I hope Edwards is able to bring up the Supreme Court tomorrow.

[spooky3]

I would like to see him raise the issue of what a few * wingnut appointees (of the Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas ilk) would do to the court and how it would affect civil rights, abortion rights, separation of church and state, etc.

[cheshire]

1. Like Scalia telling college students orgies are a good thing. Ugh on so

many level. Ugh

[Lord_StarFyre]

2. The very idea

...of Fat Tony in an orgy...

Gag, Yak, Bleech

[cheshire]

3. Makes me want to scrape the vision from my memory.(head shaking)

[TheFarseer]

4. That is exactly what I don't want him to bring up

Why would you want him to bring up the wedge issues that they have been living off of for years?

[spooky3]

7. What is your definition of a "wedge" issue? The Supreme Court

appointments of the next four years do not fit my definition of a "wedge" issue, i.e., a issue that may be of importance to some people but not as important to the country as a whole as other issues, and one intended to inflame voter emotions or appeal to ignorant voters, in order to trap one's opponent.

The membership of the Supreme Court is a critical issue that many people are not thinking clearly about. Voters who might be leaning to Bush because they "like" him may not realize that if he gets to appoint a few more justices to an already conservative-leaning court, their abortion rights may be in jeopardy, for example. They are not thinking about the power the Supreme Court has and that they may be indirectly electing some of its membership.

[TheFarseer]

8. The Supreme Court is not itself a wedge issue

But it might be deciding gay rights, abortion, gun control, separation of church and state - I want to reach out to moderate voters who don't like bush but might be scared into voting for him over these wedge issues. People who support a woman's right to choose, for example, have no choice but to vote for Kerry. I'm not worried about getting their vote. I think we might have a difference in opinion on who we are trying to reach out to to get the deciding votes.

[spooky3]

9. You have to be specific about why the Supreme Court matters if

you are going to reach people who don't yet realize this. WHY does it matter? What issues does it decide that can affect people's lives? Speaking in general terms does not persuade them.

I am not differing with you on whom to reach (please re-read my post). I am saying I believe that there are people who are currently undecided or leaning Bush who do not realize the impact that his right wing appointments will likely have on issues that AFFECT THEIR LIVES, rather than some esoteric topic they may not care about. You may not be aware of how many people there are FOR EXAMPLE (please note that I am using abortion rights as an example, not as "the" issue to discuss) who really believe that there is no chance abortion rights could be overturned by a less sympathetic Supreme Court, and who therefore do not realize that Supreme Ct. appointments are an important issue for them in deciding whom to support. For example, young, single men and women have a low voting rate. What will motivate them to get out and vote? If you want to articulate other examples, please do, but the general, no examples, no specifics argument will not convince people who don't care to care about this issue. If you can't identify some cases that are likely to come before the Supreme Court that in the past may have been decided by 5-4 or even 6-3 decisions and that matter, then you really have no way to persuade them that the Supreme Court matters.

Please note that I did not specifically mention gay rights as one of the issues I expect to be brought before the Supreme Court. I did mention civil rights, which is much broader and affects women, Latinos, African Americans, older Americans, as well as gays, and many others in this country, many of whom face discrimination in their jobs and feel alienated from the political process. And these people taken together are in the VAST majority.

You seem to assume (in your second sentence) that most if not all voters know candidates' positions on many issues as well as their own and vote for the best match. Unfortunately, research shows this is NOT true. It's certainly true for a lot of DUers, and probably you and me, but it is NOT true for many voters.

[MrBenchley]

5. He's got a perfect opportunity to do so

if he mentions the hunting trip Cheney took with Scalia at a lodge owned by an oil company CEO on the eve of Scalia deciding the Cheney energy policy secrecy case...

[sui generis]

6. Edwards needs to bash "activist" legislators too

especially with the house passing legislation designed to keep defense of marriage issues from being heard by federal judges.

If a judge cannot rule on constitutionality or unclear language, then "activist" legislators have taken away one of the checks and balances on our legislative system, and that's REALLY, constitutionally un American.