Fri Aug 13, 2021, 06:59 AM

gab13by13 (9,973 posts)

Nicolle Wallace bashing

On Thursday night, the Supreme Court issued a new injunction against a New York state law meant to shield tenants from eviction in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. But the order came on what's known as the shadow docket, which means the majority's decision is unsigned and typically offers little to no defense for the court's action.

What does this have to do with Nicolle? Nicolle, and, by the way, Chris Hayes and Rachel, have been beating the drums for Senate Democrats to do something to counter the GQP anti-democratic election/voter laws. Many people are under the false assumption that Marc Elias will defeat those GQP laws. Reality check; Marc Elias said that he can't beat back these himself. Elias said that some of those laws will be blessed by our partisan SC. Elias said that 4 justices have stated that states have "absolute power" regarding elections and voter laws. Elias, Nicolle, Chris, Rachel, have "all" said that Democrats need to pass federal legislation, federal protection. People here who don't want to hear that, who are whistling past the graveyard, are doing our country a disservice by believing that we can win elections by "getting out the vote."

Chuck Schumer needs to cut back on the Senate's month long vacation and get to work and that's not bashing Democrats, that's talking turkey. The SC we have will not overturn every or maybe any of those GQP anti-democratic laws. We should be talking about adding justices to the court to save our democracy but I bet that idea will be shot down because it is too progressive.

Rant off.

13 replies, 1401 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

13 replies	Author	Time	Post
Nicolle Wallace bashing (Original post)	gab13by13	Aug 2021	OP
Good lord.	NurseJackie	Aug 2021	#1
rebalancing the SCOTUS is a non-starter w/ this Senate, there are at least 5, and as many as 10 Dem	Celerity	Aug 2021	#2
They aren't institutionalists	gab13by13	Aug 2021	#5
I do not want to get into labelling wars, suffice it to say they are opposed to both SCOTUS & lower	Celerity	Aug 2021	#7
And of all the people you mention, this is Nicole's fault?	Scrivener7	Aug 2021	#3
No, she is the only one who gets bashed here.	gab13by13	Aug 2021	#4
I understood what you meant, but IF people did not see the finger-wagging against her by some, they	Celerity	Aug 2021	#8
I'm not a regular viewer of MSNBC,	Haggard Celine	Aug 2021	#6
"....as good as Chris Hayes, and they don't complain about him." Not true. This is DU. We...	Tarheel_Dem	Aug 2021	#12
Well, I guess I just haven't seen it.	Haggard Celine	Aug 2021	#13
The bottom line is the votes aren't there, and I am not sure why some cannot seem to	JohnSJ	Aug 2021	#9
Let's carry this out to the end.	gab13by13	Aug 2021	#10
Wasn't your OP focusing on the evictions? The Maxine Waters bill can be passed through	JohnSJ	Aug 2021	#11

Response to gab13by13 (Original post)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:06 AM

NurseJackie (42,862 posts)

1. Good lord.

We should be talking about adding justices to the court to save our democracy but I bet that idea will be shot down because it is too progressive.

Oh, please.

Reply to this post

Response to gab13by13 (Original post)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:15 AM

Celerity (29,024 posts)

2. rebalancing the SCOTUS is a non-starter w/ this Senate, there are at least 5, and as many as 10 Dem

Senators against it (expansion). Institutionalists run the road atm.

Reply to this post

Response to Celerity (Reply #2)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:20 AM

gab13by13 (9,973 posts)

5. They aren't institutionalists

that is their excuse.

Reply to this post

Response to gab13by13 (Reply #5)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:33 AM

Celerity (29,024 posts)

7. I do not want to get into labelling wars, suffice it to say they are opposed to both SCOTUS & lower

Federal Judiciary expansion. Even we somehow buck history and go +3 (hold all 4 of our at risk seats, GA, NH.AZ, and NV and sweep the 3 that are the only good chance ones for Dem pickups PA, NC, and WI) in 2020, and even if those 3 new Dem Senators are all pro expansion, we still do not have the votes. Even if DeathSantis helps destroy Rubio's chances and Crist slips in (so +4, a dream finish) we are still short.

