It should really cause one to pause to think what the Supreme Court would be if mccain won

[still_one]

With two Supreme Court justices leaving, the consequences would have been devastating

If for nothing else this is why it is a good thing we have a Democratic president

and yes, there IS and would be a difference between a Democratic president verses a republican one

bush has demonstrated that

For those considering not voting or voting for a third party because there are things that one doesn't agree with the present administration in 2012, consider this

Things could be much worse if a republican was to win

[demwing]

1. You're Correct. There is a difference between a Dem and a Republican

Just as there is a difference between white and black. However, there are also differences between white and grey, and between grey and black.

Likewise, there are also differences between a centrist and a progressive, and between a conservative Democratic official and a liberal Democratic official. Just as there are differences between the President that we have, and the President that progressives hoped for.

Is it too much to ask that said progressives be allowed to acknowledge that our President is not heroically progressive, or at least, not nearly as progressive as we had hoped? Shouldn't we also be allowed to see the grey (that he a a centrist, and seemingly uninterested in radical progress), and reject it? Must we only be grateful that he is not an old, arrogant, ridiculously conservative white male?

Must we always compare Obama to the worst case example that could have happened, instead of comparing him to the best case example that should have happened? Is that, in the end, all we are left with?

Obama is not McCain. Your initial premise is correct. But your greater premise - that we ought to feel gratitude that things aren't worse than they could have been - is limited in scope and Pollyanna-esque at its best, and deliberately false and misleading at its worst, and I reject it completely.

[still_one]

7. I did not even imply that we ought to "feel gratitude". If anything I was pointing out the terrible

bind we are in.

This is not the same country it was forty years ago, hell even twenty years ago. Unfortunately, it has dumbed itself down, and has turned hard right

Even if one is skeptical of polls, the trend in those polls seems to indicate that the demographic makeup has shifted to the right

The problem most liberals and progressives are having is that their voice has mostly been silenced, and I cannot see that changing in the near future

[applegrove]

2. very scary.

[TexasObserver]

3. If the only thing the president did was appoint the SC, that justifies voting Democratic.

That's why I will always vote for the Democrat for president.

We already have a Supreme Court that has been out of control for ten years.

[still_one]

8. At least as long as the Democrat distinguishes him or herself for certain basic principles

which include civil rights, the right to privacy, among other things

[ShortnFiery]

4. Honestly? I don't think it will matter much.

I believe that President Obama will name a centrist to the court to replace Stevens so as to "keep our powder dry" and all that happy horse-shit that merely translates to corporate control of our country by a small group of ruling elites.

The Congress is already bought and paid for ... save for some progressives who seemingly fold during the 9th inning before the votes are taken.

SCOTUS? They've already sold out to The Corporation.

Nope, other than bombing Iran and starting WWIII a couple years earlier than a democratic president, I don't see much difference in the running of our Executive Branch either.

Call me jaded? :(

[still_one]

9. If you don't think Roe V Wad, the right to privacy, and civil rights are in danger if a repuke

becomes president, I would like to point you to the fact that there is NOT one republican candidate in the last 20 years that hasn't said they would work to overturn those principles

That does not mean I am not frustrated by the less progressive turn that the Democratic party has taken, I am, but I am also more concerned with the hard shift right that the country has seemed to take

[cali]

12. now that is mind boggling ignorance.

Jaded? Perhaps. Ignorant or blind? No doubt.

[Atticus]

5. I'm waiting to see if there will be a difference. I am hoping he will nominate a candidate

who will AT LEAST be as liberal as Justice Stevens, but that is far from being a sure thing.

[still_one]

10. The game will be over if he chooses a justice that does not support Roe V Wade, civil rights,

and the right to privacy among other things

If that doesn't happen, then there really won't be a difference between the two parties

[cali]

13. here's the thing. it's very difficult to know how a Justice will vote

Stevens is evidence of that. So was Souter. And it's even more difficult now than it was in 1975.

[rug]

6. How can we pause to think with all this prodding?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8118325&mesg_id=8118325

[Statistical]

11. Congress is more important than President when it comes to SCOTUS.

President can name who ever he wants. Bush could have picked a Neo-Nazi. Obama could pick a full out communist.

Still need to get 60 votes in the Senate though.
Think Republicans (who could only manage 40 votes to stop HCR) could get 60+ votes to pass a right-winger?