Scalia's death may be the worst thing for Dems this election.

[JudyM]

We've had a good shot at a win by either of our candidates in part because of, well, the the clown car. Many conservative voters may have stayed home out of disinterest or disgust.

Now suddenly they have a genuine call to arms... and far fewer will stay home because it's no longer just the presidency at stake, it is in very real terms also the balance of the court.

[d_b]

1. hey...it goes both ways

[JudyM]

9. Right, though more of them were more likely to sit this one out.

[Champion Jack]

2. they have the guns but, we have the numbers...

[H2O Man]

3. Respectfully disagree.

His removal from the USSC is an entirely good thing.

[FSogol]

4. Same here, the USSC is a little better off today. n/t

[H2O Man]

6. The nation is.

In fact, the world is a better place.

[JudyM]

13. Of course, I'm thrilled about that, but it's not in a vacuum. It has significant implications

on this race. People are going to be more concerned about who gets in.

[H2O Man]

14. We are not in

a vacuum. I agree with you on that.

However, by November, the sum total of people who decide how to vote based upon his death will be very, very few, if any.

[JudyM]

40. Right, but it's not about deciding on a candidate, but on *getting off their butts* election day.

[KingCharlemagne]

22. One fewer asshole on the planet. - nt

[JudyM]

23. Certainly among the worst of them.

[H2O Man]

24. The more I think

about this, the more I think that your point is accurate -- though in particular for a sub-group of the republican establishment. Their party has already been focused,in part,on the next president's filling a couple USSC seats. And Scalia was of particular importance to the elders who are with the Bush family. That includes people such as James Baker, who is the most politically capable of that group of elites.

At the same time, unless they can defeat Trump, they aren't very likely going to get another Scalia on the court. He was too extreme with the "original intent" interpretation, which most sane people recognize wasn't the Founding Fathers' original intent, at all. Their goal was an on-going attempt to create a more perfect union.

[JudyM]

38. Glad you agree - though maybe only for the Bush Leagues?

Are you also seeing it in relation to the sit-at-home crowd?

And I agree with you that they're not going to get their wishes realized with tRump; though even with him, they will get a more conservative candidate than with one of our Dems winning.
Although I am assuming that... because do we even know how far in either direction tRump would lean with an appointment....!

[Zorra]

30. Most definitely. nt

[Dretownblues]

5. Obama said that he will nominate

I think this is a great thing. Even if, god forbid, the republicans win they will have one less Justice they can nominate.

[uponit7771]

11. +1

[JudyM]

17. If he gets a candidate approved, that'd be fabulous. It's not a likely outcome, however.

[Dretownblues]

18. I think they will have to

They cant leave the SC one seat empty for close to a year. Also if Obama nominates center-left candidate it wont look good if repubs obstruct.

[JudyM]

45. The rethugs feel they have far more to gain by leaving it as an election issue.

By obstructing they will get their less involved voters to the polls -- conjuring the the spectre of a more liberal court for decades to come is only going to help them with their otherwise uninspired electorate.

[liberal_at_heart]

7. Those that vote because of Supreme Court nominations on both sides tend to be

the kind that come out in force anyway. The people who stay home usually are not the ones whose vote is decided based on Supreme Court nominations.

[JudyM]

46. I don't know about that. There aren't many more stake-to-the-heart issues and this rolls

them all into one-- the threat of rolling back all their gains and the great unknown of The Evil the Libruls Will Do will make for the most potent, crystallized-fear campaign ads.

[Califonz]

8. Republican voters don't use logic and critical reasoning

Otherwise why have they been voting against their own best interests for almost 40 years?

[FrenchieCat]

10. They were already outvoting us....

in the first two primaries anyways.....

[JRLeft]

12. ^This unless more dems come out and vote I blame DWS for this.

We needed a real primary season, and the establishment discouraged a lot good people from running. That decision may end up costing us.

[FrenchieCat]

19. I try not to blame only one person for anything

it's too easy to do! If voters aren't coming out to vote, it's their fault. I know that folks fought for the right to vote, because it's how one participates to have a voice in our democracy! If there is supposed to be a revolution that can only happen if folks vote, but they're not voting, then it's their own fault... Not some DNC Member, IMO!

[JRLeft]

25. I'm not talking about Bernie, we should have had as people running as the clown

show, but the field was cleared to make sure Hillary was the nominee. Bad decision. The lack of debates earlier to limit the exposure of the other candidates was another bad decision. The entire process was orchestrated to make sure Hillary sailed through the primary unchallenged.

The Moment Hillary wanted more debates there were more debates. The democratic party may have dug its own grave. I'm supporting the nominee no matter what, but the DNC may have cost itself the election.

