Is the Blue Wave dead?

[136or142]

70% of Americans cant name a single SCOTUS justice and only 1% can name all of 9.

Nobody gives a dead mooses last shi*t about Kennedy retiring

The confirmation will be on the news a lot

Do you honestly think that Trump supporters will be watching it? Yes, I'm sure that the de-evolved cro-magnons  that are Trump supporters will immediately call out of work at their local ditch digging gig to tune into the intellectual questioning of Trump's SCOTUS nominees.

70% of Americans cant name a single SCOTUS justice and only 1% can name all of 9.

Nobody gives a dead mooses last shi*t about Kennedy retiring

Not that I disagree that Americans are extremely dumb, I'm a frequent proponent of this truism. But you don't need to know their names to know what's at stake.

They honestly dont. The vast majority of American voters just sleep walk through life totally unaware of whats at stake. If you told most Trump supporters that ''Kennedy retired from the SCOTUS,'' theyd probably respond: ''JFK wuz on da Supreme Kourt?''

Again its not Kennedy but the confirmation process will be mentioned throughout the campaign and in Red States that will make the Abortion Issue brought up a lot

You have a misunderstanding of how American politics actually work. Nobody cares about the issues...it's all about who activates the tribes in their party but for the most part an existential threat is necessary to motivate your base. Nobody cares about SCOTUS or abortion...the prime motivator for Republicans in 2016 was their insane hatred of Clinton and Obama who many on the right literally though was out to get them and thus posed an existential threat. With both of them gone, you couldn't turn out Republicans if you promised to legalize incest.

Of course exit polls aren't perfect but they're better than unsubstantiated opinions

In your vote, were Supreme Court appointments
The most important factor: 21%
An important factor: 48%
A minor factor: 14%
Not a factor at all: 14%

Hillary Clinton did much better with those who said it was either 'a minor factor' or 'not a factor at all.'

https://www.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls/national/president

People are lying to the opinion polls. Most Republican voters just took their cues from their party leaders: ''were voting for a Conservative SCOTUS because that's what FOX, and Republican talk radio told us what we were voting for.''

I don't know if that's true or not, but I agree that is one of the dangers of just relying on polls.  However, generally something is better than nothing.

[junior chįmp]

I don't know if that's true or not, but I agree that is one of the dangers of just relying on polls.  However, generally something is better than nothing.

The vast majority of voters dont know why they vote the way they do so they just lie to the pollsters. Truth is that most people vote their identity. If you live in rural Alabama...your going to vote GOP and if you live in downtown San Francisco your going to vote Democrat. But you'll never admit it that the time, place, and circumstance around you influenced your vote. People want to think that they were ''independent'' and figured it out all themselves.

[NewYorkExpress]

Yes, unless Democrats decide to start running on impeaching Gorsuch/Thomas/Roberts/whoever Trump nominates to replace Kennedy.

After all, I wouldn't be shocked if Republicans bring impeachment charges against Ginsburg/Sotomayor/Breyer/Kagan.

What drugs do you take?

Trust me, right wing zealots would love 9-0 Supreme Court in their favor.

[Zaybay]

I don't know if that's true or not, but I agree that is one of the dangers of just relying on polls.  However, generally something is better than nothing.

The vast majority of voters dont know why they vote the way they do so they just lie to the pollsters. Truth is that most people vote their identity. If you live in rural Alabama...your going to vote GOP and if you live in downtown San Francisco your going to vote Democrat. But you'll never admit it that the time, place, and circumstance around you influenced your vote. People want to think that they were ''independent'' and figured it out all themselves.

Exactly. Most people who are religious who voted for Trump would have voted for him no matter what. It was just a convenient excuse to say that it was for "A Supreme Court seat". I mean, everyone does it, we don't want to think of ourselves as partisans who vote the same way all the time, so we try to excuse it with anything. Me and Clinton don't agree on much, but I supported her because she "would be the first woman president" or "would continue Obama's legacy". Spoiler, I was a partisan Democrat at the time, now a socialist, that's why I supported her.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's a status quo appointment and nothing will change. Roe and SSM will be remanded to states. And liberals live in 3 big cities, Bronx, Chicago or LAX.  Change the number of justices when Dems get trifecta in 2020

[Zaybay]

You guys are acting like the Pundits we continuously mock. This will change nothing. The issues that actually have some effect on the midterms are tarriffs, the economy, and healthcare. These are the issues that motivate the swing voters. Not the supreme court, or gov. shutdowns.

[Mr. Morden]

And liberals live in 3 big cities, Bronx, Chicago or LAX.

People live in the airport?  So it's like that movie, The Terminal?

[Xing]

If there's no blue wave, it would be because Trump became more popular, not because of this.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Why would this motivate Republicans? McConnell will shoehorn whatever pick Trump nominates and it will make the GOP feel all big and bad and that they're owning the libs. Keeping them complacent. The antagonistic nature of this process will only make the Ds turnout bigger.

[Virginiá]

It's going to take a lot more than this to crush the backlash that has been building for 2 years. If anything, it might give a shot of energy to the left as well as the right, given that the Garland fiasco the disastrous Gorsuch-era decisions that followed infused the left with an appreciation of the courts.

And if November is a wash, there was probably never going to be a wave to begin with, despite all the signs.

Anyone who cares about the court enough was gonna vote anyway.

Though the red state Dems can negate any backlash by simply voting for whatever cretin Trump nominates. It's not like their vote will be consequential anyways. They should do everything it takes to win reelection so as to block any Trump nominees post-midterm.

I don't understand why this doesn't get enough consideration. There is a lot of overlap between conservatives who were always going to vote Republican and conservatives who care so much about SCOTUS picks that they'd base their vote on it. I'd venture a guess to say it is >90%, and these people are probably the party's most reliable voters.

Anyway, unless Dirty Mitch strings out the confirmation to overlap with the election, I doubt it sustains itself. They'll have the seat and whatever energy there is around it will quickly dissipate. And even if he does, it'll barely make a difference in the results. I bet you won't even be able to tell the difference, outside of misleading exit polls that may show a % of voters who based their vote on SCOTUS but who neglect to mention they are reliable Republicans anyway.

[CookieDamage]

Changes nothing, and people who claim that this kills Dem enthusiasm have no proof it does and nothing to bridge their claim and reality.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Immigration is a key issue in swing States like FL, AZ, TX and AZ, and another originalist will complicate matters for Latinos, that will be motivated to vote Cruz and Heller out of office

[Yank2133]

Nope.

[longtimelurker]

Depends on how many more weeks the stock market acts like the last 2 weeks, and how many independents look at their portfolios.  A 2 or 3 per cent increase in turnout/vote changing among indies may be the deciding factor.  While Ds and Rs are screaming at each other about abortion, it may come down to dollars and cents, just like old times.

[pbrower2a]

We can be nearly 100% sure that Donald Trump  will appoint some reactionary, probably someone who believes that 'justice' is identical with deterrence, that workers have duties to the Master Class which owes nobody anything, and that any partisan advantage that the GOP can get through regulation of elections is something to be frozen permanently.

There will be some strange decisions that the Trump--fixed Supreme Court will make -- decisions that will require Constitutional Amendments or a revolution to undo. Or we will end up seeing some of the most drastic decisions by states -- even secession -- as the consequences of the Trump regime become increasingly objectionable but indelible.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

Immigration is a key issue in swing States like FL, AZ, TX and AZ, and another originalist will complicate matters for Latinos, that will be motivated to vote Cruz and Heller out of office

Wow, that opinion was actually semi-coherent. I mean, you still think AZ is two states, but that is way less insane than your usual stuff.

[Calthrina950]

The Blue Wave is not dead, but I have long said that many of the people on here have expectations that are overblown. Given political polarization and gerrymandering, the House vote (in terms of seats, not in terms of percentage), will be very close, though I suspect Democrats will probably gain at least as many seats as they did in 2006, give or take a few.

As for the Senate, it is still very probable that one or more of the red-state Democrats could lose, with Heitkamp and Donnelly being the most vulnerable. Nelson's race is also a tossup. The whole Supreme Court deal can be used by Republicans to mobilize their base, along with many of the other incidents that have happened recently. In the end, I still think Republicans will narrowly hold the Senate, because at least one of the red-state Democrats will probably lose.

[BudgieForce]

No, unless McConnell holds the confirmation at the end of October. If the last 2 years havent shown you Americans have the attention span of a glazed ham, then you too might have the attention span of a glazed ham.

[Tekken_Guy]

No. Democrats are very adamant on preventing the seat from being filled before the midterms. I haven’t seen much enthusiasm from Republicans on filling the seat today.

[Mr. Smith]

Nope, and if anything, this'll mobilize turnout for the left even more.

It's usually only bases that really pay attention to or care about these sorts of things, and the in-party base is usually complacent compared to the out-party one, which'll be on the lookout for anything terrible to rag on and any weakness to tackle.

Insisting this'll prop the GOP is like how in 2014, where all those minimum wage efforts were supposed to inspire a pro-Obama counter to the RedWave.

Also, the PPACA saving 26 year olds didn't bring out a lot of youth to defend it against the Tea Party people in 2010.

I also don't recall the stem-cell research thing bringing out the religious right in 2006 to stop the inevitable.

[new_patomic]

I don't see how this motivates religious voters at all.

