You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
189 points

So Bernie & AOC are the only ones I’ve heard that call for change of the SCOTUS.

Only ones serving the people & deserving of support in many aspects.

permalink
report
reply
85 points

That’s understandable since they are the most popular.

My city’s senator called it out on the news and it’s not getting any attention from mainstream media.

And remember that it’s only been about 48 hours since Biden can legally assassinate anybody so right now, the news is kinda uncertain how to play this out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

My city’s senator

You mean representative?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Ah yeah that was a slip

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Welcome to America, fellow voter

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

There are others that don’t get the coverage, but yeah, pretty fuckin lame anyway. If only for the fact that they don’t get the coverage.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-23 points
*

They have the luxury of saying things should change without providing an actual plausible path to achieving that change.

AOC championed expanding SCOTUS without worrying about how it could actually be done, or what the consequences would be 10 years down the line.

Bernie does the same. His public statements frequently gloss over the massive hurdles that make such idealistic ideas implausible, like requiring a super majority which is functionally impossible in today’s political climate.

To be fair, I do think that it’s important that idealists voice how things could be in a political utopia, if they also include a pragmatic breakdown of what it would take.

However, virtue signaling in itself without acknowledging reality is also dangerous.

Lemmy is a perfect example of it. Lots of dissatisfaction with the status quo, and a whole lot of impossible ideas floating around like “there are obvious solutions that establishment politicians just refuse to consider”, when they just aren’t feasible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

The other side of that coin is that if there is no demand for change, no one will be pressured to work out the logistics required. All change starts with people demanding a solution.

We need a solution right now more than we need a perfect plan of execution. The solution is being called for, to expand the Supreme Court to balance the blatant corruption pouring from the conservative justices. That’s the first step

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

We need a solution right now more than we need a perfect plan of execution.

I agree. But IMO, the proposed solutions don’t have a chance in hell of being passed, because of the reality of needing a super majority. Either to impeach a SCOTUS judge, or to reform the SCOTUS rules.

And I think the messaging should focus on the need for a super majority to impeach these corrupt judges, as well as pass reform. The messaging should highlight the republican representatives refusing to cross the aisle to fight this blatant corruption.

And most importantly, highlight what can be done if voters give the Dems a super majority.

Yeah, it’s not going to happen, but instead of AOC and Bernie just floating impossible ideas, we need to focus on how voters can give the Dems the power to actually fix these problems. And without that super majority, there is very little that can be done.

Because the current approach makes the Dems seem ineffective and only serves to disenfranchise voters, when we really need to put a fire under voters to put a fire under the Republican half of our government to either cross the aisle or GTFO.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

They’re feasible with a voter mandate. You get that mandate by building it in your platform and getting elected on it with sufficient margins. The Democratic party, however, is not a revolutionary party but a status quo party and refuses to go that route because they’re afraid of losing. So they just lose by default.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

My point is that there is no good in this scenario. The proposed solutions are literally impossible.

See my other reply in this thread for a better explanation.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 448K

    Comments