•   
  •   
  •   

Opinion Hey, Democrats, The System Doesn’t Need To Be ‘Fixed’ Every Time You Lose An Election

19:26  03 july  2018
19:26  03 july  2018 Source:   thefederalist.com

Dems to McConnell: Vote on court nominee after midterms, stop the hypocrisy

  Dems to McConnell: Vote on court nominee after midterms, stop the hypocrisy "This is the most important Supreme Court vacancy for this country in at least a generation," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.The news of Justice Anthony Kennedy's retirement dropped like a bomb for Democrats, who have counted on the courts to reign in the Trump administration.

Taibbi: The Democrats Need a New Message. All Stories. Across federal and state government, Democrats have lost close to 1,000 seats. Instead, nearly every penny was hoovered up to the DNC for the benefit of Clinton's election .

Despite Donald Trump’s wackiness and the G.O.P.’s woes, Democrats could easily lose ground here. The midterm elections are at once a golden opportunity and a dangerous trap for Democrats . Democrats need practice at not wearing it.

Hey, Democrats, The System Doesn’t Need To Be ‘Fixed’ Every Time You Lose An Election © The Federalist Hey, Democrats, The System Doesn’t Need To Be ‘Fixed’ Every Time You Lose An Election

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

If you’re under the impression that the system exists merely to facilitate your partisan agenda, it’s not surprising that you also believe it's “broken” every time things don’t go your way. This is why so many Democrats argue that we should “fix” the Electoral College when they lose a presidential election and “fix” the filibuster when they run the Senate and now “fix” the Supreme Court when they don’t run the Senate.

What does Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's primary upset mean for Democrats?

  What does Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's primary upset mean for Democrats? 28-year-old knocked out Rep. Joe Crowley, who had been considered a possible successor to leader Nancy PelosiSome of the shock may have worn off on Wednesday, but 28-year-old Ocasio-Cortez, like the rest of her party, was still trying to make sense of her come-from-nowhere win. She knocked off the fourth-highest ranking House Democrat, 10-term Rep. Joe Crowley, who had been considered an heir apparent to leader Nancy Pelosi.

Efficiency suffers under the electoral calculus, legitimacy under the continual need to distinguish oneself, while time and again, the electoral system ensures that the long term and the common interest lose out to the short term and party interests. Elections were once invented to make

Drew Westen: To get ready for the 2018 elections , Democrats need to learn from their loss in Georgia. You can' t fix a problem if you don' t get the diagnosis right. I had a front row seat to the election , and Ossoff's campaign.

During the Obama presidency, liberal pundits groused about the supposed crisis posed by a “dysfunctional” Congress. In political media parlance, “dysfunction” can be roughly translated into “Democrats aren’t able to do as they like.” Congress, as you know, was only “broken” when President Obama wasn’t getting his agenda passed, not when his party was imposing a wholly partisan, unprecedented health-care regime on all Americans.

In any event, the political establishment spent six years wringing its hands about subsequent GOP electoral success, which was an organic political reaction that strengthened separation of powers and reflected the nation’s ideological divisions. Although you’d never know it listening to political coverage, it meant the system was working just fine.

Exclusive: Vacant Supreme Court seat will likely influence U.S. election turnout, poll shows

  Exclusive: Vacant Supreme Court seat will likely influence U.S. election turnout, poll shows The U.S. Supreme Court seat left open by the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy is a powerful motivator for voters, particularly Democrats, in this fall's midterm election fight for control of Congress, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Friday.Ninety percent of Democrats said the vacancy would make them more likely to vote for a Democratic Senate candidate in the Nov. 6 election, compared with 81 percent of Republicans who said the issue would make them more likely to vote for a Senate candidate from their party. The Senate votes to confirm or deny judicial candidates for federal courts, including Supreme Court nominees.

But the Democrats also need a positive agenda of their own. Hillary Clinton did not lose because she had less money than Trump; she had considerably more. Sure, I’ll vote for their candidates — in a choice between crazy and sane, I’ll vote sane every time .

