Amy Coney Barrett

[Kevin]

It works for so long as either side can motivate its base to show up and only so long as the people retain ultimate power. Most are predicting a flipped Senate and a Biden presidency. Not only do I predict that they will expand the SCOTUS. I think they'll pack the Article III courts as well, which is probably warranted as their case load and the populations they serve have expanded, so there's almost certainly a decent rationale there.

And of course, why stop there? Statehood for D.C., maybe turn California into some sort of gerrymandered mess of new states in order to pack the Senate and really consolidate power.

Abd why stop there? Then how about disbanding the electoral college and electing the President by popular vote?

The natural progression of what you propose foresees a back and forth equilibrium. The only logical step for either party is to do whatever it can to upset the equilibrium and place themselves in an unassailable position. This is how dictatorships begin.

When I recall the fall of the Roman Republic and how that transpired, it seems we're standing on the precipice of something like that.

[Kevin]

Except this is not a case where mutually assured destruction exists. History has shown us that with Republics, there are means by which the will of the people can be circumvented or rendered symbollic. Take Russia and just about any other Republic-in-name-only. It's the same story.

One side can win and the other side can lose. Recent months have shown us that large segments of our country would be fine with that.

That is kind of where you'd expect the GOP to slide as the country is becoming less white and trending Democratic. If Texas becomes a blue state, the GOP, given its current policies, might nearly become irrelevant.

Back to the topic at hand though--the last time any President had to threaten to expand the Court was under FDR. And at that point, the body that blinked first was the Court. Roberts, it would appear may be malleable. I think Gorsuch is maybe more malleable than anyone thought. Especially considering his work on the McGirt case, which has the justice system in my State overwhelmed.

[Cheerio]

Billy Joel once sang, "We Didn't Start The Fire", too.

[Kevin]

I'll maintain a respectful dialog with you if you'll not refer to Democrats as rats. FWIW, I am a Republican. And before the complaint that I'm being unfair with you. I pruned the vitriolic back and forth on the last page or so. I don't have any intention of manicuring the rest of the thread. If that upsets someone's post count, my deepest sympathies.

[What?]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'll maintain a respectful dialog with you if you'll not refer to Democrats as rats. FWIW, I am a Republican. And before the complaint that I'm being unfair with you. I pruned the vitriolic back and forth on the last page or so. I don't have any intention of manicuring the rest of the thread. If that upsets someone's post count, my deepest sympathies.

I appreciate this dialogue. You are both articulate and well informed. I wish that more people would leave the comfort of their echo chambers to engage in similar discussion.

[TriDeltaSallie]

Kevin and Ronaldo -

I truly appreciate the civil and informative dialogue (minus the Rats). It's refreshing to see people actually discuss ideas in a substantive way.

Kevin mentioned that he expected Biden to win so I wanted to offer a different perspective. By way of background, I'll give this.

Two weeks before the last election, I publicly predicted Trump would win. Not on a whim, but because I spent the better part of a month really digging into all the information I could find. I had come to that conclusion, but when Michael Moore basically said what I was thinking I knew I was probably right. We are polar opposites in nearly every way, but he had observed the same things I had. This was a big switch for me to come to this conclusion because I had not even taken Trump's candidacy seriously in the beginning.

My husband was convinced about Trump fairly early on because he noted that Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Trump were consistently getting 70% of the primary votes. All three were change candidates.

I strongly believe that as of today Trump is on track for a landslide victory for multiple reasons. I came to this conclusion because I take in a lot of information and look for patterns. I'm a big picture person so I analyze and synthesize information constantly. I notice things that most people never see and see the various ways they are connected. It's just the way I'm wired.

These are the reasons I see a landslide for Trump (in no particular order). None of these are enough to push him over the top again on their own, but put together I think they show a big picture win for him.

Trump will have lost almost no one who voted for him last time. People who voted solely because of the Supreme Court feel validated.

Trump will pick up a significant number of Conservatives and Christians who were uncertain and didn't take a chance on him so they voted third party or didn't vote for President. He will have met their criteria this time in terms of issues that are important to them.

Trump has a 90%+ approval rating with Republicans

The Walk Away Movement represents a significant number of formerly dependable Democrat voting blocks (minorities, gays, etc.)

The Blexit Movement

Other former Democrats with strong Youtube and social media followings who have become vocal Trump supporters such as Dave Rubin, Karlyn Borysenko, Tim Pool, etc.

The DNC released no polling results after their online convention

Support for BLM, Inc. has dropped dramatically since summer to only around 39%. They also recently scrubbed their website of a substantial number of Far Left and anti-family beliefs/policies leading me to believe that the DNC realized via polling numbers this was hurting them

Increasing numbers of people speaking out against all topics related to white fragility, anti-racism, etc. which was not happening just four to six weeks ago

Homeschooling has doubled this year. Not school from home, but legitimate homeschooling.

