be hard to misinterpret. Gore-suck has already shown himself to be highly partisan, no wonder the rightards love him.

You must be logged in to post a comment.