Comments on Bigot. by Michael Cain in reply to George Turner

Unconstitutionally vague? What about advocating for an exit-clause amendment? Or for a constitutional convention?

I have some distant family that I see as infrequently as possible for whom "No matter what the Republicans do to me, the Democrats would have done worse" is an article of faith. No specific policies or outcomes needed.

Nixon gets too much credit for this. Years later, when we got to see his papers, his reason for creating the EPA by executive order was that he didn't like or trust the environmentalists in various federal agencies and wanted them all in one place where they could be more easily controlled. He vetoed the Clean Water Act. Like all of the major environmental bills of that time, it had passed by a veto-proof majority and the veto was overridden. He impounded half the funds appropriated to enforce the CWA, eventually losing in the Supreme Court and leading to passage of the 1974 Impoundment Control Act.

Much of Nixon's support of environmental protection was under the umbrella of his New Federalism plans: he wanted most of the control (and funding) to be the responsibility of the individual states, with some federal oversight. Congress declined to do it that way.

...or because they don’t have a plan for a second act so they are terrified of having all of that time on their hands.

This, at least among my former colleagues. When they start muttering about retirement, I ask them, "What's your plan to fill up all those hours? How's it hold up if you (or your spouse) develop physical limitations?" I started planning for my retirement -- and not just in the sense of money -- years before I actually retired.

This is one of her main proposals which is supposedly proving she’s a serious player… and I don’t hear any pushback on it.

"Repeal Obamacare" was a main proposal by every Republican everywhere, it seemed. But when it actually mattered McConnell couldn't deliver 50 votes.

The Dems need to flip three seats (plus the White House) to control the Senate. Four if you assume Doug Jones loses in Alabama. There aren't four states with Republican Senators to be flipped where a federal wealth tax supporter can win.

To be honest, I'm not sure a federal wealth tax can get by the current Supreme Court.

Wealth tax.

Not a chance in hell. Warren can't do it unilaterally, and Schumer -- or any other Dem who could win the majority leader spot -- won't have the votes in the Senate to pass it.

I'd be willing to bet my standard bet that Schumer won't have the votes to simply repeal all of the McConnell tax cuts, let alone pass new taxes. The American system is set up so that the members of the legislature at all levels are on average older, richer, and more conservative than the people they represent. The Senate is the extreme case of that.

Imagine the worst that Warren could do...

The question I ask myself is, "If the Dems win all of the House, Senate, and White House, how much can they do?" The White House, by rule-making and/or decree, can't go much farther left than where things stood at the end of Obama's time. Legislation will be moderated by Pelosi and Schumer. Schumer is unlikely to find the votes to kill the legislative filibuster. If Pelosi or Schumer are replaced, it will be by someone in their 50s or 60s. None of the Squad are going to end up as Speaker or leading major committees. I don't believe that John Roberts is going to roll over and allow wholesale reversal of Court decisions made over the last 20 years. I feel quite confident that voting for Warren (and for my current Dem Representative, and to replace my current Republican Senator) isn't going to result in single-payer or free college (or court-packing or any of the more extreme positions common in the LGM commentariate).