Biden declines to answer question on court-packing

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Who cares about CRT packing, we are still in a Pandemic, we need our stimulus checks and a vaccine

Judges are living way too long, anyways, the life span was 65, not 80 which it is now. CRT PACKING is the answer to term limits on judges. The founders didnt put term limits on judges due to life span was 60 yrs old in 18th century

[brucejoel99]

Perfect response. The threat is out there. It speaks for itself.

And he's really good at this. People keep putting Biden down for his decades of experience, but it's those decades of experience that allow him to recognize traps & avoid them. A lesser candidate might've bitten down hard on that bait.

[Tekken_Guy]

Perfect response. The threat is out there. It speaks for itself.

And he's really good at this. People keep putting Biden down for his decades of experience, but it's those decades of experience that allow him to recognize traps & avoid them. A lesser candidate might've bitten down hard on that bait.

Like Beto and AR-15s?

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Perfect response. The threat is out there. It speaks for itself.

And he's really good at this. People keep putting Biden down for his decades of experience, but it's those decades of experience that allow him to recognize traps & avoid them. A lesser candidate might've bitten down hard on that bait.

Like Beto and AR-15s?

Beto fell into a lot of traps by accident, but deliberately walked into that one - it was accepting a general election penalty in exchange (he hoped) for a primary election boost.

Essentially, he realised he needed his campaign needed more visibility and decided to set it on fire to achieve that.

[brucejoel99]

Perfect response. The threat is out there. It speaks for itself.

And he's really good at this. People keep putting Biden down for his decades of experience, but it's those decades of experience that allow him to recognize traps & avoid them. A lesser candidate might've bitten down hard on that bait.

Like Beto and AR-15s?

Beto fell into a lot of traps by accident, but deliberately walked into that one - it was accepting a general election penalty in exchange (he hoped) for a primary election boost.

Essentially, he realised he needed his campaign needed more visibility and decided to set it on fire to achieve that.

Yeah, I just meant a less-seasoned candidate who's not already well-versed on the subject would've tried to answer it instead of question the motives behind it.

[It’s so Joever]

Contrary to what Atlas thinks, this is the smartest answer.
If Trump tries to attack him on it, Biden can portray the entire SCOTUS debate as out of touch with the American people during the current crisis.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Sorry, he wouldnt have the votes, it wont be a Supermajority Senate, it will be 51/50 Senate and Feinstein said no

[Non Swing Voter]

Contrary to what Atlas thinks, this is the smartest answer.
If Trump tries to attack him on it, Biden can portray the entire SCOTUS debate as out of touch with the American people during the current crisis.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

What a coward! He shouldn't be scared to say what he believes, that is the mindset of a career politician, not someone who speaks the truth. If someone won't say something due to fear of people disagreeing, why should we trust him on anything else?

[Non Swing Voter]

What a coward! He shouldn't be scared to say what he believes, that is the mindset of a career politician, not someone who speaks the truth. If someone won't say something due to fear of people disagreeing, why should we trust him on anything else?

As opposed to Republicans who just blatantly lie/reverse position as it favors them?

BTW - maybe he wants to think about the issue?  give a reasoned answer, rather than just blurt out lies like Trump does?

[Sbane]

Democrats really are experts at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory .


If they lose this will be the 3rd election this century they have blown along with 2000 and 2016

2016 was absolutely Republicans to win. Only because they nominated a weak candidate like Trump did they perform as they did. Rubio or Kasich would have done better.

Yes of course but the gop still nominated Trump and Dems should have been able to beat Trump

Hillary was a disaster from the beginning. She should have figured it out in 2008 she was never going to be President.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

He can't answer the question, the Senate will be 50-52 seats and we don't know what Sinema, Manchin will do, and Feinstein says no to eliminating filibuster

[Big Abraham]

What a coward! He shouldn't be scared to say what he believes, that is the mindset of a career politician, not someone who speaks the truth. If someone won't say something due to fear of people disagreeing, why should we trust him on anything else?

