25th September 2020, 9:54 PM
I oppose term limits for the House and Senate; we have term limits here in the Maine state legislature, and it's a horrible idea, it leads to a constant brain drain of good, knowledgeable legislators in favor of a constant stream of new people. A few can stay on by going back and forth between the House and Senate, since that is allowed, but as the Senate is far smaller than the House this is not a solution for most.
However, for the Supreme Court? Yeah, it's a fair idea there. The Democrats seem to now be raising the idea of an 18-year term for Supreme Court justices, which might be just about right. That is long enough to be there quite a while, but not so long that thanks to modern medicine you get the same people on the court for what, forty years or something.
That said, while he does seem to think that by putting another person on the court he can get a court that will hand him a second term even if he loses, but if it's a blowout that will not happen; there is not a majority of the court who would overturn numerous states where the outcome is clear, just because they want the other person in office. In a very close race I could see them making a decision like Bush v. Gore from 2000, but I don't think things will be anywhere near that close, not with where the polling continues to be. If people vote, he should lose and be removed from office no matter how much he howls about it. He wants people to not vote unless they are going to vote for him. So vote.
However, for the Supreme Court? Yeah, it's a fair idea there. The Democrats seem to now be raising the idea of an 18-year term for Supreme Court justices, which might be just about right. That is long enough to be there quite a while, but not so long that thanks to modern medicine you get the same people on the court for what, forty years or something.
Quote:Addressing everyone else, look where we are. Trump has reached the final bullet point on that now famous list of fascist warning signs. He's trying to deligitimize the election itself. Getting in that supreme court justice puts the republican party in a position to make themselves the fiat rulers of the nation forever.Trump said this same kind of thing in 2016, if you remember -- he basically promised to only accept the results if he won. Of course, as he wasn't President then he didn't have the kind of power then he does now, but this is not a new thing from him, whether it is because of his narcissism or what he is instinctively evil and fascistic.
That said, while he does seem to think that by putting another person on the court he can get a court that will hand him a second term even if he loses, but if it's a blowout that will not happen; there is not a majority of the court who would overturn numerous states where the outcome is clear, just because they want the other person in office. In a very close race I could see them making a decision like Bush v. Gore from 2000, but I don't think things will be anywhere near that close, not with where the polling continues to be. If people vote, he should lose and be removed from office no matter how much he howls about it. He wants people to not vote unless they are going to vote for him. So vote.