School choice is becoming a front burner issue for more people now that they have peeked behind the curtain of public education as it currently exists.

Many people are now fully aware of the existence of critical race theory and what it means

There are now 5 million new gun owners in 2020

Stony Brook professor, Helmut Norpoth, is predicting a Trump landslide. He correctly predicted Trump's last win.

Trump has made major inroads with the black community. In the past it was said that if a Republican could get 15% of the black vote, the Democrats could not win. I think Trump is on track to get much more than 15% of the black vote.

The combination of China - NBA - coronavirus - human rights abuses in China - Hong Kong - medical supply chain issues means many people would choose Trump to deal with China over Biden

Most people do not believe that the USA is a racist or evil country no matter how many times talking heads on TV try to tell them that it is

Most people do not believe they are racist nor do they believe their neighbors are racist no matter how many times Robin Diangelo and Ibram X. Kendi tell everyone they are

Riots and violence push people toward law and order

Trump is getting all of the law and order endorsements which means he will be getting the vast majority of those votes

Voter enthusiasm is overwhelmingly for Trump. It was watching Trump rallies streamed on YouTube that in part convinced me he was going to win in 2016.

Re: the streamed rallies on YouTube. In the past, there would be approximately 20k people watching the stream on the independent channel I use to monitor them (Right Side Broadcasting). Lately there have been 95k-120k watching each rally.

Trump is campaigning in Minnesota which means he clearly thinks he can win it

Attacking Amy Coney Barrett's adoption of her children was a big mistake

Kamala Harris is such a liability that they aren't allowing her to take questions. She was so unpopular in her own party that she dropped out before the first primary voting took place. She is incredibly unlikeable by almost any standard.

People have to choose someone to oversee the economy and Trump is more desirable than Biden

We are seeing very little polling information being pushed out which means it isn't favoring Biden

Many Trump supporters, Conservatives, and Republicans have openly admitted they will not answer a polling call or will lie.

That's my list. These are observations so take them for what they are worth. I'm not going to defend any of them since they are simply observations. People can choose to disagree if they are important or not. At this moment, it's a Trump landslide. The media is not helping by lying about this.

And speaking of Amy Coney Barrett, I wrote a piece on my website about how I think wokeness has the potential to damage NPC sororities. I've mentioned some of this before in discussions here, but when I saw the Kappa Delta Facebook meltdown over Barrett I decided to finish a post I had started. I'll share the link if anyone wants to read it.

My two cents. Your mileage may vary.

Breaking Our Bonds: How Wokeness Will Destroy National Panhellenic Conference Sororities

[Sister Havana]

Originally Posted by Ronaldo9

I would just note, however, that the Democratic Party would have the power to block and filibuster the ACB nomination right now except McConnell removed the filibuster on SCOTUS judges. He did that to make good on a promise he made to the Democrats that he would take that course of action if they used their 2011 Senate majority to remove the filibuster on Circuit and District court judges, which - despite the warning this would be the response - they did.

So, yes, we are seeing the raw exercise of power inviting the next, however, this process was set in motion - not this year - but in 2011 and by Harry Reid. In other words, were it not for an action taken by Harry Reid nine years ago, there would be no chance ACB will be confirmed the week after next as will happen.

Let’s remember why Reid and the Democrats changed the rules to remove the filibuster for all but Supreme Court nominations. It’s important to understand it in context. McConnell and the Republicans used the filibuster a then-unprecedented amount of times to block or stall pretty much all of Obama’s appointees. They filibustered appointees they all agreed were qualified, for no other reason than Obama was doing the appointing. They even filibustered Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Secretary of Defense - yes, that would be former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel.

The event that was really the tipping point for the rule change was when Obama nominated three judges to fill three vacant seats on the DC Circuit Court. Not only did Senate Republicans scream and yell about how Obama was court-packing (by filling existing vacancies!), but they even introduced legislation to remove those three seats from the DC Circuit so Obama could not appoint people to fill them. (It didn’t pass, obviously.) This was the climate in which the rule was changed. Harry Reid didn’t do it just for fun.

And if the filibuster hadn’t been removed during the Obama years, anyone who thinks Mitch McConnell wouldn’t have done it himself the first time Democrats tried to filibuster any of Trump’s nominees has not paid attention to Mitch McConnell.

[What?]

Sallie, I applaud your perspective and continued willingness to make well reasoned points that have proven unpopular on this forum.

I hope that I am proven wrong, but like Ronaldo, I do not share your optimism. I am terrified of the voter fraud that MSM sweeps under the rug.

Originally Posted by Ronaldo9

Great perspective, TDSallie. I wish I shared your optimism that the Chief will win and win big. I don't but I hope you prove me massively wrong!