As opposed to Republicans who just blatantly lie/reverse position as it favors them?

BTW - maybe he wants to think about the issue?  give a reasoned answer, rather than just blurt out lies like Trump does?

Because the opposition is worse, that makes it acceptable?

These are not the words of a man who has any principles.

He doesn't need to "think about it", he already came out against court-packing in the primaries. If he's stayed true to his word, he would re-iterate it here. If he's flip flopped, then he's clearly only doing so opportunistically

[Alben Barkley]

What a coward! He shouldn't be scared to say what he believes, that is the mindset of a career politician, not someone who speaks the truth. If someone won't say something due to fear of people disagreeing, why should we trust him on anything else?

As opposed to Republicans who just blatantly lie/reverse position as it favors them?

BTW - maybe he wants to think about the issue?  give a reasoned answer, rather than just blurt out lies like Trump does?

Because the opposition is worse, that makes it acceptable?

These are not the words of a man who has any principles.

He doesn't need to "think about it", he already came out against court-packing in the primaries. If he's stayed true to his word, he would re-iterate it here. If he's flip flopped, then he's clearly only doing so opportunistically

I'd rather have someone who is open to changing his mind in the face of new situations and evidence than someone who dogmatically sticks to the same "principles" he had when he was a teenage hippie.

This is what I don't think Bernie disciples understand. Their constant touting of his "ideological consistency/purity" is not just something I don't find to be a positive; I find it to be an outright negative in a politician.

See, the thing about politics is that it's not actually about ideology. That is the domain of academics, pundits, and people arguing on the internet. Politics, at least in a democratic society, is about getting enough support from people to put yourself in a position where you can realistically achieve policy goals. All of this requires compromise, coalition/alliance-building, and constant awareness of how the public perceives you and your words. Things, incidentally, Bernie is terrible at; he's great at wagging his finger and loudly telling the world how things should be, but has never shown any indication he is capable of actually making that happen.

And so whatever Biden really thinks about court-packing, the politically smart thing to do here is to hedge and hold out. He doesn't want to create a headline that says "BIDEN IS FOR/AGAINST COURT-PACKING" because he doesn't want the conversation to be about court-packing at all right now. He wants it to stay focused on the GOP's hypocrisy and on COVID. Don Draper in Mad Men said "If you don't like what's being said, change the conversation" in reference to marketing, and politics is very similar to marketing.

So Biden absolutely made the right move here. I don't really care at this moment what he really thinks about court-packing, if he has in fact come to a concrete conclusion at all (and no, what he said in the primaries BEFORE RBG died doesn't necessarily mean anything now that the situation has changed completely). I don't want it to be a distraction or liability. Put all the pressure on the GOP, then cross that bridge if and when it comes to it.

[KYRockefeller]

Biden will need a better answer for the debates.

I still don't see a court packing plan making it through the Senate if its close.  If Manchin votes for it he's gone next cycle (although he might be anyway) and it'd set up Mark Kelly for a closer race in Arizona in two years time.  Also, if the GA race comes down to the Court, I can't see a Dem winning that race.

[Big Abraham]

I'd rather have someone who is open to change his mind in the face of new situations and evidence than someone who dogmatically sticks to the same "principles" he had when he was a teenage hippie.

He is free to open his mind if he has genuinely evolved on the issue; if he has, when he is directly asked a question about it would be a great time to respond. But I think you clearly know that the "new situation" here only refers to the fact that Democrats are butthurt about a court vacancy with a Republican president and Republican senate. If the parties were reversed, or even if the Democrats were able to successfully block a Court nominee, the Democrats (and Republicans mind you) would be changing their whole tune. This is not "changing his mind", this is opportunism. And if you support that, fine, but at least call it what it is

See, the thing about politics is that it's not actually about ideology. That is the domain of academics, pundits, and people arguing on the internet. Politics, at least in a democratic society, is about getting enough support from people to put yourself in a position where you can realistically achieve policy goals. All of this requires compromise, coalition/alliance-building, and constant awareness of how the public perceives you and your words. Things, incidentally, Bernie is terrible at; he's great at wagging his finger and loudly telling the world how things should be, but has never shown any indication he is capable of actually making that happen.

