It is different work, but it follows a similar model. The argument to tie the number of justices to the number of districts makes sense when viewed in that context. We don’t do it because? Because we’ve decided that 9 is somehow sacrosanct. For no reason. 9 was created the same reason 7 was created and 10 before it - for political gain. Because we were just a little more honest about how fucked the whole institution is back then.
Seems like one of those things the founding fathers left out and everyone just kind of deferred to Congress while figuring out the new country.
The Tenth Amendment (implemented by those same Founding Fathers) reserved all unenumerated powers to the states, so why is it that the states don’t get to decide how many justices there are?
because 9 is the most powerful number in the universe. if you don't believe me watch the video above so you too can have your eyes opened
What a (sad) reflection on modern society that admitting you could be wrong on something is to be frowned upon. Where? Guess it was too late considering the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791 and the Supreme Court would have been seated first in 1790?
It's a valiant attempt at deflection, but misses the point. You have taken a seemingly strong position on a particular topic based on information that you don't know to be actually true. If anything, it's a shining example of the sad state of affairs in current political discourse that people take extremely strong positions on topics without actually having factual support upon which to base those opinions.
Hello ser - everyone misconstruing the argument which is that the Right has been degenerate for awhile and not moved, but in recent years the Left has also moved. Eliminating the filibuster and packing the courts would be qualified as extreme IMO. It’s also hard the cultural ascendance of the modern but something there.
Has anyone read Antifragile? This whole thread reminds of the description of Fragilistas in the prologue
Republicans removed the filibuster to appoint scotus justices with a simple majority That's court packing
I mean you've shown it to be literally factual. I told talking head similar for years before he became a Biden reply guy
Remind me, what was that in response to? I know you know the answer, you’re a very studied guy Again demonstrating the lost meaning of “factual”
If you keep scratching every political change they're all in response to other things so it becomes an arbitrary thing to worry about except in the functional angle Judicial supremacy is bad, we should work to unravel it
I would argue that's an unfair characterization of the situation. I have what I believe is a strong understanding of the subject matter (which I would argue is true based on being right so far). But I acknowledge it's a nuanced discussion, and there very well may be someone out there with a better understanding than myself.
So you’re agreeing no one has moral superiority and this fucked state of affairs we all find ourselves in is at the end of a decades long tit for tat. Ty ser
this is why i think your entire political positioning is due to lack of knowledge and an inability to see the bigger picture regarding functioning governance also you seem to fit the arrogant ignorance hallmark of so much of modern society
Sorry, I haven't finished the thread, but I definitely need to talk about his. I've been a CPA in public accounting for 25 years. I'm in the capital of Florida, so a ton of our clients are these same Republican politicians/lobbyists. Unfortunately, they are also my social circle. It's definitely not a good idea to express anything but conservative ideas. Most of the non-political rich people, who obviously we need as clients, are also red. In 2016, like 1 week after Trump got elected, we had our partner meeting. Our keynote speaker was Mike Huckabee. Eventually, I just couldn't take it anymore, and had to quit the only career I've had for my whole life, last October. So please don't tell me that it's conservatives that have it bad. I really don't agree with all the hate directed your way. You seem genuinely interested, and I honestly think it's important to have conversations. I understand how they feel though. They probably have to keep what they think is the obvious truth, buried inside and nod along with a bunch of what they see as crazy shit, just to stay included in society. Anyway, just trust me. The right has moved way way way right.
Yes, indeed we’ve been here for awhile with some, but little tangible progress. FWIW you seem to fit the exact description of a Taleb Fragilista like so much of modern society
Thank you sir - have enjoyed our talks. Did you used to be under a different name? Don’t remember seeing you around but haven’t been around much the last year
again, think about the function of the changes in regards to how our democracy works. is it making the system more democratic? is it making it more responsive? if yes those are good changes, and why both Reids filibuster change and McConnells were good you get lost in the sauce regarding partisanship because again, you have a really thin level of understanding
Yo! WHAT THE FUCK? No one cares about the stupid ass oathkeepers. THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES was in on it!
Curious - is there a “right level” of responsiveness for you or do you go all the way to direct democratic rule? Or is there another non-American model you prefer? All I seem to get is ours is very bad from you
I agree that both political parties we have are shit but that's largely because they're both conservative parties
I mean proportional representative democracy is good. Endless counter majoritarian and veto points is bad when there is incentive to break the system like ours does. There's a reason we're listed well down the rankings of democracies because ours fails most tests.
TH made the exact same argument that the gop was always illiberal crypto fascists then he went and became a fan.
Look for whatever reason we seem to have dual convos when we talk. At no point did debating the merits of a two party system to a coalition govt ever enter the mind when talking about Dems vs. Repubs. Purely speaking a citizen vs a poli sci analyst (which is what I went to school for). Maybe I’ll dust off some old papers, but not really top of mind for me in the current political climate
I appreciate the pattern recognition but truly haven’t changed. Held my nose for Hillary and Joe like a good boy despite being uninspired but knowing it was best of the country. Like we all have, just very frustrating
Which is why I think you come to really dumb conclusions, you can only do really dim analysis. The thing about all your politics being learned from twitter fits you as well as musk.
Don't worry the parroting right wing framing because that's all you ingest was the no coming back point for him seemingly.
Think you conflate the role of structural analysis of political systems with a moral right or wrong framework which is usually where the message board is at (what I come here for). And despite what you think, I don’t use twitter as a primary means of political info, I think it’s a crutch you use to discredit a political opponent tbh. GF is looking at me like I’m crazy…good night for real, tomorrow is another day
Yes I view political actions through the impact they have on individuals and the system itself. I don't think that's strange at all. I like pro democracy actions because I'm a lib. I also like harm reduction actions. Sorry, twitter and discord with right wingers.
Just for clarity you were the one to ask what system I preferred when I was telling you why I found bipartisan actions regarding the filibuster good. Then got confused why we were talking about it.
Which tech billionaires are left-wing, by the way? Tim Cook just made $99million dollars in ONE YEAR.
Democrats chose for those things to not "succeed". Not Republicans. Democrats. You are not operating in reality.
If you think packing the courts would be extreme, wait until you find out what the republicans did when they were in power.
Why do you view making the American government more democratic (small d) and also more in line with the framers’ intent (a rare overlap of those 2 things admittedly) an extreme position? Can you just explain that to me? Like how does your brain square that?
No. I’m literally talking about the origins of the terminology right and left wing when talking about politics. The GOP are theocrats and neo-monarchists. They are illiberal and oppose democracy. They have become the most classically right wing version of themselves in their party’s history, and a significant portion of that movement has happened since 2008.