2026 Mid-Term Elections

[Toni]

White men have been the majority on the USSC since it's inception until quite recently. They are the original guaranteed slot.

So other white men need to be punished now with quotas restricting access of white male jurists to the Court?

It's like with affirmative action. Blacks and women were discriminated against decades ago, so we should punish white male (and also Asian) students now even though they are very different individuals than those who were discriminated against in the past.

Why should someone not break that barrier? Reagan broke the gender barrier by nominating Sandra Day O'Connor. Johnson nominated Thurgood Marshall breaking the color barrier. Brandies was the first Jewish USSC justice.

I have nothing against appointing qualified people regardless of demographic. And yes, somebody is by necessity going to be first. But that does not mean that a president should restrict his choice to e.g. black women only. And certainly not because he wants to secure endorsement of Jim Clyburn as part of a corrupt bargain.
Biden made a campaign pledge to put a Black woman on the Supreme Court.

It isn't as though there were not a plethora of well qualified black women who could have been nominated by Biden or by previous POTUS.

There are also a plethora of well qualified jurists who are not black women. No need to discriminate against all of them, like Biden did.

Giving someone other than white men a shot is not punishing white men. No longer guaranteeing that white men are the top choices for every good things called: beings bit more fair. It’s mediocre white men who have benefited from centuries of discrimination in their favor. Learning that discrimination means other highly qualified people who are not white and make get chosen because they are no longer at the end of the line.

You’d have a really good argument if they were selecting less well qualified women or black or brown people but they are not.

 

[Derec]

Giving someone other than white men a shot is not punishing white men.

Selecting people without regard to race and gender is one thing.
Saying that nobody other than black women will be considered is quite another.
The first one is giving everyone a shot. The second one is not giving 93% of the population a shot.

No longer guaranteeing that white men are the top choices for every good things called: beings bit more fair.

Again, Biden guaranteed that a white man will under no circumstances be selected either for SCOTUS nor for Veep. How is that more fair?

It’s mediocre white men who have benefited from centuries of discrimination in their favor.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination in the past does not justify discrimination now.

Learning that discrimination means other highly qualified people who are not white and make get chosen because they are no longer at the end of the line.

Huh?

You’d have a really good argument if they were selecting less well qualified women or black or brown people but they are not.

KBJ is well-qualified but I do not think she has been more than mediocre so far.
And Kamala was certainly mediocre as Veep and also later as the default nominee.

But it gets even more obvious when you look at how this translates into things like med school admissions.



As you can see, the GPA and MCAT scores vary widely by race and ethnicity because these two variables are given high weight in admission decisions - yes, it seems this is the case even after the 2023 SCOTUS decision. Note, the MCAT is not really scored out of 528. It is really scored out of 56 (14 points per section) and then 472 is added. So a few point difference plays a big role. For example the black mean is 505.7. That's about 66th percentile. The white mean, 512.4 is 85th percentile. And the Asian mean, 514.3 is 90th percentile. So whites and Asians must work much harder to gain acceptance into med schools.

And guess who was loud in denouncing the SCOTUS decision restricting discrimination by race and ethnicity? Yes, that's right. Joe Biden.
'This is not a normal court': Biden blasts affirmative action ruling

 

[laughing dog]

True. Doesn’t make it bad either.

You think a president restricting his choice to a narrow demographic slice is not bad? Why?

I think Presidents play politics with political appoints. I don’t think one loses much when restricting the pool for 1 slot. There are probably plenty of qualified candidates within any demographic group.

 

[Toni]

Giving someone other than white men a shot is not punishing white men.

Selecting people without regard to race and gender is one thing.
Saying that nobody other than black women will be considered is quite another.
The first one is giving everyone a shot. The second one is not giving 93% of the population a shot.

No longer guaranteeing that white men are the top choices for every good things called: beings bit more fair.

Again, Biden guaranteed that a white man will under no circumstances be selected either for SCOTUS nor for Veep. How is that more fair?

It’s mediocre white men who have benefited from centuries of discrimination in their favor.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination in the past does not justify discrimination now.

Learning that discrimination means other highly qualified people who are not white and make get chosen because they are no longer at the end of the line.

Huh?

You’d have a really good argument if they were selecting less well qualified women or black or brown people but they are not.

KBJ is well-qualified but I do not think she has been more than mediocre so far.
And Kamala was certainly mediocre as Veep and also later as the default nominee.

But it gets even more obvious when you look at how this translates into things like med school admissions.

