WHAT DO YOU THINK? Add your comments below...

You can enjoy more Good Sauce articles and shows by subscribing to the Good Sauce podcast on Apple, Google, Spotify, Amazon and more. Please take a minute to help us reach more people by giving us a 5 star rating and review in Apple Podcasts.

DEMOCRATS have promised to continue the tantrum first begun in November 2016 when it became obvious Hillary Clinton was never, ever, ever going to be President of the United States of America, despite every mainstream media outlet in the nation promising the ‘very bad orange man’ couldn’t possibly defeat their idol.

He did though; and the palpable grief on the tear-stained faces of everyone not lumped in Hillary’s “basket of deplorables” was simply a prelude to the longest four years of non-stop tantruming in living memory. The sheer outrage that a nation dared disagree with a particularly large & angry swarm of radical leftists has in turn led to pathologically irrational responses to every policy, order & comment by the lawfully elected President Donald J. Trump.

The latest of these is the routine replacement of the deceased Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In keeping with the emotionally incontinent displays of juvenile pouting and foot stomping, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee will boycott Thursday’s committee vote on Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett (ACB).

That’s right: they’re not going to even bother turning up — an appropriate metaphor for their lack of credible arguments against this President since 2016. Instead, they’re going to pop cardboard cutouts in their seats, and hold a few press conferences for their partners in the mainstream media: a powerful illustration of everything wrong with Western politics.

Of course, without them or despite them, ‘notorious’ ACB will be nominated successfully and move to the full senate vote which will go down party lines, and Republicans have the majority.

So what exactly are the Democrat’s problems explaining such churlish behaviour (other than the obvious: that Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination is another decision by the President they love to hate)?

1. Elections have consequences

This has been stuck in the Democrat’s craw since they lost. They simply lost the election. They’ve never recovered from the jarring reality shaking them out of their reverie. They gave it their best shot, and rejected the result because they didn’t win. Like their preferred debate strategy of cancelling their opponent rather than engaging with reality, they haven’t stopped trying to cancel the 2016 election result.

They signed petitions to overturn it, they impotently impeached the President (despite less evidence of ‘collusion’ or ‘quid pro quo’ than Hunter Biden’s laptop), they claimed Trump had cheated, the Russians had interfered, the voters had been suppressed, the FBI had investigated crooked Hillary, the election had been rigged, the nation was ‘sexist’ and the Constitution ‘unfair’.

Any of these would be terrible if true, but not a shred of evidence could be produced to confirm their shrieks that Trump had stolen the election and didn’t deserve to be there. Democrats’ biggest problem is their failure to graciously accept that elections have consequences.

2. The United States is a republic

Democrats second biggest problem is they think the USA is a democracy, and the electoral college an inconvenient fancy of the founding fathers with no relevance in a ‘progressive’ society. But it’s not, and if you want to change the Constitution, tantrums aren’t how that’s done. There’s an order part to law and order.

The Electoral College makes sure a tiny majority of heavily populated states can’t impose their will on a large majority of sparsely populated states. That’s how the independent states became the United States — by making sure they weren’t simply subservient to California & New York. Such an unattractive proposition would have made the great experiment of democracy an early failure.

The Electoral College strikes a careful balance between respecting the sheer volume of voters in some states with the need to assure the ongoing participation in the Union of the other states. For Democrats who don’t like this when their candidate wins the constitutionally-irrelevant ‘popular vote’ but not the election, see number one above.

3. The Supreme Court is not a legislature

One of the strategies of sore loser Democrats over the decades has been to reinvent the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) into a legislature, a place which makes laws. This has no reference to the Constitution. It is a vain imagination of people who will stop at nothing to obtain power when they lose lawful elections.

ACB rejects Democratic ‘super legislature’ and ‘living constitution’ imaginations. She has talked about the proper role of the courts, saying they are not supposed to make law and legislate from the bench:

“Courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our life. The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People. The public should not expect courts to do so, and courts should not try.


“When I write an opinion resolving a case, I read every word from the perspective of the losing party. I ask myself how would I view the decision if one of my children was the party I was ruling against. Even though I would not like the result, would I understand that the decision was fairly reasoned and grounded in the law? That is the standard I set for myself in every case, and it is the standard I will follow as long as I am a judge on any court.”

The Democrats’ problem with ACB is she is a judicial originalist; someone who believes judicial activism is wrong.

4. Democrats lost the Presidency

One of the consequences of the 2016 election in that Democrats didn’t get their presidential candidate into the Oval Office. As much as they don’t like that, it is nevertheless one of the consequences of the election they lost that the winner — President Donald J. Trump — has the constitutionally prescribed role of nominating someone to fill any vacancies arising in the Supreme Court of the United States.