IT’S TIME TO FIGHT DIRTY How Democrats Can Build a Lasting Majority in American Politics By David Faris 178 pp. Then, they should set about unrigging the system . To fix the problem of Democratic underrepresentation in the Senate, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico should get

Yet many of the president’s boosters, including Ezra Klein, then at The Washington Post, began not only arguing that Congress was “broken” (bad) but that it was “fundamentally broken” (really bad!). By 2013, after Republicans had made gains in the Senate, Klein and others were arguing for increasing majoritarianism to “fix” the problem. It was the GOP’s “unprecedented obstructionism” (a euphemism for disagreeing with Obama on policy) that supposedly left them no other choice.

Now, if the majority of voters had been truly disgusted by “obstructionism,” the GOP would have paid a political price for their actions. The opposite occurred. Perhaps instinctively, voters wanted a more ideologically balanced Washington. So Democrats decided the system was the problem.

What we call “norm-breaking” these days was referred to as “reform” during the Obama administration. "Reformers" like Klein and his allies would convince Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a man who once argued that weakening the Senate filibuster would “destroy the very checks and balances our Founding Fathers put in place to prevent absolute power by any one branch of government,” to use the “nuclear option” and blow up Senate rules on judicial filibusters so Obama could stack the courts.

Restless Democratic newcomers bringing change to House

  Restless Democratic newcomers bringing change to House Ready or not, change is coming to the House Democrats. Across the country, a new generation is making its way to Washington. It's not just that some of the Democrats, like 28-year-old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are young and progressive. They are. Or that many are women entering politics who want to fight President Donald Trump. They do. Or even that some of them live in Trump country.They also come to politics steeped in an era of resistance and revolt, like the tea party Republicans who rose against President Barack Obama and the so-called Watergate babies elected after President Richard Nixon.

Former President Barack Obama tells Democrats to stop "moping," and not to get their hopes too high for the 2018 midterm elections . The former president added that it’s time to put democracy in action, rather than trying to usher the party under one leader to fix the system .

“ Every time Donald thinks things are not going in his direction he claims whatever it is … is rigged against him,” said Clinton in Las Vegas on October 19. “He became the first person, Republican or Democrat , who refused to say that he would respect the results of this election .

“Thanks to all of you who encouraged me to consider filibuster reform,” Reid tweeted in 2013. “It had to be done.”

But then the unanticipated began happening. For one thing, the GOP won the majority and Sen. Mitch McConnell, despite immense pressure, refused to give Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland a vote. That was well within his authority as majority leader, his constitutional authority, and his ideological imperative to stop Democrats from transforming the Supreme Court into one that relied on empathy over the Constitution.

This tactic opened a seat for the next president.  Then Donald Trump also won. Unexpectedly. And guess what’s broken now?

“The way we choose Supreme Court nominees is broken,” Klein laments, “Here’s how to fix it.”

Here is what Klein said back when he was a filibuster reformer:

Democrats, rather than filibustering themselves in service of a political point, would have weakened the filibuster on behalf of the next majority, whoever it may be. It could be a blow struck against themselves in service of the long-term health of the Senate.

Here’s what he says now as a Supreme Court reformer:

The must-read Trump quote on Social Security

  The must-read Trump quote on Social Security Despite plain-as-day problems, America's most important social program is unlikely to be fixed anytime soon.Furthermore, the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities finds that its mere existence keeps more than 22 million people, including 15.1 million seniors, above the federal poverty line. We'd probably be contending with a genuine elderly poverty crisis right now if not for the guaranteed monthly payout associated with Social Security to eligible beneficiaries.

After another demoralizing loss to a monstrous candidate, Democrats need a reboot. Democrat Rob Quist was beat by Greg Gianforte in Thursday's special election in Montana. How low do you have to sink to lose an election in this country?

It was the first time a Democrat won this state legislative district in more than three decades. Hours before the election , a progressive Democrat told The Fix that Lesko winning by seven or eight points would be a reason for Democrats to Democrats didn' t win in Arizona, but they didn' t need to .