View attachment 54914

As you can see, the GPA and MCAT scores vary widely by race and ethnicity because these two variables are given high weight in admission decisions - yes, it seems this is the case even after the 2023 SCOTUS decision. Note, the MCAT is not really scored out of 528. It is really scored out of 56 (14 points per section) and then 472 is added. So a few point difference plays a big role. For example the black mean is 505.7. That's about 66th percentile. The white mean, 512.4 is 85th percentile. And the Asian mean, 514.3 is 90th percentile. So whites and Asians must work much harder to gain acceptance into med schools.

And guess who was loud in denouncing the SCOTUS decision restricting discrimination by race and ethnicity? Yes, that's right. Joe Biden.
'This is not a normal court': Biden blasts affirmative action ruling

White men have started on at least second base, if not third, with bases loaded.

Letting people who have always been at the back of the line, if they were ever given a place in line at all go first is called making up for unfair treatment.

It is not unfair for someone who always got the first shot and all the benefits of doubt and best chance that comes from
Being burn into a long lounge of best chances to not get the first shot sometimes. Last I looked white men were still doing ok.

Let’s face it: had Biden never stated he was going to nominate a black woman but it still turned out that a black woman was chosen, you and a bunch of mediocre white people would still claim it wasn’t fair.

Because fair to you will always look like a white man.

 

[bilby]

But that is not socialism. That is capitalism with social democratic elements.

Indeed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Justice Jackson became only the second black person to sit on the SCOTUS bench,

Third, actually. Are you forgetting Thurgood Marshall?

Yes, clearly I am. Yipes!

over 3 decades after Justice Thomas got his seat, roughly 3 decades after the Civil Rights Act was passed.

But Thomas is still in his seat. If it had been three decades since the last black justice vacated a SCOTUS seat, you'd have a point.
But it is pretty ridiculous to claim that there must be hyper-representation of black people on the Supreme Court.

Hyper-representation?!

So I suppose we get to the real issue you have here. Where in the world were your threads whining about all of the white nominations when white people are grossly hyper-represented on the Supreme Court?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Critical primary in Michigan, maybe? It is hard to tell if Trump's numbers are going to trash the GOP in November, so it might not even matter. But I wanted to share this thing on el-Sayed.

I come at this from a place of principle. I will not treat money spent to Israel differently than I treat money spent to Egypt, right? I don't think we should be sending money to either. Egypt is the second biggest recipient of foreign military aid. If you'd like to start there, we can start there.
I don't want to see my tax dollars being used to put a chokehold on the Egyptian people by a military dictatorship, which is what happens in Egypt. Similarly, I don't want my money used in apartheid and genocide. I want my money used to provide classes for kids and good schools and health care here in Michigan. So they are making themselves one of the most important players in our politics.

El-Sayed not wanting any military aid for Egypt either is not him being so principled that he is even against military aid for his own country. No, the truth is very different. He is against military aid for Egypt because he is a Muslim Brotherhood supporter.

And that came mind, or more that he wanted regime change that didn't involve the military in Egypt and that would lead to some expected outcomes. It was a peculiar thing to bring up, almost out of the blue and implied certain stances.

It looks like El-Sayed will win the nomination, sadly. Then Rogers is the only hope to stop an MB sympathizer from getting into the Senate.

It seems unlike that El-Sayed won't take the nomination. That would be the wrong choice in the primary. But suggesting a guy that is enabling the destruction of our Government should be re-elected because the opponent has some misguided to out-of-touch to potential outrageous foreign policy views seems misguided. I'd call it a Hobson Choice at the polls.

 

[ZiprHead]

El-Sayed not wanting any military aid for Egypt either is not him being so principled that he is even against military aid for his own country. No, the truth is very different. He is against military aid for Egypt because he is a Muslim Brotherhood supporter.

First of all, El Sayed's country is the USA.

Critical primary in Michigan, maybe? It is hard to tell if Trump's numbers are going to trash the GOP in November, so it might not even matter. But I wanted to share this thing on el-Sayed.

I come at this from a place of principle. I will not treat money spent to Israel differently than I treat money spent to Egypt, right? I don't think we should be sending money to either. Egypt is the second biggest recipient of foreign military aid. If you'd like to start there, we can start there.
I don't want to see my tax dollars being used to put a chokehold on the Egyptian people by a military dictatorship, which is what happens in Egypt. Similarly, I don't want my money used in apartheid and genocide. I want my money used to provide classes for kids and good schools and health care here in Michigan. So they are making themselves one of the most important players in our politics.

El-Sayed not wanting any military aid for Egypt either is not him being so principled that he is even against military aid for his own country. No, the truth is very different. He is against military aid for Egypt because he is a Muslim Brotherhood supporter.

