I thought Alstein was joking about splitting DC into five states :P
KevinC
5253
I see Trumpism and the Republican party that grew it and supports it a danger to our entire society, so Iām on board with whatever means are necessary. That being said, I think we should focus on things that make sense. Puerto Rico as a state with two senators makes a lot of sense. D.C. statehood does as well. Thereās a decent argument for expanding the Supreme Court. Something like splitting D.C. into five states sounds absurd and I think would be easily attacked.
Doing things like this and abolishing the filibuster carries risks in a āwhat goes around comes aroundā way but weāre at a time when extreme measures are not only necessary but perhaps our only option.
Alstein
5254
Iāve seen folks want to split DC into thirteen states.
Five might be a bit ridiculous, but at this point I want to do to the Republicans what theyāve done to us. I no longer care about being nice, or even being fair. These folks are so dangerous they need to be stopped.
Regular measures arenāt going to work, and if the Republicans win anytime this decade, we might be screwed for good- whether itās 2020, 2024, or 2028. We have to do whatever it takes to stop them.
Court packing will be unpopular, but most of the Republicanās rigging measures only carried a short-term hit. This is why you do it early, folks will forget about it in a yearās time and things will be back to the status quo.
Iād also consider mandatory voting , perhaps in conjunction with an UBI-like tax credit as well.
āSome people have crazier ideas than I doā isnāt a very convincing argument lol.
Siphon9r
5256
As Scott said earlier, moves should and can be aggressive, but they shouldnāt be absurd. If the Democrats donāt at least appear to be taking reasonable steps, they will likely lose many of the voters they have gained since 2016. The āsuburban momsā so to speak. A lot of people have been turned off by the horrible behavior of Trump and the GOP. If Democrats start doing blatantly cynical moves like creating five states from DC many people will fall back to a pox on both houses. Sure the GOP has earned dirty pool, but its the national audience of voters that gets to judge what they get in the end. An expansion of the court and statehood for DC and PR with four new senators sounds pretty good to me. If the GOP still manages to dominate after that, then we were all screwed anyway.
I cannot see any significant support for creating more than one state out of DC, even within DC itself. Puerto Rico makes sense.
Another option is to merge the Dakotas. Each of the current Dakotas has a lower population than my suburban county. One Dakota should be sufficient.
You have a better chance of rewriting the Constitution than that happening.
We have to operate in the realm of whatās possible, not what we would love to see happen.
Example: Moving election day to the weekend. Not possible. November Tuesday is hard-wired in the Constitution. Making election day a Federal holiday? Very possible.
We should merge the two pieces of Michigan into one.
Maybe connect them with pontoons hundreds of miles wide.
Pontoons that have their own Senators.
Itās not that bad, but we love to be negative here. So Iām being contrarian to negativity.
The right to clean air and water, for example, was considered important by 93 percent of those surveyed; protection of personal data, by 93 percent; the right to a quality education, by 92 percent; racial equality, by 92 percent; affordable health care, by 89 percent; and the right to a job, by 85 percent.
Of 16 rights and values polled, a majority considered every single one either very or somewhat important to being American today.
That poll divided people into those that think we are divided and those who donāt. :)
That poll is incredibly divisive!!
BTW, Murkowski has reaffirmed that she is a NO on nominating a new justice this close to an election.
Yeah, just saw that. So whatās up with the famed brow-furrowers Collins and Murkowski? Not that I am complaining.
KevinC
5268
Doesnāt cost them a thing until thereās 4 nays.
Murkowski has always seemed like she does what she likes and doesnāt let the rest of the caucus influence her. Sheās been primaried and lost and then been reelected as a write-in. Mitch has no sway over her.
And then yeah, I imagine McConnell told vulnerable, up for re-election senators that up to two (and thatās it) of them could declare as āNoā on a nominee. And Susan Collins is probably the only one such a stance might vaguely, possibly help.
Agree. Iām sure she thinks this stance might help her win. And if she loses anyway, then voting for Trumpās nominee in the lame duck session will be the perfect payback.
Trump will replace RBG. I think thatās nearly certain.
.jpg)