However, even if the Chief doesn't return to office we are still in a very enviable position. The opposition will have put in power a president who has committed to being a one-termer and who will enter into office with intensely low enthusiasm and burning skepticism from within his own party. That means, in 2024, we will not have to face an incumbent, we will be in the rare position of having a fresh election after just four years. There will be victories and losses in the next several decades of the National Reorganization Process but it is at the point that it can't be stopped by a single election that goes against us. The party is in an excellent position!



+1

[thetalady]

Originally Posted by What?

Sallie, I applaud your perspective and continued willingness to make well reasoned points that have proven unpopular on this forum.

I hope that I am proven wrong, but like Ronaldo, I do not share your optimism. I am terrified of the voter fraud that MSM sweeps under the rug.

TriDeltaSallie, loved your analysis. Thank you for your perspective. Like What?, I fear the possibility of massive voter fraud. Seeing states that are dragging out voting now to a week after Nov 3 makes it clear that this election is going to be full of fraud. Already finding large numbers of ballots trashed. Conspiracies for vote harvesting in older populations already running rampant.

[carnation]

Hey, my daughter got sent a ballot. She passed away in 2018.

[TriDeltaSallie]

Originally Posted by What?

Sallie, I applaud your perspective and continued willingness to make well reasoned points that have proven unpopular on this forum.

I hope that I am proven wrong, but like Ronaldo, I do not share your optimism. I am terrified of the voter fraud that MSM sweeps under the rug.

I agree that voter fraud is a huge concern. Trump wins in a landslide for the reasons I've outlined (and several more points I've thought of since I published it). But, yes, there is an all-out effort to undermine the election.

A lot can happen in a month. That's why I said "as of today" I think he wins in a landslide. Something could change that and I would be the first to reassess my thinking and expectations.

[Shellfish]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

Kevin and Ronaldo -

I truly appreciate the civil and informative dialogue (minus the Rats). It's refreshing to see people actually discuss ideas in a substantive way.

Kevin mentioned that he expected Biden to win so I wanted to offer a different perspective. By way of background, I'll give this.

Two weeks before the last election, I publicly predicted Trump would win. Not on a whim, but because I spent the better part of a month really digging into all the information I could find. I had come to that conclusion, but when Michael Moore basically said what I was thinking I knew I was probably right. We are polar opposites in nearly every way, but he had observed the same things I had. This was a big switch for me to come to this conclusion because I had not even taken Trump's candidacy seriously in the beginning.

My husband was convinced about Trump fairly early on because he noted that Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Trump were consistently getting 70% of the primary votes. All three were change candidates.

I strongly believe that as of today Trump is on track for a landslide victory for multiple reasons. I came to this conclusion because I take in a lot of information and look for patterns. I'm a big picture person so I analyze and synthesize information constantly. I notice things that most people never see and see the various ways they are connected. It's just the way I'm wired.

These are the reasons I see a landslide for Trump (in no particular order). None of these are enough to push him over the top again on their own, but put together I think they show a big picture win for him.

Trump will have lost almost no one who voted for him last time. People who voted solely because of the Supreme Court feel validated.

Trump will pick up a significant number of Conservatives and Christians who were uncertain and didn't take a chance on him so they voted third party or didn't vote for President. He will have met their criteria this time in terms of issues that are important to them.

Trump has a 90%+ approval rating with Republicans

The Walk Away Movement represents a significant number of formerly dependable Democrat voting blocks (minorities, gays, etc.)

The Blexit Movement

Other former Democrats with strong Youtube and social media followings who have become vocal Trump supporters such as Dave Rubin, Karlyn Borysenko, Tim Pool, etc.

The DNC released no polling results after their online convention

Support for BLM, Inc. has dropped dramatically since summer to only around 39%. They also recently scrubbed their website of a substantial number of Far Left and anti-family beliefs/policies leading me to believe that the DNC realized via polling numbers this was hurting them

Increasing numbers of people speaking out against all topics related to white fragility, anti-racism, etc. which was not happening just four to six weeks ago

Homeschooling has doubled this year. Not school from home, but legitimate homeschooling.

School choice is becoming a front burner issue for more people now that they have peeked behind the curtain of public education as it currently exists.

Many people are now fully aware of the existence of critical race theory and what it means

There are now 5 million new gun owners in 2020

Stony Brook professor, Helmut Norpoth, is predicting a Trump landslide. He correctly predicted Trump's last win.

Trump has made major inroads with the black community. In the past it was said that if a Republican could get 15% of the black vote, the Democrats could not win. I think Trump is on track to get much more than 15% of the black vote.

