Capitol Hill Blue Forums Life and Moral Issues Morality & Society The Lawlessness is the Point

In his Atlantic essay, "The Cruelty is the Point", Adam Serwer described the joyful participants in 20th century lynchings, "Their names have mostly been lost to time. But these grinning men were someone’s brother, son, husband, father. They were human beings, people who took immense pleasure in the utter cruelty of torturing others to death—and were so proud of doing so that they posed for photographs with their handiwork, jostling to ensure they caught the eye of the lens, so that the world would know they’d been there. Their cruelty made them feel good, it made them feel proud, it made them feel happy." So it is with the current ultra-revanchist majority on the Supreme Court.

Or as Robert Reich notes in the Guardian The US supreme court is now cruel, partisan – and squandering its moral authority. They have given up any pretense of evenhandedness or reverence for the law or the Constitution, pushing instead for exerting raw judicial hubris: "we're in charge now, so you'll comply." Consistency is immaterial to them, as they have exhibited frequently in recent weeks: assertion of utter control is what's important. They are the resurgent Taliban, needing to broadcast their usurpation of the legal world. Justice Breyerrecently lamented the upsurge in "shadow docket" activism, but these zealots are so eager to assert control they can't tolerate the normal process of judicial restraint and procedure. They want to forcefully demonstrate their ascendancy. The lawlessness is the point.

Them that did the lynching didn't consider blacks to be human but, rather, pests to be dealt with. If they ain't white then they ain't. Same with the whole lot of them. There are many that feel exactly the same today. Anybody who thinks they are just like those that accept other races and just have a small problem would be flat out wrong.

They are going to drive the movement toward court reform and dilution with this type of decision. There are just a few Democrats in the Senate resisting junking the filibuster, and it won't take much more to convince them it's necessary.

They feel the same way about Democrats.

The problem with the filibuster thing is that the Dems are slated, by just about every talking head, on either side, to lose next year's election. If that happens, and its close, then the Dems just may want the filibuster in place.

So far, as far as I can tell, I agree that they are going to lose. On the way they are going to stop any of their legislation from passing which will include the basic infrastructure thing that ALL the states are eagerly awaiting so they can fix as much as they can. So, by the time next year's election the Dems got to deal with their big deals whilst they were in charge which will come to a total of NOTHING! (I REALLY hope I am wrong!) Oh, and a president which has demonstrated that he can't admit being wrong about anything and accompanied by a Democratic party that really knows how to run their mouths, to their own detriment, whilst fighting with each other as publicly as they can manage.

The real shame is that the Republicans are also working really hard to piss everybody off and also giving the Dems a chance which they are, as far as I can tell, working equally as hard just proving they are incapable of doing anything for themselves or the nation. the choice will be, basically, vote for somebody who you don't like but just might do something to help the nation or a group that has spent the last year proving they are incapable of doing anything at all. On reflection both sides are so bad that there are going to be a LOT of voters who are just not going to vote at all because the choices are going to be so bad. As far as I can tell the Republicans, especially the senate Republicans have spent the last 5.5 years doing just about nothing and proud of it. So, I guess, on reflection, that neither side is worth a damn.

The only real difference is that the Dems tend to be more concerned with reality and the other side has absolutely no interest in reality.

I think the Democrats, if the election were held today would pick up a couple of senate seats. Here's the list of switchable seats. All other seats look safe for the party that currently holds them.

Arizona Kelly D –The former astronaut Kelly is well liked and should win. Democratic hold R 50 D 50

Florida Rubio R – Close, but the polls give Rubio a 5-10 point lead at this time over Val Demmings. Republican hold R 50 D 50

Georgia Warnock D –Another close one, but incumbency should keep Warnock in the senate. If the Republican nominate Hershel Walker, the former Georgia football star and NFL player, all bets are off. For now, a Democratic hold R 50 D 50

Nevada Cortez Masto D – Masto will probably be a fairly easy winner. Democratic hold R 50 D 50

New Hampshire Hassan D – If Sununu, the GOP governor runs, this may be a Republican gain. If not Hassan is safe. Until Sununu decides, NH is staying a Democratic hold. R 50 D 50

North Carolina Burr R – Burr is retiring, open seat. 50-50, Republicans out number Democrats in NC by a slight advantage. PVI R+3 Republican hold. R 50 D 50

Pennsylvania Toomey R – Toomey is retiring, open seat. Democrats have the advantage with their most likely candidate being the Lt. Governor. Fetterman Democratic gain R 49 D 51

Wisconsin Johnson R – Johnson isn't liked. If he runs again, the democrats will win. Democratic gain R 48 D 52

A short very condensed preview of my forecast due in January. As for the House, I've said until redistricting is completed, making any forecast there is useless. But going by history of the first midterms and the generic congressional ballot, needing but to gain 5 seats, current indications is the House will most likely be in GOP hands.

I've mixed feelings on the filibuster. I'd be all in favor of keeping it, but I realize if the Democrats don't do away with it, once the Republicans gain the senate and the presidency, they will. I'd say if the Democrats are going to do away with it, they better do it right quickly. After the midterms, if all indications are correct, it won't matter as the GOP will have the House. More on the house once redistricting is completed.

Pretty sure with DeSantis killing his base, Flor-i-duh will turn blue. Same with Abbott and Texas.

Florida Record Deaths
Bloomberg News

You can't mandate people from wearing masks and not have an effect on election outcomes. Flor-i-duh had 2,345 COVID deaths last week - and it's not even winter.

The number of COvID related deaths is nearing DeSantis' margin of victory in 2018.

Florida has about 250 deaths a day right now. Most of them Republican voters.

But I still wouldn't count on Florida going blue...it could happen but I'm not feeling it happening yet.

Before any real change, here or elsewhere, will occur Republicans need to see that they are wrong.

They are as blind as they've always been.

Without your factors taken into consideration, COVID etc. There has been movement from 2000-2020 for the states one way or the other. Using PVI, Partisan Voting Index which rates states on their partisan voting you'll see several states moving from red to blue and blue to red. Some are more apparent then other, some more subtle. but the movement is there. From 2000 to 2020

Arizona from an R+7 down to an R+3. Moving blue.
Florida R+3 Same rating as in 2000.
Georgia From an R+10 down to an R+3 Moving blue
Michigan from a D+6 to a R+1 Moving Red
North Carolina from an R+13 down to a R+3 moving blue
Ohio From an R+4 up to an R+6 Becoming more red
Pennsylvania from D+4 to a R+2 moving red
Texas from an R+20 down to an R+5 moving blue
Wisconsin from an D+10 to a R+2 moving red

The above is a 20 year change in the partisan voting index. Now one must understand independents can overcome any PVI for one party or the other and elect someone from the party that has the lower PVI. This happen in Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania in 2020 with independents voting Democratic by more than 10 points overcoming the Republican PVI. The PVI also explains Trump carrying Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in 2016 where independents sided with Trump, barely.

The 20 year trend shows some states in the south, NC, GA, TX moving from Red to blue. That is being offset by some states in the Midwest moving from blue to red, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin while Ohio is becoming more redder. Keep in mind all of this is very dynamic and changes constantly. But there is a trend showing. I would also say any state with a PVI of +5 or lower are considered swing states. Where independents decide the winner and not the party faithful.

People said that about GAs Senators too. Florida going blue will happen and in your lifetime.