US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
Tennessee does politics fun...
Just not serious people...
Feinstein is dead.
It was appalling how they kept rolling her out "to work" while she was clearly in no shape to govern.
Surprised they didn’t try to Weekend at Bernies her.
Yeah it was disgraceful. Another good. case for age limits.
If the military wasn't an equal opportunity employer they d barely have enough people to enlist. What another dumb as rocks comment by Tuberville. Unfortunately many of his base won't see the sheer irony in that comment.
Phew. Bet her spads are gutted they’ve lost their puppet though.
RIP I guess to her but say goodbye to any more judges being confirmed.
RIP. It was obvious over a year ago that she was in no fit state to be in any job never mind being a senator. Unsure why her family did not step in to give her a dignified end to her life.
I wonder if her coffin will be draped in an American or a Confederate flag.
I must have missed something. Confederate flag?
RIP
So what happens now, Gavin picks a replacement, and that senator will have sort of an incumbency-advantage in next years primaries?
So what happens now, Gavin picks a replacement, and that senator will have sort of an incumbency-advantage in next years primaries?
I mean, it's the only flag that she has ever fought to keep in place.
As mayor she repeatedly had the flag raised on a monument outside city hall after people would tear it down.
Why though? Doesn't Gavin pick an interim senator in the meantime?
In San Fransico? That's f'n' strange.
There has been a big push for him to pick someone who vows to not run since if he picked Porter/Schiff/Lee it would be handing that person an advantage in the election next year. Boxer would be a easy choice as she had been in the Senate and retired already so likely would not want to run again.
Who is Richard Bradley? Man who took on Dianne Feinstein over Confederate flag speaks out 37 years later - ABC7 San Francisco (abc7news.com)
The Dems stupidly put a zombie on the Senate Judiciary committee. At the beginning of a term both sides pick who they want on committees and they are approved all together. If a replacement needs to be made mid-term it requires a vote of approval in the full Senate and, because of the filibuster, it requires 60 votes. McConnell has already said he would block a replacement on the committee. This means the committee is deadlocked with R's and D's and so no judges, or at least no even slightly progressive judges, will make it out of committee for a confirmation vote.
Hopefully Gavin picks someone who wont run, i think he has indicated as much, but lets see.
As for the judiciary, was it not a straight up majority vote? I thought that extra seat dems picked up in the midterms allowed for a majority on the judiciary instead of the spit that was before.
It requires 60 votes now, but not at the begining of the term? Well, thats a big blow then.
Though if recall, didn't Biden get to pick a good amount of judges with split judiciary from 2020 to 2022?
Maybe i'm confusing the judiciary committe with the senate confirming judges, nevermind.
Last edited:
They did, that seat was Feinstein's
I believe it does at the beginning of the term as well, but both sides vote for it since it is a single approval vote for all seats on all committees.
I have limited knowledge on this field, im afraid, say the senate is 50/50 after next years election(pretty much best case scenario for dems), that means the judiciary committee will continue to be split, right?
So, we are looking at, in the best case scenario, 3,5 years of a split committee, with few judges getting confirmed now.
At least she croaked before the election.
So the way I understand it is that the Senate, as opposed to the house, always has a quorum since only 1/3 of the Senate stands for election every 2 years (as opposed to the house where the entire body is up each election). As a result, the Senates rules of operation do not expire, they just need to get renegotiated. So when it was 50/50 in 2021 we had a funny situation of Rep Committee Chairs in a Dem controlled Senate (thanks to Harriss's tie breaking vote) while Schumer and McConnell negotiated a new rules package. Part of any rules package is the appointment of Committe chairs, which the Dem's got thanks to their majority. What I don't know is if they still had a voting majority in those committees. Maybe @Carolina Red would know.
Here's the official rosters for the committees, but it doesn't have them denoted by party.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CPUB-117spub5/pdf/GPO-CPUB-117spub5.pdf
It sort of does as they are in seperate columns.
Also, Marsha Blackburn is on Judiciary?
It sort of does as they are in seperate columns.
Also, Marsha Blackburn is on Judiciary?
Also, Grassley, if GOP are smart they would try to replace him(on the judiciary) with someone else after next years election. as to not get screwed over as dems just did.
Good shape for his age, but he is ancient.
Ahhh you're right. Totally didn't realize that they did that on purpose.
Well that's not happening then.
Damnit, someone (I will not name because there may be a reason) deleted their post discussing age distribution of the Senate between parties. I, of course, immediately went into Excel land to look into it. Here you go
Essentially the parties are pretty even in the middle, with the GOP have a few more young Senators. The striking difference is in the 70-79 range.
| Average | Median | <50 | 50-59 | 60-69 | 70-79 | 80+ | |
| Dem | 64.8 | 65 | 4 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 2 |
| Rep | 62.1 | 65 | 6 | 11 | 18 | 12 | 2 |
| Total | 63.49 | 65 | 10 | 23 | 33 | 30 | 4 |
Essentially the parties are pretty even in the middle, with the GOP have a few more young Senators. The striking difference is in the 70-79 range.
oh man
Chaos caucus
I mean, why the feck not. We are already living in the absurd version of the simulation.