Reply to this post

Response to gab13by13 (Original post)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:15 AM

Scrivener7 (42,400 posts)

3. And of all the people you mention, this is Nicole's fault?

Reply to this post

Response to Scrivener7 (Reply #3)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:18 AM

gab13by13 (9,973 posts)

4. No, she is the only one who gets bashed here.

Elias, Hayes, Maddow, all get a pass.

Reply to this post

Response to gab13by13 (Reply #4)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:35 AM

Celerity (29,024 posts)

8. I understood what you meant, but IF people did not see the finger-wagging against her by some, they

may well be confused.

Reply to this post

Response to gab13by13 (Original post)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:24 AM

Haggard Celine (15,222 posts)

6. I'm not a regular viewer of MSNBC,

but I have seen Wallace's program many times and I don't have a problem with her. I don't know what it is that some people don't like about her. She's at least as good as Chris Hayes, and they don't complain about him.

Anyway, I agree that Congress needs to pass legislation to counter the laws passed in red states. I don't know if they need a special session to do it, but they need to get that done.

I disagree that we need to try to add seats on the SCOTUS right now. We don't have the political capital it would take to get that done.

Reply to this post

Response to Haggard Celine (Reply #6)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 09:01 AM

Tarheel_Dem (30,987 posts)

12. "....as good as Chris Hayes, and they don't complain about him." Not true. This is DU. We...

"complain" about everybody. I, personally, can't stand Chris Hayes. I immediately reach for the remote the moment his smarmy face pops up. So, everybody gets complaints here at DU.

Reply to this post

Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #12)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 09:18 AM

Haggard Celine (15,222 posts)

13. Well, I guess I just haven't seen it.

It's just bullshit anyway.

Reply to this post

Response to gab13by13 (Original post)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 07:51 AM

JohnSJ (83,645 posts)

9. The bottom line is the votes aren't there, and I am not sure why some cannot seem to

comprehend that.

The time to address this was in 2016, when we lost the SC, with the help of some self-identified progressives who refused to vote for Hillary in the general election, by either not voting, or voting third party

and it didn’t take too much. In every critical swing state Hillary lost by less than 1%, and in those critical swing states Jill Stein received 1% of the vote

Some seem to forget about 2016, but 2016 was the result of not learning the lessons from 2000

United we stand, and divided we fall, and the SC does matter

The only thing we can do now is try to pass the bill introduced by Maxine Waters at the end of July

post haste, and if that means the August recess is cancelled, then so be it

https://financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=408261

Reply to this post

Response to JohnSJ (Reply #9)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 08:01 AM

gab13by13 (9,973 posts)

10. Let's carry this out to the end.

Let's say that Democrats get a good election/voter protection bill passed. What will the GQP do? It will appeal this voter protection bill to the SC where 4 justices have already stated that the states have absolute power to run their elections.

Then what? Minority rule forever?

Reply to this post

Response to gab13by13 (Reply #10)

Fri Aug 13, 2021, 08:31 AM

JohnSJ (83,645 posts)

11. Wasn't your OP focusing on the evictions? The Maxine Waters bill can be passed through

reconciliation. That was the remedy actually suggested by the SC a few weeks ago, when some were criticizing the Biden administration for not using an executive order to extend the eviction moratorium. The SC made it clear that wasn’t going to fly

As for the voter suppression bills being passed by some states, the issue which has not been addressed by the SC is overturning the results of an election by republican operatives if they don’t agree with the results

I am not sure how the SC will rule on that. Not only does that have Constitutional implications, but if that is allowed to stand, I think that will be the preamble to the end of our republic

If we cannot win local and state elections, because a political party will overturn the results, it’s over.

Reply to this post

General Discussion (Forum)