LogFAQs > #896570548

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Regaro posted...

Seph admitted that his political party has no ethics, ideals, or principles (and are thus utterly unqualified to lead a government)?

That was somewhat unexpected

I said that in certain cases, namely stonewalling Garland, the Party threw away ethics in order to "win." And I would argue that maintaining a 5-4 moderate/conservative majority on the Supreme Court as opposed to a 5-4 hardline progressive majority is one of the most consequential political events of our time. My point is that by not playing politics well (and ostensibly holding onto your principles), your party is losing a tangible policy battle.

Like would you rather see your candidates "sell out" if it meant advancing your most important policy goals? We live in a very Machiavellian time where I don't think you can always have it both ways.

Replacing a hardline originalist like Scalia with a regular conservative like Gorsuch over a diehard moderate like Garland is not only worth admitting to sacrificing your ethics, but one of the most consequential political events of our lifetime??

Literally never attempt to claim the moral high ground ever again, and for what? Lmao
---

Phantom Dust.
"I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado