I maintain that the best possible outcome here is that nobody is seated until after the election, and everybody tries their best to calm the fuck down and make their arguments on the assumption that their preferred party will not and should not have perpetual rule going forward.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
at least hes consistently unabashedly like this so his motives are never in question
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
57 justices....

. Why can't we just call this guy a communist and end the charades.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
To be fair, a sufficiently large supreme court is essentially abolished, since it is harder and harder to coordinate. In many ways the Supreme Court seems more trouble than it is worth. The British don't need it, why does the US?
-
The British do have a Supreme Court. (although it has been widely regarded as a bad move)
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Sounds unwieldy. And questions at oral arguments would take forever!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What must be understood about Yglesias before all else is that his is the mentality of the gated community: whatever the consequences of what he advocates, he believes implicitly that the price will be paid by others out there beyond the steel which keeps him safe.
-
Which is odd because he himself was once victim to a violent crime.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Do you disagree with this?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.