Ginsburg dies; Amy Coney Barrett confirmed

[KGs Knee]

How about the United States or Divided States (as some outsiders call it), split the country in half.  All the democrats move to one side and republicans move to the other. Build a wall in between

problem solved? 

so much infighting and nasty politics.  It has gotten worse with social media

Give the Dems the west coast and the northeast (split PA in half).  They can carve out Chicago, too, sort of like Cold War Berlin.  Everybody’s happy.

Nope, I'm holding out for NH to become our own country.  I suppose Maine can join us if you don't want to be isolated.

Progressives can have the west coast and north east, conservatives can have the middle states and southeast, and libertarians get NH (which also would absorb Maine).

What about Moderates?

Us "Elephonkies" as CNN calls us - DO exist.

I'd humbly suggest you send Moderates to EVERY state - to add BALANCE. Need someone with some sanity left - to hold us all together.

Lots of moderates and progressives in Southern NH -- don't forget their senators are Maggie Hassan (also former governor) and Jeanne Shaheen.   What KG might would need to do is divide NH north of Concord (plus western NH) to join up with Maine.

As long as I get to keep the lakes and mountains, I'll be happy.  The rest is slowly becoming just like Massachusetts anyway, you can keep the crappy part, it's not worth the hassle. 

Sounds like a fair trade to me.  Hope our borders and visitations can be friendly and welcoming.  Pre-Covid I used to work a couple of days a month in Lakes and North Country.  It's pretty there, though I'd never want to live there.   We can all still be Celtics fans. 

I'm up for a good multi-nation secession if Trump is re-elected.   I think President Baker and President Sununu can work cooperatively.

You and I would have better luck, and yes it would be highly cordial.  I'm not really a big Sununu fan anyway.  He's okay in a lot of regards, but he's definitely more of a conservative than a libertarian. In this hypothetical I'm not looking for a conservative or progressive country, I can do without their either form of authoritarianism just the same.  But as for Sununu and Baker, I'm not sure how well they get along. Sununu is currently suing Baker over Massachusetts taxing NH's remote workers and now they're trading barbs. I'm not sure if SCOTUS will take the case or not but it's the one thing that has united NH politicians more than any other recently. 

But being real for a minute, if this falls apart it's not going to be clean and easy, it's going to be messy.  It'd be a miracle for there to not be bloodshed. I can't see a dissolution of the union and states all becoming independent (with free will to merge as they each see fit) going smoothly and peacefully.  It's not something anyone should want.  I still believe it would be best if someone can lead us off the ledge.  I don't see who that person is, and maybe it isn't any single individual, but something needs to change.  Someone needs to lead.

[Neurotic Guy]

How about the United States or Divided States (as some outsiders call it), split the country in half.  All the democrats move to one side and republicans move to the other. Build a wall in between

problem solved? 

so much infighting and nasty politics.  It has gotten worse with social media

Give the Dems the west coast and the northeast (split PA in half).  They can carve out Chicago, too, sort of like Cold War Berlin.  Everybody’s happy.

Nope, I'm holding out for NH to become our own country.  I suppose Maine can join us if you don't want to be isolated.

Progressives can have the west coast and north east, conservatives can have the middle states and southeast, and libertarians get NH (which also would absorb Maine).

What about Moderates?

Us "Elephonkies" as CNN calls us - DO exist.

I'd humbly suggest you send Moderates to EVERY state - to add BALANCE. Need someone with some sanity left - to hold us all together.

Lots of moderates and progressives in Southern NH -- don't forget their senators are Maggie Hassan (also former governor) and Jeanne Shaheen.   What KG might would need to do is divide NH north of Concord (plus western NH) to join up with Maine.

As long as I get to keep the lakes and mountains, I'll be happy.  The rest is slowly becoming just like Massachusetts anyway, you can keep the crappy part, it's not worth the hassle. 

Sounds like a fair trade to me.  Hope our borders and visitations can be friendly and welcoming.  Pre-Covid I used to work a couple of days a month in Lakes and North Country.  It's pretty there, though I'd never want to live there.   We can all still be Celtics fans. 