Now Democrats are absolutely convinced (again) the polls are right are their candidate will certainly win the 2020 election. Even though their idol, Ruth Bader Ginsburg (RBG), could have retired in 2015 or 2016 and given Democrat President Barak Obama the same constitutional opportunity to nominate an activist jurist to SCOTUS, she too believed the polls & hoped to allow Hillary to choose her replacement.

But when Hillary lost, RBG lost bigly. She was forced to hang on as long as possible, but also to no avail. She had a third failed strategy for controlling SCOTUS by bequeathing her seat with an alleged death-bed wish that it be filled after the election. Unfortunately for RGB and Democrats, the President has the constitutional right to nominate justices. It belongs to the people, and elections have consequences.

5. Democrats lost the Senate

In the 2016 election 34 of the 100 Senate seats were contested. The Republicans entered the election with a Senate majority of 4 seats, and only lost 2, retaining control of the Senate. Having great disdain for the Constitution as a terrible inconvenience to their radical social agendas, Democrats have another problem with ACB because they Senate — which they lost — has the constitutional power to reject or confirm the President’s nominee.

The Democrats had not had control of the Senate previously either, and so although they had the Oval Office, the Senate was not obliged constitutionally to confirm his nominee. They argue invalidly that because the Republican Senate dragged its feet until after the election when a Democrat President nominated a person to fill a vacant seat, the Republican Senate should drag its feet until after the election when any President nominates a person to fill a vacant seat.

But that’s not how politics works. Elections have consequences.

6. Democrats lost the argument

In keeping with their preference to vandalise reality rather than accept it, Democrats have decided to ‘pack the court’ if Biden/Harris becomes President.

For 150 years there have been exactly 9 seats on the Supreme Court, although this is only in legislation and not the Constitution. Faced with the daunting prospect of losing their weapon to circumvent democracy and implement radical agendas like abortion on demand and the undefintion of marriage, Democrats will double down and simply add as many judicial activists as necessary to outvote the Constitutionally-faithful judicial originalists.

But Americans are not convinced the tantrum should continue. A Gallup poll shows Democrat arguments for waiting until after the election are not cutting through, and 5% more Americans want ACB confirmed than those who don’t. A Morning Consult poll shows while only 7% of Republicans think the Senate should vote not to confirm, compared with 79% support, 32% of Democrats think the Senate should vote to confirm, compared with only 48% opposition.

Even the left-leaning American Bar Association gave ACB its highest review rating as a “Well Qualified” nomination. A major problem Democrats have with Judge Amy Coney Barrett is their transparently-partisan, ‘sour grapes’ arguments for not confirming her to SCOTUS simply don’t hold water for centred, undecided voters.

7. Democrats have lost all credibility

The tantrum has not abated since 2016. The fury has reached such fevered pitches that reliable polling has become all but impossible, requiring more mystical peering into the opaque minds of voters than science and survey due to understandable fear of admitting of anything other than radical leftist inclinations.

Not content with undefining marriage & gender, Democrats confronted with intentions of adding more seats to the court have undefined ‘packing the court’ to now mean doing what the Constitution provides can be done with SCOTUS. Of course, that’s a bad thing to them, and so they apply juvenile logic to their dilemma and conclude two wrongs will make a right — they can “also” pack the court.

They simply make stuff up, change the rules and even the dictionary at a whim. Websters literally rewrote the definition of sexual preference overnight to support a Democrat accusation of bigotry against the loveliest of ladies in a desperate, reality-detached attempt to demonise her.

President Trump will be re-elected as President of the United States of America with an increased majority if not landslide result due to the fact that Democrats have completely failed to accept the 2016 election result & its consequences, to moderate their tantrums or to turn up to the serious business of government.

Dave Pellowe is a Christian writer & commentator, founder of The Good Sauce, convener of the annual Australian Church And State Summit and host of Good Sauce's weekly The Church And State Show, also syndicated on ADH TV. Since 2016 Dave has undertaken the mission of arming Christians to influence culture through events from Perth to Auckland, videos, podcasts and articles published in multiple journals across Australia and New Zealand. [more]

Subscribe to Dave's mailing list here.

Honest political commentary & analysis

Here is where you'll find quality videos, podcasts & articles from some of the best independent voices in Australian politics and culture. Subscribe to get FREE weekly updates, uncensored, direct to your inbox today.

Success! Please check your inbox in a minute to finalise your subscription.