The last two presidential elections hardly mentioned the Supreme Court

[still_one]

Shouldn't that be a major issue in the 2008 campaign?

We have Stevens who is holding on until 2008 before stepping down, and we have several judges in their 70's

Isn't it about time that this became a major campaign issue?

Let's face it, those that control the republican party, have been insuring that Federalist Judges are appointed, whose sole intent is to overturn Roe V. Wade, and moving civil rights to the state level.

Even if guiliani is pro-choice, if he comes before his party, and says he will appoint pro-choice judges, he will lose support from the pat robertson group

I believe most people feel that abortion should be allowed in the first trimester.

I know 2000 and 2004 they seemed to avoid discussing the Supreme Court. Perhaps it was the media not bringing it up, knowing that if people really knew what the republican party was trying to do, it would hurt them.

Personally, I think this is a winning issue among others for us in 2008

[skipos]

1. It is a very big deal, but unfortunately there are many who would gladly Naderize the Dem candidate

again in 2008. If there is another Repub president in 08, the supreme court will be screwed for decades.

Anyone who thinks there is "no difference" between their least favorite Dem candidate and the least offensive Repub candidate (the same people who said Bush=Gore in 2000 I guess) needs to start thinking about the S.C.

[still_one]

2. I was somewhat that way toward Hillary, until I reflected

Actually it was the book The Nine, by Jeffrey Tobin who probably had the most influence, though also some posts here at DU also moved me in the direction that the stakes are huge

[bain_sidhe]

3. Not so...many women's groups were screaming

in 2000 about how the new motto should be "it's the Supreme Court, stupid." Unfortunately, not enough people listened. The pooh-poohers sniffed that it was all about "abortion" and how focusing on such a divisive a single issue would "turn off" too many "moderate" voters.

I remember pointing out at the time that Bush, as governor, had no interest in appointing social conservatives to the courts and boards he had appointment powers for... but he infallibly appointed pro-corporate neo-feudalist types to every board and bench he could get his hands on. And also pointed out, that, in the end, a SCOTUS that favored corporations and state power over individual rights would affect far more people than a SCOTUS that struck down Roe-v-Wade.

But, what did I know? I was just one of those man-hating, shrill feminists.

[Flabbergasted]

4. There is very little chance R v W will ever be overturned

[fishwax]

5. I thought it was a very big issue in both of those campaigns

and likely will be in this one as well. With the recent talk of a third-party candidate from religious conservatives if rudy gets the nod, it's happening already :)