12 Comments
User's avatar
тна Return to thread
User's avatar
Comment deleted
May 6Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

I don't see how that's relevant, the calls for RBG to retire started way before 2016.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

She thought she could retire after Clinton won and be replaced by another progressive. She in her hubris did not retire during 2008-10, the only other period where she could have.

Edit: It was 2012-14, I got it wrong.

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

Hubris is exactly the word. Overconfidence struck down by an unforeseen event, in this case the Comey letter.

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

2012 - 2014 is the last time she couldтАЩve retired and been replaced by a likeminded judge.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

My bad, I got terribly confused.

Expand full comment
Avedee Eikew's avatar

I remember the day after the 2014 midterms the sponsors who were letting me stay in their home for the duration of the campaign were yelling about RBG's selfishness not leaving while the Dems had the Senate. They ended up being right.

Expand full comment
John Carr's avatar

She тАЬthoughtтАЭ. Did she realize (or warned) that itтАЩs very difficult for a party to win a third consecutive Presidential election? Also, there was no guarantee that Dems would have won the senate even had Hillary won in 2016. In that case, Republicans likely would have just held her seat open (along with ScaliaтАЩs) until a Republican was elected President.

You donтАЩt take chances like this when the next 50 (or more) years of American democracy is at stake.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

I agree.

Expand full comment
JanusIanitos's avatar

I'm not convinced she was even thinking that deeply.

She was hellbent on becoming the longest serving Jewish justice on the court, wanting to eclipse Brandeis and his 23 years. That would require her to stay on until April 2016.

My opinion is that everything else she said about things were excuses, some even to herself, to justify her staying on until then.

She wanted to have that in her legacy, and in so doing she undermined the actual legacy of her career. I'd argue selfish more than hubris, although hubris was definitely present as well.

Expand full comment
AnthonySF's avatar

There's no reason to think deep. It was widely speculated that Dems would lose the Senate in 2014, and she was already in her 80s. She should have retired. Obama asked her to retire. She didn't, and now has no legacy.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

She may, eventually, but yeah.

Expand full comment