You say numbers don't mean shit, but your whole argument for defining a "swing voter" is based solely on a NUMBER decisive decisions. Can't have it both ways my man.
I don't think you're understanding what you're arguing. Are you arguing that every case is equally important? That's the only way you could disagree with me is if you're arguing every case is equally important. Numbers don't mean shit without context.
Are you equating some case you've never heard about with Roe vs Wade?
If so, we don't even need to continue debating this. Because it's a silly debate if you aren't distinguishing between the magnitude of the cases. A reliable conservative SC Justice is never siding with Democrats on issues like abortion. That's not even up for debate. That's why most conservatives despise Roberts. The swing votes he's made have been monumental. Another Gorsuch-type selection completely kills that. Everything will be along partisan lines. And nigga don't come back in here talking 84% when part of that 16% are cases like Roe Vs Wade. That's why I said the absolute numbers aren't as meaningful as the magnitude of the cases.
Roberts was absolutely a check on the far right on many social issues and they despised him for it.
A conservative "swing" voter on the SC is one who will vote against conservatives on social issues. And that's all you can hope for when a republican president appoints a justice. Shit ain't gonna happen with Mitch and Trump.
Last edited: