NYT: This Is No Time for Liberal Despair

[ehrnst]

The fight over President Trump’s second Supreme Court nominee is going to feel frustrating for Democrats. Not long after stealing one Supreme Court seat, Republicans will have a chance to fill a second and move the court further to the right.

Yet the confirmation process could still turn out to be productive for Democrats — or it could become the worst of all worlds, both frustrating and damaging. The key now for the party and its voters is to understand the difference between those outcomes. Here’s a three-step guide to doing so.

Step one: Be realistic.

Trump’s nominee is overwhelmingly likely to be confirmed regardless of what actions Democrats take. Republicans hold the Senate majority, and every Republican senator — yes, including Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski — has a history of voting for judges like those Trump is considering. Collins and Murkowski have a script: They make centrist-sounding statements, to shore up their images, and then vote aye.

So Democrats should go into the confirmation debate recognizing that it is almost certainly unwinnable. It will not depend on how hard Democratic leaders fight or which tactics they choose, alluring as that fantasy may be. In these polarized times, court nominations unite political parties, even more than individual issues, like, say, health care.

.............................................................................................................

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/08/opinion/trump-supreme-court-kennedy-retiring-democrats.html

Remember, too, the limits of the court’s power. On some big issues, the court is not imposing right-wing policies on the entire country. It is instead refusing to ban state-based right-wing policies — like abortion restrictions and partisan gerrymandering — that progressives consider unconstitutional. (And, by the way, the court was already doing so with Kennedy.)

Progressives can still win many of these issues. They simply will have to do so in a small-d democratic way, by winning elections — as they’ve begun to do lately. If Democrats win more governorships and state legislatures, they can keep Republicans from drawing ridiculous congressional maps and infringing on African-Americans’ voting rights — among many other things. If Democrats retake Congress this fall, they can halt the Republican legislative agenda and gain subpoena power.

...............................................................................................................

The best issues are those on which Democrats hold a decisive advantage in public opinion. Health insurance is a good example. So are taxation, corporate power and the Trump administration’s corruption. All of these issues can be grist for a nominee’s Senate hearing.

I’m not suggesting that Democratic senators ignore social issues. They just shouldn’t fool themselves into thinking that the country is further to the left than it is. For instance, about two-thirds of Americans believe abortion should be illegal at least sometimes, according to Gallup, and many of the strongest opponents base their votes on the issue. That’s why Republicans are happy to have these arguments.

[Cha]

1. Thank You, ehrnst!

[scarletwoman]

2. Thanks for posting. That last section is excellent advice for our Dem Senators.

In regard to questioning the Supreme Court nominee:

The best issues are those on which Democrats hold a decisive advantage in public opinion. Health insurance is a good example. So are taxation, corporate power and the Trump administration’s corruption. All of these issues can be grist for a nominee’s Senate hearing.

[ehrnst]

3. I think that the article is intended for the liberal base, and a warning not

to excoriate Democratic leadership for not being able to prevent the SCOTUS nomination from going forward.

Yes, I agree this paragraph is about the SCOTUS nomination process, rather than actual policy making.