Abdul El-Sayed’s Father-in-Law, a Top Donor to an El-Sayed Super PAC, Is Among Top Leaders of Muslim Brotherhood Organization Linked to Terror Funding

There is more:
Michigan Senate Candidate Backed by Bernie Sanders To Speak at Islamist Convention Alongside Hamas Sympathizers

El-Sayed will share the convention stage with Sami Hamdi, a British activist who said he felt "euphoria" after Hamas’s Oct. 7 terrorist attack on Israel. Tom Facchine, another conference speaker, said after the Hamas attack that, "we are with the Palestinian resistance 100 percent, no ifs, no ands, no buts, no equivocations, no apologies, no condemnations." He has also encouraged Columbia University students to "take out" pro-Israel professor Shai Davidai, the New York Post reported.
Muslim American Society director Ayman Hammous, another convention speaker, has praised Muslim Brotherhood leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who called for another Holocaust to "punish" Jews and has defended Palestinian suicide bombers. Hammous recently promoted a protest sign that referred to "the Satanic state of Israel."
And there is Shaun King, a former Black Lives Matter activist who converted to Islam after the Oct. 7 attacks. King, who has served alongside El-Sayed as a Bernie Sanders campaign surrogate, called Joe Biden a "genocidal monster" after the former president’s cancer diagnosis earlier this week, and said, "I hope his final days are painful." King expressed outrage after the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, whom he referred to as his "dear brother."

It looks like El-Sayed will win the nomination, sadly. Then Rogers is the only hope to stop an MB sympathizer from getting into the Senate. Is Adam Hamawy, the associate of the Blind Sheikh, not enough?

P.S.: I didn't even know Shaun "Talcum X" King converted to Islam. I guess that makes his nickname even more fitting.

This whole thing sound like six degrees of Kevin Bacon.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This whole thing sound like six degrees of Kevin Bacon.

While I agree that anything from the NY Post is to be handled with extreme care, El-Sayed stated a couple of things that did perk my ears up. I'm not very comfortable with how much push is being made against AIPAC, as if AIPAC is driving much in the way of US policy.

 

[Elixir]

So again, Derec is worried about the stuff that almost certainly isn't going to happen than what has actually happened.

I’ve noticed that habit among trumpapologists. Probably because Dear Leader’s media are telling them what to worry about.
(What to SAY they’re worried about).

 

[TomC]

Last time Dems put any man on SCOTUS was in 1994, more than 30 years ago.

You do realize that that's a decision made by the Republicans, led by McConnell, don't you?

Obama nominated Merrick Garland. He is a white male Republican. He'd originally been put up as a candidate by the Republicans. But the Republicans refused to hold a vote on him.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

But the Republicans McTurtle refused to hold a vote on him.

Seems god struck him down for that.
Ironically, now people are calling him “Bernie”.
(as in “Weekend At”…)

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Last time Dems put any man on SCOTUS was in 1994, more than 30 years ago.

You do realize that that's a decision made by the Republicans, led by McConnell, don't you?

Obama nominated Merrick Garland. He is a white male Republican. He'd originally been put up as a candidate by the Republicans. But the Republicans refused to hold a vote on him.
Tom

2 in 6 nominations since 1994 were men. Odd that Derec makes this observation despite the fact that males were hyper-representing on the SCOTUS bench.

 

[Elixir]

Odd that Derec makes this observation

I’d be gobsmacked were it not so.
Derec is very consistent.
IMHO NWRT, but very consistent.

 

[laughing dog]

Pure hand waving.

It's not handwaving. It's a fact that there are politicians on the Left who are not formally DSA members, but share many of their positions. Like with Abdul with his economic policies and his rabid hatred of Israel.

You’ve presented no evidence that DSA +DSA adjacent comprise a sufficient fraction to have real influence. That’s hand waving.

Your entire position is anecdote- driven opinion fueled by unbridled fear.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Maine had Platner, Ohio has Miller. And the average GOP voter in Medina County apparently can live with it. What makes this even more of something is that US Senator Moreno (R) is Miller's ex-Father-in-Law... ie the woman making the accusations is the US Senator's daughter. And he has come out saying Miller should step down.

Accusations, smackusations.

The Washington Post interviewed dozens of voters across Ohio’s 7th Congressional District, a conservative swath stretching south from the Cleveland suburbs.

Many were unfamiliar with the legal and political drama that is rapidly enveloping Miller, 37, who faces an ethics investigation and pressure to drop out of the race ahead of an Aug. 10 deadline to replace him on the ballot. That could change in the months to come as the court case continues to unfold, potentially fueling attack ads that would bring the situation to a larger audience.

