Quote:
Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
For as long as they want. Like Sebby said, who else are they going to vote for? The GOP is the least worst for them.
|
The potential problem for the GOP is that they don't vote at all. (Not that I have a problem with that, but ....) The Rs want to keep the lunatic fringe voting, but not scare the shit out of everyone else. This is a very dangerous game, because, while the loonies may just not vote if they think they aren't getting their goodies, an alienated middle WILL vote, and they will vote DEM. Hence, I think [whoever] is right when they say that the Rs are way more interested in protecting RvW than they are in satisfying jezus nutters.
However, I do anticipate that there will be some erosion around the edges (notice, waiting periods, banning more "offensive" procedures, etc.). So the real question is - how much erosion can they get away with before the middle spooks and 90% of voters who are female, have a daughter or have a non-gay teenage son suddenly convert into single-issue voters.
In other news, the ABA was kind enough to e-mail me this article:
http://www.abanet.org/journal/ereport/nov19affirm.html
[Article on a recent study of the performance of affirmative action candidates in law school and on the bar.] Of particular interest given some prior discussions here: Affirmative action admittees perform comparably to legacy admittees (which is to say not very well compared to everyone else).
Also, the study makes the interesting but debatable presumtions that (i) people who do poorly at an elite school would do much better elsewhere and (ii) the grades you get in law school matter more than where you go. "Experts" disagreeing with the study's conclusions argue contra (i), while black lawyers who participated in the study disagreed with (ii) vehemently.
