This is the key, "And I think the solution for Democrats anticipating this bind isn’t to guard their left flanks by embracing the progressive catechism. It’s to disavow the wimpy politics that got the party into this mess."
In 2016, I believed that Senate Republicans would pay a political price for stealing the Garland SCOTUS seat. I was wrong. Based on the evidence, I have since come to the conclusion that SCOTUS backlash isn't a thing (in either direction), because most movable voters aren't paying attention. Maybe they pay attention when SCOTUS hands down decisions (and maybe there was even (obviously unjustified) backlash to *Biden* when the Dobbs decision came down on his watch), but nominations and structural changes to SCOTUS are too inside-baseball for most people. They are very salient for committed Democratic voters and for committed Republican voters, but that doesn't make a difference electorally. No matter how outraged my friends and I were at the Republicans in 2016, we couldn't vote for Democrats any more than we already were doing. And likewise, committed Republican voters will be outraged when Democrats expand the Court, but they can't vote for Republicans any more than they were already planning to.
So Democrats should do what needs to be done with SCOTUS, and not worry about backlash.
This is the key, "And I think the solution for Democrats anticipating this bind isn’t to guard their left flanks by embracing the progressive catechism. It’s to disavow the wimpy politics that got the party into this mess."
In 2016, I believed that Senate Republicans would pay a political price for stealing the Garland SCOTUS seat. I was wrong. Based on the evidence, I have since come to the conclusion that SCOTUS backlash isn't a thing (in either direction), because most movable voters aren't paying attention. Maybe they pay attention when SCOTUS hands down decisions (and maybe there was even (obviously unjustified) backlash to *Biden* when the Dobbs decision came down on his watch), but nominations and structural changes to SCOTUS are too inside-baseball for most people. They are very salient for committed Democratic voters and for committed Republican voters, but that doesn't make a difference electorally. No matter how outraged my friends and I were at the Republicans in 2016, we couldn't vote for Democrats any more than we already were doing. And likewise, committed Republican voters will be outraged when Democrats expand the Court, but they can't vote for Republicans any more than they were already planning to.
So Democrats should do what needs to be done with SCOTUS, and not worry about backlash.
Why only four seats? Not enough margin. Eight. Or at least six. When you have the hammer, you have to pound hard.