Even among those who had heard about the accusations that Miller physically harmed his ex-wife and their 2-year-old daughter, however, Republicans were largely wary of wading into what they considered a family matter and reluctant to abandon Miller.

Some were dubious about claims made during the course of a breakup. Others argued they were less important than what Miller has done for his constituents, or did not matter in a political system full of reprehensible people.

Among the allegations...

Miller and Emily Moreno divorced in June 2025, after less than three years of marriage. Since then, she has charged in court filings that Miller threw hot water on her from a pan of eggs he had just cooked, once held a gun to her head and hurt their daughter, who suffered a fractured collarbone in February. Miller claims his ex-wife fabricated those allegations because she is mentally ill, which she denies.

While the abuse accusations have been public for months, their legal showdown continues to escalate. Moreno filed a new restraining order against Miller last week, alleging that he grabbed her attorney during a court hearing. Miller responded online Sunday with a lengthy live-streamed video where he said their relationship had been respectful until they became enmeshed in a custody battle and vowed to push ahead with his reelection bid.

 

[Toni]

Giving someone other than white men a shot is not punishing white men.

Selecting people without regard to race and gender is one thing.
Saying that nobody other than black women will be considered is quite another.
The first one is giving everyone a shot. The second one is not giving 93% of the population a shot.

No longer guaranteeing that white men are the top choices for every good things called: beings bit more fair.

Again, Biden guaranteed that a white man will under no circumstances be selected either for SCOTUS nor for Veep. How is that more fair?

It’s mediocre white men who have benefited from centuries of discrimination in their favor.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination in the past does not justify discrimination now.

Learning that discrimination means other highly qualified people who are not white and make get chosen because they are no longer at the end of the line.

Huh?

You’d have a really good argument if they were selecting less well qualified women or black or brown people but they are not.

KBJ is well-qualified but I do not think she has been more than mediocre so far.
And Kamala was certainly mediocre as Veep and also later as the default nominee.

But it gets even more obvious when you look at how this translates into things like med school admissions.

View attachment 54914

As you can see, the GPA and MCAT scores vary widely by race and ethnicity because these two variables are given high weight in admission decisions - yes, it seems this is the case even after the 2023 SCOTUS decision. Note, the MCAT is not really scored out of 528. It is really scored out of 56 (14 points per section) and then 472 is added. So a few point difference plays a big role. For example the black mean is 505.7. That's about 66th percentile. The white mean, 512.4 is 85th percentile. And the Asian mean, 514.3 is 90th percentile. So whites and Asians must work much harder to gain acceptance into med schools.

And guess who was loud in denouncing the SCOTUS decision restricting discrimination by race and ethnicity? Yes, that's right. Joe Biden.
'This is not a normal court': Biden blasts affirmative action ruling

I honestly do not understand what you believe MCAT scores have to do with choosing a black woman for the USSC.

Something I learned within 48 hours of being on campus as a freshman is that nobody gave a fuck about my perfect grades and stellar test scores. Definitely not my professors who only cared about how I did in their class, on their exams. Oh, and that I did not cheat or cause them extra work or trouble.

 

[Derec]

I honestly do not understand what you believe MCAT scores have to do with choosing a black woman for the USSC.

Only considering black women for SCOTUS/Veep/Senate seat from California is the result of the same identity politics as discriminating against white and Asian applicants in med school admissions for example.

Something I learned within 48 hours of being on campus as a freshman is that nobody gave a fuck about my perfect grades and stellar test scores. Definitely not my professors who only cared about how I did in their class, on their exams. Oh, and that I did not cheat or cause them extra work or trouble.

What does that have to do with the fact that admission standards are significantly higher for some races/ethnicities than others?

 

[Derec]

You’ve presented no evidence that DSA +DSA adjacent comprise a sufficient fraction to have real influence. That’s hand waving.

I have already mentioned that the NY state legislature is already pretty far left given the legislation they are passing. Legislation like the bail deform.
Are you really going to deny that the current legislature is left and is about to become even more so?

 

[Derec]

You do realize that that's a decision made by the Republicans, led by McConnell, don't you?

No. Obama only nominated Garland as a sacrificial lamb to call McTurtle's bluff. It was not a serious nomination, as is evidenced by him already 63 when he was nominated.

Hillary, had she won, would certainly have nominated someone younger and probably not a white man.

Obama nominated Merrick Garland. He is a white male Republican.

Since when?