I'm up for a good multi-nation secession if Trump is re-elected.   I think President Baker and President Sununu can work cooperatively.

You and I would have better luck, and yes it would be highly cordial.  I'm not really a big Sununu fan anyway.  He's okay in a lot of regards, but he's definitely more of a conservative than a libertarian. In this hypothetical I'm not looking for a conservative or progressive country, I can do without their either form of authoritarianism just the same.  But as for Sununu and Baker, I'm not sure how well they get along. Sununu is currently suing Baker over Massachusetts taxing NH's remote workers and now they're trading barbs. I'm not sure if SCOTUS will take the case or not but it's the one thing that has united NH politicians more than any other recently. 

But being real for a minute, if this falls apart it's not going to be clean and easy, it's going to be messy.  It'd be a miracle for there to not be bloodshed. I can't see a dissolution of the union and states all becoming independent (with free will to merge as they each see fit) going smoothly and peacefully.  It's not something anyone should want.  I still believe it would be best if someone can lead us off the ledge.  I don't see who that person is, and maybe it isn't any single individual, but something needs to change.  Someone needs to lead.

Yeah - though I’ll be sickened if this country re-elects Trump, I’m not serious about secession.  I agree with you that it’s going to ugly after this election is decided. My hope is for a decisive victory for Biden but I’m not counting on that at all.  I expect that if Biden wins  it will be after all ballots are counted and Trump throws everything he can at discounting as many mail-in votes as possibly.  Bloodshed, anger, divisiveness all likely.

Re: leadership.  I believe Biden is the bridge to that leader.  It isn’t Biden or Harris (imo), though I think they may be able to calm the waters and leave the country in a slightly better place.    The next leader has got to be special.  Hope it happens. 

[Ogaju]

ACB recuses from the first election case to come before her.

[Roy H.]

ACB recuses from the first election case to come before her.

It’s not technically a recusal; she can still participate should the case come back in front of the court.  She declined to participate in the decision on the pending motion, as she hadn’t been part of the original hearing and had less than 24 hours to review materials.

[mmmmm]

ACB will be joining a board of elite, supreme intellectuals, all masters of the craft of jurisprudence.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/brett-kavanaugh-voter-suppression-wisconsin-mistakes.html

https://www.salon.com/2020/10/29/kavanaugh-corrects-controversial-opinion-after-vermont-fact-checks-false-claim-about-mail-in-voting/

Just pathetic.

Compounded irony is that among other things he cites bush-v-gore, which is just an awful, poorly composed and written decision that was embarrassing to read at the time.   Kavanaugh also was _involved_ in that case and yet amazingly his citation in this currently writing is absurdly erroneous.   

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Have another beer or six, Brett.

[tarheelsxxiii]

ACB will be joining a board of elite, supreme intellectuals, all masters of the craft of jurisprudence.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/brett-kavanaugh-voter-suppression-wisconsin-mistakes.html

https://www.salon.com/2020/10/29/kavanaugh-corrects-controversial-opinion-after-vermont-fact-checks-false-claim-about-mail-in-voting/

Just pathetic.

Compounded irony is that among other things he cites bush-v-gore, which is just an awful, poorly composed and written decision that was embarrassing to read at the time.   Kavanaugh also was _involved_ in that case and yet amazingly his citation in this currently writing is absurdly erroneous.   

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Have another beer or six, Brett.

In good faith, I actually clicked the first link, but the embedded links are broken.  You've cited slate and salon, dude...

Are you truly judging his character based on a high school yearbook, too? You're a smart guy - that's hard for me to believe.

If you are going to call out Rs on potential election corruption, you should acknowledge both sides: Pelosi has repeatedly stated that Biden should not concede under any circumstances.

[Roy H.]

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Like when he voted with the liberal justices in the NC ballot case, which allows ballots to be received nine days after Election Day?

His opinion you cited above did have some facts wrong.  I assume one or more of his law clerks just got ripped a new one.

