Originally Posted by beis77

I think she’s qualified, and the GOP will try to install her prior to January. I doubt it happens prior to the election, unless Senators are willing to give up valuable time on the campaign trail next month. The thing is, the WH and Senate have a constitutional responsibility to fill the seat, so one can reasonably argue that they’re just upholding their constitutional responsibility. The root of the problem is that the Senate GOP abdicated that responsibility in 2016, and are only now choosing to uphold it, since they can get their pick; hence the calls of hypocrisy and the partisan sh!t show that’s unfolding before us.

I’m not sure if she’ll get appointed or not, the Dems will do everything in their power to block it, and frankly I don’t blame them. The GOP started this fight in 2016 and neither side is going to back down. IMO installing more seats on the panel is not the answer though, as some Dems as proposed as a counter move. If both sides just start installing judges to tilt the court in their favor, then it begins to look more like a pickup game of basketball than the highest court in the land. Frankly, I’m tired of both sides continually putting party over country. Perhaps we should go back to Whigs and Torys? (j/k)

Originally Posted by All 5 Stages

It appears the CDC published Infection to Fatality Ratios and here is what it says ("current best estimate"):

Age 0-19: 0.00003
Age 0-49: 0.0002
Age 50-69: 0.005
Age 75+: 0.054

This is great news if it's accurate, and if I'm reading it correctly.

A5S

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/new-cdc-estimates-fatality-rate-covid-19-drops-again-and-may-surprise-you

Originally Posted by Gspeed

Its good to know that they are all too busy to hammer out a CARES2 deal but not busy enough to go through the circus of the SC nomination process.

Originally Posted by jmcharles

These are accurate numbers, but to translate to something understandable you have to move the decimal places two to the right and add a %.

Originally Posted by Ursula

Not sure how you botched a copy and paste that bad. It's 20-49 not 0-49 and 70+ not 75+. That's a 1 in 20 chance of death just 5 years into retirement. Try digging up hospitalization rates from some sources you trust as well and maybe look for long term lung, heart, and brain damage caused by Covid since death is the most extreme outcome. Also 60 is a lot worse than 50, so it's unfortunate the age ranges are so clumped. Same for 19 vs 49 and 80 vs 70, etc.

Originally Posted by beis77

^^^^^^^100%^^^^^^
Prior to RBG’s passing, McConnell was ready to call a Senate recess to go hit the campaign trail, so there’s that also. Senate’s priorities:

1) Fill SCOTUS seat
2) Pass a CR
3) Recess to campaign/get re-elected...
4) Vacation
5) Family picnics/ children’s recitals
6) Holidays
7) CARES?

In some twisted way, I actually think that filling the SCOTUS seat increases the odds of CARES passing. It keeps them in town, otherwise they’d already be gone. And with the Senate judiciary committee only being one part of it, others are still around to help make CARES happen. I’m remaining cautiously optimistic, although I’m thoroughly unimpressed with their priorities.

Originally Posted by beis77

The GOP started this fight in 2016 and neither side is going to back down

Originally Posted by All 5 Stages

The "fight" for Supreme Court justices began waaaay before 2016. One can look back to FDR's attempt to pack the court due to his displeasure of the rulings of the 4-horsemen. Justice Roberts, ironically, was the associate justice who's "switch in time that saved nine."

Regardless, just about every politician in 2016 has gone 180 out today: Obama, Biden, Schumer, HRC, are arguing the same points that McConnell, Graham, etc. al. are arguing today, and vice versa. Don't look to politicians if you want consistency. And don't fool yourself ... if the Dems held the Senate and Presidency, you'd see the same process from Schumer, and the associated "outrage" from the GOP.

A5S

Originally Posted by notEnuf

True but this will shape the court for a generation or more with the new justices being relatively young. Breyer is the oldest at 82.

Originally Posted by All 5 Stages

The "fight" for Supreme Court justices began waaaay before 2016. One can look back to FDR's attempt to pack the court due to his displeasure of the rulings of the 4-horsemen. Justice Roberts, ironically, was the associate justice who's "switch in time that saved nine."

Regardless, just about every politician in 2016 has gone 180 out today: Obama, Biden, Schumer, HRC, are arguing the same points that McConnell, Graham, etc. al. argued in 2016, and vice versa. Don't look to politicians if you want consistency. And don't fool yourself ... if the Dems held the Senate and Presidency, you'd see the same process from Schumer, and the associated "outrage" from the GOP.

A5S