What does any of this have to do with Bernie Sanders? This thread is about Biden blatantly and obviously avoiding a question he was asked because it's politically uncomfortable. You bringing up a senator you don't like is nothing more than a red herring

And so whatever Biden really thinks about court-packing, the politically smart thing to do here is to hedge and hold out. He doesn't want to create a headline that says "BIDEN IS FOR/AGAINST COURT-PACKING" because he doesn't want the conversation to be about court-packing at all right now. He wants it to stay focused on the GOP's hypocrisy and on COVID. Don Draper in Mad Men said "If you don't like what's being said, change the conversation" in reference to marketing, and politics is very similar to marketing.

Terrible analogy. I guess it is similar to marketing, but there's nothing admirable about that, especially coming from a politician trying to present himself as the alternative to Trump. Politics is about people's livelihoods, not corporate strategy. I get that he wants to "stay focused" on the pandemic and Republican hypocrisy (even though the Democrats are just as guilty of hypocrisy as well, considering they supported appointed a SC nominee in an election year four years ago), but that's because it's politically convenient to him

So Biden absolutely made the right move here. I don't really care at this moment what he really thinks about court-packing, if he has in fact come to a concrete conclusion at all (and no, what he said in the primaries BEFORE RBG died doesn't necessarily mean anything now that the situation has changed completely). I don't want it to be a distraction or liability. Put all the pressure on the GOP, then cross that bridge if and when it comes to it.

The situation hasn't changed completely. A justice dying and Trump being there to fill the seat has always been a possibility. A president nominating judges to the bench with Senate confirmation is part and parcel of the constitutional process in this country. And hell, even if you think it was a smart move, there are a hell of a lot better ways to go about doing it than to straight up tell your constituents that you're purposely evading a question

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Biden will need a better answer for the debates.

I still don't see a court packing plan making it through the Senate if its close.  If Manchin votes for it he's gone next cycle (although he might be anyway) and it'd set up Mark Kelly for a closer race in Arizona in two years time.  Also, if the GA race comes down to the Court, I can't see a Dem winning that race.

Bullock is only 1 pt down to Daines, we haven't had a poll from KS, Ernst is underperforming against Greenfield and two GA seats are in flux.

Pelosi has mishandled the stimulus checks and Trump wants its passed on 10/1, but McConnell let it expire, in August.

Also, Trump refuses to wear a mask, that looks him look weak, when his own Surgeon General calls on everyone to wear a mask.  Fauci encourage everyone to wear a mask

Trump still wants to pass tax cuts for the rich, and raising the cap on SSA for people making over 80K a year would only close the deficits

[Badger]

What a coward! He shouldn't be scared to say what he believes, that is the mindset of a career politician, not someone who speaks the truth. If someone won't say something due to fear of people disagreeing, why should we trust him on anything else?

Thanks bot!

[Stranger in a strange land]

Just saying "All Options are on the table" and "I will do whatever it takes to protect Americans' access to healthcare" is absolutely the correct approach.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

What a coward! He shouldn't be scared to say what he believes, that is the mindset of a career politician, not someone who speaks the truth. If someone won't say something due to fear of people disagreeing, why should we trust him on anything else?

As opposed to Republicans who just blatantly lie/reverse position as it favors them?

BTW - maybe he wants to think about the issue?  give a reasoned answer, rather than just blurt out lies like Trump does?

No not opposed to Republicans who just blatantly lie/reverse position as it favors them. That would be even worse, I'm saying he should speak what he actually believes. Also you shouldn't assume anyone who criticizes Biden supports Republicans, Republicans do much worse than anything Biden does, so don't assume I am one.