The SCOTUS is lost for a generation. The only remedy is...

[Yavin4]

becoming a dominant, progressive political party at all levels of government for decades to come. It's not just about this year's mid terms, but every single election across the country. We can no longer afford to write off red states. The Democratic party needs to develop local talent at all levels that can relate to and win elections in those locations. We have to work extra hard to get money out of politics. We have to put forward a progressive message that resonates with voters and gets them out to the polls.

The Democrats need to learn how unions built political power in this country. They did it through service. The party needs to become a service organization. Help people deal with their every day problems and soon they will see you more than just a political party. They will see you as a force for positive change.

[roamer65]

1. Time to increase the size of the court.

13 justices.

2021...

[BigmanPigman]

2. Yep!

[Lucky Luciano]

3. I've been pushing that sort of thing. Getting it to 11 is enough for me.

It gets revenge for Garland and this pick that never should have happened. Any pick by fuckface must be neutered. They are illegitimate.

[dalton99a]

6. Yep.

[Takket]

7. dumb question but.............

why doesn't the GOP just do that?

[former9thward]

15. Because when FDR tried that he lost 72 seats in the House and 7 in the Senate

in the next midterms because of the blowback from the public. It was the end of the New Deal legislative agenda. It would be suicide for the Democrats to do that.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

20. Increase the size and impose 20 year term limits

Right now, both parties are incentivized to take the youngest picks - not the best picks. A 20 year service limit would encourage justices in their 60s to be picked once again.

[lordsummerisle]

4. Voter turnout is all-important

A weak dem turnout means the continuation of a divided, somnolent do-nothing Congress and more of the status quo.

Thom Hartmann keeps saying on his program that there's a provision in the constitution that says that Congress can manage the Supreme Court. That's about as likely to happen as me becoming president...
I'm not optimistic...

[Kablooie]

5. If you can change the constitution SCOTUS can be restrained.

Nearly impossible of course, but still that distant option exists.

[Varaddem]

8. It's already

A joke to anyone who wants justice. Just going on memory here but Clarence Thomas not recusing himself, Alito not recusing himself with Stocks, and plagiarism by Gorsuch Haven’t they already lost all credibility ? They don’t believe in voting rights. How many of these POS is would you want to be in business with?

[Vogon_Glory]

9. We Should Do These Things, But There Is Still Hope For This Generation

The Justices are mortal. I wasn't expecting Justice Scalia to flat-line so soon.

[ismnotwasm]

10. Unions just lost a lot of political power with the Janus ruling

They will maintain as much as they can through grassroots, but the Freedom foundation has all the names of state workers and is planning on knocking on doors to get people to opt out. I am looking forward to telling them to get the fuck of my property, personally.

My point is, the political landscape is a bit more complex than “how the unions did it” —especially if one has a grasp on union history and Democrats in my state are already countering Republicans as best they can.

You are right as far as how one path to counter this shit. I’m just still pissed off about how we got into this in the first fucking place.

[johnnyrocket]

11. Three words: pack the court.

add 2 or 4 more justices when dems control congress/POTUS.

Simple. Rack 'em and stack 'em.

[standingtall]

12. I think 2 to 4 is not enough

we need to add about 6 to 10. You have to figure if we do this once republicans are back in power they are going to stack over what we've done. So we will have to do what we can to keep republicans out of power for as long as possible. We would have to be ready to hit the ground running with legislation that will help people as well as help people vote and we will need these things to go into immediately not years later.

[mythology]

18. If packing the courts was such a great answer, why haven't Republicans done it?

Increasing the size of the court because we don't like how it rules is a recipe for disaster.

[standingtall]

19. republicans already have the supreme court they want

and the other reason is they are afraid we will do it. A recipe for disaster is letting the Supreme Court be used as a right wing tool for the next lifetime.

[Control-Z]

13. Are you a Democrat? A US citizen?

I only ask because of your language:

"Help people deal with their every day problems and soon they will see you more than just a political party. They will see you as a force for positive change."

That aside, I believe we need to educate the public about the power of Congress. And we need to talk about all that Democrats have done for the country. Every good program and policy we have in this country was brought to us via Democrats. We need to start naming them. We need to brag about them!

[Yavin4]

14. Please. Stop being a grammar Nazi.

It's fucking rude.

[Control-Z]

16. A grammar Nazi? Please. I wasn't questioning your grammar.

And there was nothing rude about my post. I was asking a sincere question. And nicely, I might add. I made a point of explaining why I was asking. We have a lot of members who do not live here, and who are citizens of other countries. They usually have very good perspectives of what is happening here since they are looking at is from a different vantage point. We also have Independents and Green party members.

Geez. Or should I make that fucking geez.

[Maven]

17. Forgive me, but I think this kind of thinking is where we keep going wrong.

Yes, we should compete in elections in every state and at every level. But putting forward a progressive message that resonates is, unfortunately, beside the point in today's political reality. It fails to address the two wars that the GOP has been fighting against us, which are not policy wars per se. They are:

1) The procedural war, in which Republicans have exploited gray areas in the Constitution to build in structural advantages for themselves and shut us out of governing, and

2) The propaganda war, in which Republicans use the massive media machine they've built over the last 30 to 40 years to mainstream their hyperpartisan worldview and to cast Democrats and liberals as not only their political opponents but as the enemies of decent, everyday Americans.

I wholeheartedly agree that we should continue to espouse progressive policies loudly and proudly. But there is much evidence to suggest that policy outcomes don't necessarily correlate with voter preferences. The modern news media covers politics as a team sport (or in some cases, a reality show), so it's no surprise that many voters are uninformed about policy and don't understand who is really on their side.

All that is to say: organizing and good messaging are important, but they aren't enough. If we don't start fighting fire with fire and fight back against the procedural assaults of the GOP and against their propaganda platforms, we will not survive as a party or as a country. In fact, I'm not at all sure that it isn't too late for us at this point.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

21. One tremendous structural advantage we don't discuss is state size

Kansas, Nebraska, NoDak, SoDak, Montana, Vermont, and Wyoming are all over represented in the Senate. I took civics and i get the big state small state thing, but DC has more people than either Vermont or Wyoming. Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties in Florida have more people than 4 or 5 of the upper Midwest states combined. Meanwhile, Puerto Rico and DC have no real representation. Big states (both red and blue, to be honest) should consider breaking up into smaller states. Once that is done, some of the less viable states should be merged. There should be a population floor for a state of like 2 million and a maximum size of like 5 million.

[standingtall]

22. If larger States broke apart I think the results of the electoral college would be about the

same if not worse and the Senate would certainly have more republicans. Each State gets 2 Senators so the parts that splinter off from larger States will favor republicans in that scenario. More practical to make Puerto Rico a State and there really is no reason why it shouldn't be other than right wing opposition.