[mmmmm]

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Like when he voted with the liberal justices in the NC ballot case, which allows ballots to be received nine days after Election Day?

Certainly.  He can get credit for the easy ones.

[mmmmm]

ACB will be joining a board of elite, supreme intellectuals, all masters of the craft of jurisprudence.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/brett-kavanaugh-voter-suppression-wisconsin-mistakes.html

https://www.salon.com/2020/10/29/kavanaugh-corrects-controversial-opinion-after-vermont-fact-checks-false-claim-about-mail-in-voting/

Just pathetic.

Compounded irony is that among other things he cites bush-v-gore, which is just an awful, poorly composed and written decision that was embarrassing to read at the time.   Kavanaugh also was _involved_ in that case and yet amazingly his citation in this currently writing is absurdly erroneous.   

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Have another beer or six, Brett.

In good faith, I actually clicked the first link, but the embedded links are broken.  You've cited slate and salon, dude...

The only link on either page that is 'broken' is the one that went to Kavanaugh's original draft, which he apparently had removed after everybody saw it and criticized it.   But most of the relevant excerpts have been captured on those and other pages.

Instead of dropping cryptic aspersions towards the sources, do you have any valid defense for the lies and errors in his opinion?  Because neither slate nor salon were the authors of those lies and errors.   Kavanaugh was.

Are you truly judging his character based on a high school yearbook, too? You're a smart guy - that's hard for me to believe.

We can only judge him on what he says and what he writes.  So far, he has not impressed.

[tazzmaniac]

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Like when he voted with the liberal justices in the NC ballot case, which allows ballots to be received nine days after Election Day?

His opinion you cited above did have some facts wrong.  I assume one or more of his law clerks just got ripped a new one.

Kavanaugh voted against the Pennsylvania ballot case.  From what I've read, it is unknown how he voted on the NC ballot case. 

[Roy H.]

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Like when he voted with the liberal justices in the NC ballot case, which allows ballots to be received nine days after Election Day?

His opinion you cited above did have some facts wrong.  I assume one or more of his law clerks just got ripped a new one.

Kavanaugh voted against the Pennsylvania ballot case.  From what I've read, it is unknown how he voted on the NC ballot case.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will allow absentee ballots in North Carolina to be received and counted up to nine days after Election Day.

The justices, by a 5-3 vote Wednesday, refused to disturb a decision by the State Board of Elections to lengthen the period from three to nine days because of the coronavirus pandemic, pushing back the deadline to Nov. 12. The board’s decision was part of a legal settlement with a union-affiliated group.

Republicans had asked the high court to step in.

Under the Supreme Court’s order, mailed ballots postmarked on or before Election Day must be received by 5 p.m. on Nov. 12 in order to be counted.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the three liberal justices in the majority. Three conservative justices, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, dissented.

[Roy H.]

But hey - he'll vote the way conservatives have groomed him to vote!  It doesn't matter that his reasoning is flawed and absurd.

Like when he voted with the liberal justices in the NC ballot case, which allows ballots to be received nine days after Election Day?

His opinion you cited above did have some facts wrong.  I assume one or more of his law clerks just got ripped a new one.

Kavanaugh voted against the Pennsylvania ballot case.  From what I've read, it is unknown how he voted on the NC ballot case.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will allow absentee ballots in North Carolina to be received and counted up to nine days after Election Day.

The justices, by a 5-3 vote Wednesday, refused to disturb a decision by the State Board of Elections to lengthen the period from three to nine days because of the coronavirus pandemic, pushing back the deadline to Nov. 12. The board’s decision was part of a legal settlement with a union-affiliated group.

Republicans had asked the high court to step in.

Under the Supreme Court’s order, mailed ballots postmarked on or before Election Day must be received by 5 p.m. on Nov. 12 in order to be counted.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the three liberal justices in the majority. Three conservative justices, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, dissented.

Technically it was an unsigned order with three dissents (Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch), but Kavanaugh didn’t note a dissent or that he was casting no vote (like ACB).