The combination of China - NBA - coronavirus - human rights abuses in China - Hong Kong - medical supply chain issues means many people would choose Trump to deal with China over Biden

Most people do not believe that the USA is a racist or evil country no matter how many times talking heads on TV try to tell them that it is

Most people do not believe they are racist nor do they believe their neighbors are racist no matter how many times Robin Diangelo and Ibram X. Kendi tell everyone they are

Riots and violence push people toward law and order

Trump is getting all of the law and order endorsements which means he will be getting the vast majority of those votes

Voter enthusiasm is overwhelmingly for Trump. It was watching Trump rallies streamed on YouTube that in part convinced me he was going to win in 2016.

Re: the streamed rallies on YouTube. In the past, there would be approximately 20k people watching the stream on the independent channel I use to monitor them (Right Side Broadcasting). Lately there have been 95k-120k watching each rally.

Trump is campaigning in Minnesota which means he clearly thinks he can win it

Attacking Amy Coney Barrett's adoption of her children was a big mistake

Kamala Harris is such a liability that they aren't allowing her to take questions. She was so unpopular in her own party that she dropped out before the first primary voting took place. She is incredibly unlikeable by almost any standard.

People have to choose someone to oversee the economy and Trump is more desirable than Biden

We are seeing very little polling information being pushed out which means it isn't favoring Biden

Many Trump supporters, Conservatives, and Republicans have openly admitted they will not answer a polling call or will lie.

That's my list. These are observations so take them for what they are worth. I'm not going to defend any of them since they are simply observations. People can choose to disagree if they are important or not. At this moment, it's a Trump landslide. The media is not helping by lying about this.

And speaking of Amy Coney Barrett, I wrote a piece on my website about how I think wokeness has the potential to damage NPC sororities. I've mentioned some of this before in discussions here, but when I saw the Kappa Delta Facebook meltdown over Barrett I decided to finish a post I had started. I'll share the link if anyone wants to read it.

My two cents. Your mileage may vary.

Breaking Our Bonds: How Wokeness Will Destroy National Panhellenic Conference Sororities

QFP to compare later.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by Ronaldo9

As an originalist I, of course, disagree slightly with this. I would like a 9-0 originalist court, frankly.

That said, I do agree with your position that one raw exercise of power invites the next. I would just note, however, that the Democratic Party would have the power to block and filibuster the ACB nomination right now except McConnell removed the filibuster on SCOTUS judges. He did that to make good on a promise he made to the Democrats that he would take that course of action if they used their 2011 Senate majority to remove the filibuster on Circuit and District court judges, which - despite the warning this would be the response - they did.

So, yes, we are seeing the raw exercise of power inviting the next, however, this process was set in motion - not this year - but in 2011 and by Harry Reid. In other words, were it not for an action taken by Harry Reid nine years ago, there would be no chance ACB will be confirmed the week after next as will happen.

Originally Posted by Sister Havana

Let’s remember why Reid and the Democrats changed the rules to remove the filibuster for all but Supreme Court nominations. It’s important to understand it in context. McConnell and the Republicans used the filibuster a then-unprecedented amount of times to block or stall pretty much all of Obama’s appointees. They filibustered appointees they all agreed were qualified, for no other reason than Obama was doing the appointing. They even filibustered Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Secretary of Defense - yes, that would be former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel.

The event that was really the tipping point for the rule change was when Obama nominated three judges to fill three vacant seats on the DC Circuit Court. Not only did Senate Republicans scream and yell about how Obama was court-packing (by filling existing vacancies!), but they even introduced legislation to remove those three seats from the DC Circuit so Obama could not appoint people to fill them. (It didn’t pass, obviously.) This was the climate in which the rule was changed. Harry Reid didn’t do it just for fun.

And if the filibuster hadn’t been removed during the Obama years, anyone who thinks Mitch McConnell wouldn’t have done it himself the first time Democrats tried to filibuster any of Trump’s nominees has not paid attention to Mitch McConnell.

Interestingly, I just saw this pop up tonight.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...es/3573369001/

[What?]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

I agree that voter fraud is a huge concern. Trump wins in a landslide for the reasons I've outlined (and several more points I've thought of since I published it). But, yes, there is an all-out effort to undermine the election.

A lot can happen in a month. That's why I said "as of today" I think he wins in a landslide. Something could change that and I would be the first to reassess my thinking and expectations.

Please don’t interpret my comment as any criticism of your analysis, I just worry that this rosy outlook for Trump will further galvanize the fraudsters as their brethren are facing no consequences.

Carnation, my mother-in-law has received multiple pieces of election mail for my dead (2018) father-in-law, aka her ex-husband, who had not lived at her current address since the early 2000s. This is not an anomaly as I have heard similar stories from multiple friends and family members.

[TriDeltaSallie]

It would be great if someone would create a list for a Biden landslide like the one I created for a Trump landslide.

I've seen so many articles predicting a Biden landslide or comfortable victory, but haven't seen anyone lay out a systematic explanation for it that explains things such as where Biden will pick up voters Hillary Clinton didn't get or which groups of former Trump voters will switch to Biden and why.