If Trump wins again, and the R's maintain the Senate, he might be able to get two more SC picks in the best case. That would probably be the most consequential legacy of any Republican president. For better or for worse. Then again, Bush's presidency was also consequential, but in a different way.

Yep, I don't think the Dems will go this route either.

Isn't that a little harsh if she doesn't want to blurt out a strategy that's still in the making?
I think the Dems are probably considering increasing the number of SC judges in January if they get back into power. Not a good move to publicly announce that to McConnell, though, or he'll start doing the same between Nov and Dec.

I'd love to be proven wrong here .. but my experience with Pelosi says no. There is no strategy. She shifted it onto the election cause she has so answer to the question and no backbone to start an impeachment hearing. The bitch was resistant as hell against the first impeachment until it became abundantly clear the abuse of power and the pressure mounted on her. And even then she didn't want to pursue many of the obvious other instances of corruption but keep it limited to the Ukraine issue. Basically she has no backbone, like most Democrats. I pray she's voted on of office in 2020.

... If they get into power, I pray you're right. I doubt it.

If they don't get into power, we're ****ed either way.

Yes, Pelosi has a reputation as a cunning survivor - not so much as a principalled champion.

Yes, I'm worried about the chances of the Dems getting into power, especially as this has now become a possibilty:-
i) a GOP judge is put in the Supreme Court
ii) the election is close and goes to the SC
iii) a Dem landslide in the election is contested by Trump and goes to the SC
iv) the SC flexes its new-found GOP majority and gives Trump the election result he wants.

She's being primaried from the left in this election, and her district has jungle primaries which means that the top 2 contenders go to the general rather than the top candidate of each party. Which, since she's is a heavily blue district, means the general will likely be her vs her more progressive challenger that's also a Democrat. Anyone who lives in her district: vote her out. You literally have nothing to lose.

I mean there's so many different potential problematic scenarios. The Dems winning power after Trump seats someone on the SC in itself is potentially still problematic. I don't believe they have it in them to stack the courts... Everything I've seen suggests they're unwilling to do anything that controversial.

It's funny cause the same rules that people have been proposing here for why the Republicans might not act cause it would be too controversial... They don't apply to Republicans. They only apply to spineless Democrats that then project their own cowardice onto the GOP.

Understand this... There are no such thing as norms anymore. There's no such thing as fairness. There's only what you can get away with and what you can't. Until the Dems figure that out they will always be losers.

C'mon man, you dog faced pony soldier, that's a bunch of malarkey.

Me too

I can’t wait to see how many of them actually bother.

Yeah. I was thinking the same thing.