[JudyM]

16. So you think the election is going to them anyway?

[Joe the Revelator]

15. Obama is going to get a nominee through. Bank it.

[Fast Walker 52]

21. I sure hope so-- if he doesn't, it's due to unprecedented obstruction, which helps the Dems

should fire them up.

[Fast Walker 52]

20. Not sure-- seeing the GOP in action blocking Obama's nominee on BS grounds

could be a very potent reminder of what is at stake in November.

[saltpoint]

26. I think the debate tilts in our favor

since progressive have been acutely aware of this for a long time.

I think as many blue voters will turn out to protect liberties and rights than red voters will to dismantle them.

[JFKDem62]

27. It can only help the Dems

This will be a good thing.

[quantumjunkie]

28. Therefore BERNIE needs to be the NOMINEE

With his giant Democratic enthusiasm lead over Hillary and his populist tone (and REAL record) the choice is obvious.
Another $100 to Bernie from me.

[me b zola]

29. Remember that many in congress are up for re-election

If the republicans do what they do best, obstruct, it will be under a microscope during the election season. The electorate is angry and may very well take it out on those participating in the obstruction.

The president should swing for the fences in his nomination.

[JudyM]

33. Ha! Swing for the fences. If only.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

31. WRONG, almost certainly

Whether the vacancy helps or hurts Democrats depends on what President Obama does and on the outcome of that move.

If President Obama nominates someone under age 50 who has a record of progressive decisions, and if that person has been confirmed by Election Day, conservatives will be energized and someone from the Clown Car likely will get to Reverse our USSC gain by appointing Ruth Bader Ginsberg's replacement. But how likely is that?

More likely, President Obama will appoint 9thCircuit Judge Paul Watford (age 48), or someone like him, and the Republican Senate will block confirmation.Then HRC can focus saturation ads on how Roe vv Wade surely will be overturned ulnless she wins the WHO.

[JudyM]

35. Just as surely as HRC will focus her saturation ads on that, it's going to get more conservatives

out of their houses on Election Day. I believe one advantage we'd had up until yesterday was that a good many conservatives would stay home on Election Day, especially if Bernie gets the nomination. HRC seems to be a lightning rod for them that would get them out of their lazy-boys but now there is also going to be the enormous airplay that the whole nation is riding on the outcome of the election because of the supremes.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

37. But R turnout may face a "ceiling

Last edited Sun Feb 14, 2016, 11:22 PM - Edit history (1)

effect", and does not have to deal with the devilishly clever effect of evil genius Jim Baker's voter ID laws. Many economists are convinced by a recent study out of ucsd.edu of the substantial causal effects of voter ID laws on the turnout of POC vs whites and of Ds vs Rs.
The author is Zoltan Hajnal, a much published political scientist.

Something like a USSC-focused GE campaign may be needed to counter note suppression by Republican gerrymanderers.

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027612863

for more on the UCSD voter ID study.

[L. Coyote]

32. Scalia's death may be the best thing for Dems this election.

Nothing points to the importance of having a Dem in the White House right now than the Supreme Court, especially given how reactionary the Republican field is.

What we should be assessing is how this plays in the Republican primaries.
Will the least reactionary Republican on women's issues benefit from the timing?
Or will this polarize the Republican electorate around the abortion issue to Trump's demise?

[JudyM]

34. I see your logic and agree but question exactly the reactionary nature of the conservatrons.

The latter of your two groups is by far going to be the more reactionary. And not just around abortion. Bet you anything that rethug ads are going to start hammering the whole parade of horrible so if a dem not only gets in but is also able to appoint a Supreme.

[Califonz]

36. Doubt it...

Strategic thinking and good life choices are not a GOP voter's strong suit.

[TransitJohn]

39. That will be taken care of well before the General Election.

JMOHO.

[Egnever]

41. Agree with you wholeheartedly

And am surprised so many can't see it.

[JudyM]

42. Thanks. I'm also surprised.

[Egnever]

43. Seems to me they quickly decided

They were going to run out the clock on this. That means this will be in the news all the way to and through the election.

I was entirely confident we would win this election because of the clown car and the effect it has on your average republican, not the die hard crazy faithful but your average sane if in my opinion misguided republican.

Those people were positioned to sit this one out as they would most likely be faced with voting for a batshit crazy candidate. Now they will have a reason to go to the pols regardless.

A possibility of someone retiring and having that position need to be filled is not nearly as compelling as this fight has the potential to become.

I am now for the first time this election cycle concerned they might have a chance.

[flamingdem]

44. I hope the Millenials are also motivated by the balance of the court

If not we're screwed.