Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
He wasn't a because-we-can appointee, but when the issue becomes polarized, he becomes one. Who knows why Trump picked him, but Trump was not nodding to the old-school GOP. He was taking a list from the Federalist Society. David Souter and Clarence Thomas got their seats because of their ties with GOP Senators. That's not where Alito or Kavanaugh came from. (Or, conversely, Sotomayor or Kagan. The center of gravity has shifted from the Senate to the White House as it has become more politicized.)
And I like that "theme" because it has so much explanatory power. If you're missing that angle, you're missing a lot.
|
It’s more complex than angry white dudes protecting their turf. Most of the folks I know who want a conservative court want it because they don’t like govt intrusion and want low taxes. The rabid crazies want to flip Roe, but they’re a minority of lunatics. Most of the GOP I’ve run into, which is a lot of people, are supportive of the right to choose, are generally tolerant, but simply don’t want a liberal court because they figure it will mean more regs, more laws, more govt intrusions. (They are also aware that the crazies of their party will use a conservative court to try to intrude on people’s personal lives, just as a liberal court will intrude on peoples’ economic lives. They don’t like that, but that’s the devil with whom they have to deal.)
That article nails the crazies of the GOP. But lumping the economic Republicans in with those looks is simply inaccurate.
ETA: And none of these economic Republicans care about protecting some white male privilege. They don’t draw the circle that big. They don’t care who has money as long as they individually get to keep and increase their own personal wealth.
