this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2026
227 points (97.5% liked)

politics

31714 readers
2788 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump floated nominating Ted Cruz to the Supreme Court for a future vacancy on the nation's high court, joking that the Texas Republican senator's confirmation would earn unanimous Senate support because senators from both parties would like to see him gone.

Trump, who has mentioned Cruz previously for the Supreme Court, suggested the third-term senator again at an Oct. 27 midterm campaign rally in Lubbock, Texas as the president discussed what he might do if he gets to nominate a Supreme Court justice for a fourth time over his two White House terms.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] noahm@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Reason number 86,384,028 why dems need to take the senate this year. Rs would support this, even if nobody likes Cruz, because they’d be terrified of what MAGAts would do to them if they voted against the president’s nominee.

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

You are correct on this, but in the last year or so, trump has been less and less successful with getting Rs to "close ranks" like they would usually do. I doubt that would be enough to prevent a SCOTUS nomination though, they'll definitely all vote to confirm, and probably some Ds as well.

[–] TheFinn@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I think that's only because they know he's unpopular and midterms are coming up. Once they are over I think we'll see them go back to total fealty.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If the midterms ends up the way they're expected to, Trump will be a major lame duck. They'll have basically no reason to bend the knee anymore. Trump appointees have never done well when he isn't on the ballot and he can no longer be on the ballot.

[–] TheFinn@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

The problem is that would mean they're doing the rational thing and nothing about MAGA is rational. So who knows what they'll do.

[–] noahm@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Assuming Fetterman is still a D. I can't imagine any others voting to confirm. I mean, it's fucking Ted Cruz.

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

There will always be enough defectors to pass a SCOTUS vote.