Here, in truth, is where the past few years have left us. The minority party no longer holds a scintilla of power over Supreme Court picks. The majority party can and will jam whomever they want onto the Court, where that person will serve for life.

“The institution is broken,” he said.  “The filibuster rests on an unstable foundation,” he said. “Let’s talk,” he said. When it was convenient, his Twitter bio let two-million-plus followers know that he hated the filibuster. Now he's concerned that the majority party is “jamming” through a nominee?

What Klein probably meant to say all those years was that the filibuster undermined a “healthy” liberal majority. Today, he couches concerns about the system in the supposed tribulations surrounding “life appointments” to the court. I don’t recall similar concerns regarding the lifetime appointments of Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan, although perhaps they exist.

But that’s another debate. For me, at least, the more undemocratic the court is the better -- and not merely undemocratic, but randomly undemocratic. Creating term limits does little to change the politics of confirmation, but it could do plenty to change the way justices approach their jobs. A term-limited judge, for example, is one who is concerned about a professional life after SCOTUS, and might act accordingly, meting out favors the way politicians do today.

Homeowners are sitting on a record amount of cash – and not tapping it

  Homeowners are sitting on a record amount of cash – and not tapping it Home prices are rising fast, and homeowners are gaining thousands of dollars in available equity to tap, but they are taking out very little. It may be that they don't know how much they have or that they are generally more conservative following the last housing crash.U.S. homeowners today are getting richer by the minute, but they are less likely to cash in on their newfound wealth than during previous housing booms. As home values rise, home equity lines of credit, often used to tap home equity, are flatlining, and the overall amount of money people are taking out of their homes is shrinking.

The Left considers their losing as proof of a broken system in need of " fixing ," rather than an 'youre broken and only I can fix you ' - Every abusive partner ever. 0 ответов 2 ретвитов 4 отметки «Нравится». Before 1995 you didn' t hear much from Democrats talking about gerrymandering.

It's a destructive distortion in the system and it needs to be fixed . Repeated proposals to have Congress elect the president were shot down because the framers wanted an independent executive; at the same time they didn' t want direct election of the president because they doubted the average

In any event, there is simple solution: voters should assume that every president will name at least one Supreme Court justice and vote accordingly. The last president who didn’t was Jimmy Carter, and the one before him was Andrew Johnson.

Klein isn't alone. Others, like Harvard’s Ian Samuels, are more straightforwardly partisan, proposing that the next Democrat candidate promise to add six justices to the Supreme Court to neutralize the power of the textualists and create a progressive court. He’s not alone. Although the Constitution doesn’t stipulate the number of justices needed, and Democrats are free to make such promises if they like, you’d think liberals would have learned their lesson during the Obama years.

The real anxiety driving liberals is the reality of President Trump getting another Supreme Court justice, the kind of nominee any conservative president would likely have picked. This person will presumably help constrain progressive policies because many of those policies rely on coercion and unconstitutional intrusions into personal freedom. Maybe it's not the system that's broken, but rather rather the Left's agenda.

The arrogance of the age -- maybe every age -- is that intellectuals believe, by default, that they’re smarter, more moral, and more evolved than those who came before them. We often hear the Left gripe about the antiquated nature of the Constitution. It was Klein, after all, who once claimed that the Constitution was a confusing document because it is old.

We can disagree about the usefulness of Enlightenment ideas. But when Klein contends that the “chaotic, ugly realpolitik that followed Justice Antonin Scalia’s death” necessitates a “fix,” he is being transparently partisan. Nothing is more chaotic than altering the rules every time you experience a political defeat. And nothing says realpolitik more than attempting to “fix” a system for practical political concerns when your ideological goals fall short.

George W. Bush 'disturbed' by current US immigration debate .
<p>"I think it doesn't recognize the valuable contributions that immigrants make to our society," the former president said.</p>"I think it doesn't recognize the valuable contributions that immigrants make to our society. And it obscures the fact — the rhetoric does — that the system is broken and needs to be fixed," Bush said on Thursday.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

This is interesting!