Assuming Republicans aren't stupid and they confirm a justice before the midterms we're back to the status-quo. They get another 'win' under their belt and another thing to sell to the base, but I doubt there's some great segment of voters out there who were thinking "Well, I wasn't sure with Gorsuch, but now with two Gorsuchs they've got my vote!"

If the Republicans don't vote before the midterms... well, why wouldn't they? To motivate turnout? The question becomes, and one Trump would definitely be asking, why aren't you just voting on it now when you know you have the votes. Why go through the extra drama when everyone knows you'll still have the votes in the lame-duck period, if you lose the midterms. This isn't February of 2016 where if Hillary Clinton wins you're for sure going have a Democrat to deal with for the next four years. Trump is still going to be President after November, there's no liberal justice coming down the pipeline.

If anything the likelier reaction would be complacency on the right since they've effectively won, and outrage (and motivation to vote) on the left because there's nothing really else to do, if it even matters at all. 

[Devout Centrist]

70% of Americans cant name a single SCOTUS justice and only 1% can name all of 9.

Nobody gives a dead mooses last shi*t about Kennedy retiring

The confirmation will be on the news a lot

Yeah, just like Breyer’s in ‘94.

The answer is ‘no’.

[Orser67]

I actually expect the vacancy to help Democrats for three reasons.

Number one, Americans generally don't like the idea of one-party government, and replacing Kennedy with some 50-year-old Federalist Society right-winger gives Republicans clear control over all three branches of government. I think some swing voters will probably have an even greater reason to check Trump.

Number two, Republicans ramming a nominee through the Senate will make the party look bad. Normally, this wouldn't matter all that much, but given how close the hearings will be to the election I could see this having a genuine effect on some swing voters.

Number three, Republicans putting a conservative on the bench will just add a little more fuel to the fire for any left-leaning individuals who might have thought about sitting out the race. I expect we will see very, very high turnout among Democrats in this race, at least for a mid-term.

[Consciously Unconscious]

It really could go either way.  A lot of it depends on timining of the nomination, who is actually not nominated, as well as how Congressional Democrats and Republicans approach the issue. 

[Fuzzy Bear]

I don't see how this motivates religious voters at all.

Assuming Republicans aren't stupid and they confirm a justice before the midterms we're back to the status-quo. They get another 'win' under their belt and another thing to sell to the base, but I doubt there's some great segment of voters out there who were thinking "Well, I wasn't sure with Gorsuch, but now with two Gorsuchs they've got my vote!"

If the Republicans don't vote before the midterms... well, why wouldn't they? To motivate turnout? The question becomes, and one Trump would definitely be asking, why aren't you just voting on it now when you know you have the votes. Why go through the extra drama when everyone knows you'll still have the votes in the lame-duck period, if you lose the midterms. This isn't February of 2016 where if Hillary Clinton wins you're for sure going have a Democrat to deal with for the next four years. Trump is still going to be President after November, there's no liberal justice coming down the pipeline.

If anything the likelier reaction would be complacency on the right since they've effectively won, and outrage (and motivation to vote) on the left because there's nothing really else to do, if it even matters at all.  

I am not a "religious conservative" down the line on every issue that such folks usually are, but those sort of folks are whom I fellowship with reqularly.  

They are not always the best informed on political issues.  They believe what they hear on FOX and from their closed circles.  And what they see on social media.  One of my closer friends, a guy who thinks highly of me, was telling me of Obama's plan to convert closed shopping malls and military bases into re-education camps of some sort.  He was serious.  (I know I've told him that I voted for Obama in 2012, but he thinks I'm a great guy, so he's in denial of that.  And he's a good friend, so I maintain my own denial of his belief in some things that are downright wacky.)

There are two (2) issues that these folks, to a person, are not confused about.  One is the fact that America is a GREAT nation and it is their job to see that it is a GODLY nation.  And the second fact is that the SCOTUS is the vehicle that has fostered the progressive un-Godliness of America.  It was the SCOTUS that kicked God out of the public schools by eliminating prayer and Bible reading.  It was the SCOTUS that ushered in the abomination of abortion, and the murder of unborn children.  It was the SCOTUS that established SSM, an abomination in the eyes of God.  These things are FACTS to these folks; they accept these things as axioms just as the LGBTQ folks accept the idea that one is "born LGBTQ" axiomatically.

The part that is absolutely true, and not up for debate, is that prohibitions on school prayer, abortion on demand, and SSM (to name three) are things that were ushered in by the SCOTUS.  They weren't legislated.  These folks may not be policy wonks but they understand what the SCOTUS did and the process by which it can be undone.  That's not rocket science.  They understand that Donald Trump will appoint a SCOTUS Justice that will reverse what they loathe, and that the GOP Senate will confirm this.  And they're about to actually GAIN GROUND; Kennedy was the enemy on THEIR issues.  They're already motivated.  It'll only increase.