Can House and Senate Republicans support today's ruling...

[GimmeDANEger]

without committing political suicide?

I strongly doubt it.

I trust that Obama was blindsided today. His tone has rarely been this aggressive. A great blow was struck against our democracy. There's no denying that. But an amazing opportunity has materialized.

The populist rage boiling to the surface of this nation has been misdirected at our side for too long. Any of our opponents (or "peers") who support this post-plutocratic decision in future legislation will become lightning rods.

There's no other way to spin this. We've found our bipartisan issue.

[TheKentuckian]

1. No, not suicide but with aggressive tactics and an iron will it can be a rope to hang them with

but we'll have to get our hands dirty and be loose with or ignore the rules.

Never underestimate the teeth the corporations have in the minds of the people right now. Hell, there are more than plenty here that continue to carry illusions or fear upsetting the cart over a few dollars.

[frog92969]

2. Whatever position Obama and the Dems take on this

The gop will run in the opposite direction screaming.

[Vicar In A Tutu]

3. This can kill the GOP, more than anything else they've done.

But Obama and the Democrats must be aggressive about. They need to have their faces everywhere, at first stating the necessity of working with the Republicans to stop the corporations taking over. Then, when the Repubs start sheepishly backing the court's ruling, you have Obama at the forefront talking about the need to push to alter this ridiculous law, emphasising the notion that working Americsns will essentially be told what to think by the super-rich corporations who have been laying them off.

If Obama carries on as passionately as he was today in addressing this issue, the Republicans are going to have to find themselves backing the President or being seen as the ultimate corporate lackies - and for the first time, there is something very real and tangible from which they cannot hide. They will be the party of big business and nothing else. The 'Tea Party' or something equally crazy could well become a legitimate third party insomuch as it splinters the Repub vote and renders them incapable of seriously competing for office. If, on the other hand, Obama finds a way to let this slip away meekly, it will be Mr. Romney or similar who carries the hitherto meaningless title of "President".

[GimmeDANEger]

6. Exactly. I also want to add...

passing health care bit by bit, starting with the most populist pieces, will help to redefine the narrative in our favor. I'm glad this idea has been gaining traction. How can Republican Senator vote against the banning of preexisting conditions (or insurance companies booting the sick, or lifting bans on importation of cheaper drugs, or regulating the banks that still owe us, or voting in favor of unbound corporate influence)?

Don't frame it as "us vs them", frame it as "them vs YOU."

[GimmeDANEger]

7. frame net neutrality and independence from big oil in this manner too n/t

[grillo7]

4. I don't know, I'm skeptical...

The fundies and crazies haven't really had a problem with corporate cash stuffed republicans before. I don't see how that's really going to change, except for a few really fringe right-wingers who already hate both parties anyway.

[Vicar In A Tutu]

5. An alternative would be to increase the size of the Supreme Court

In theory that should be easy to pass with a sizeable Democratic majority in congress. But on the other hand....

In some respects maybe, that could be a better option. Ride the crest of a wave of populist anger, hammer home the "CORPORATIONS TAKING JOBS!" message for a while and change the make-up of the court.

[vincna]

8. Forget it.

FDR tried it in the 30's and was shot down in a very bipartisan way. Both parties opposed it.