 You know, I find it really interesting that Mitch McConnell he refused to allow a vote on another stimulus package The Democrats passed the heroes act in the house months ago. He won't even allow a vote on that and it's imperfect It's not good enough, but it's something right now Americans need anything. They can't put a foot on the table They're getting evicted. You need to give them some relief Wouldn't take that up. He wouldn't even take up Donald Trump's 1.8 trillion proposal down from 2.2 trillion that Nancy Pelosi was proposing I Repeat the Republican Senate majority leader would not take up the Republican president's stimulus package after the Republican president Publicly said I want to pass this this package But he had time of course to rush through a far-right Supreme Court nominee Confirmed that individual one week before the selection to make sure that his corporate donors got exactly What they wanted and it just goes to show you that this is asymmetric warfare Now they're going on recess while the American people are just being left out to dry So the Republican Party is playing as dirty as they possibly can play using every single procedural tool at their disposal Being as openly hypocritical as is humanly possible and it's time that Democrats actually Fight fire with fire, which is why they have to make sure that their number one priority if they take back the Senate is court-packing and I know that some of them aren't on board including Democrats that I like or I should say independence that I like such as Bernie Sanders He's not necessarily been open to ending the filibuster and packing the Supreme Court Not acceptable Nobody is allowed to not accept this because we can't afford to have three to four decades worth of Non-stop conservative rulings and undo what little progress we've made So whoever isn't on board is going to have to get on board because we don't have a choice Otherwise we are allowing the Republicans to wage asymmetric warfare Not just on the Democratic Party, but on the country itself now some Democrats are starting to vocalize openness if not outright an endorsement of court-packing and Marquis tweeted out and the filibuster and Expand the Supreme Court. That is exactly what I want to hear every single US senator say now I think that they're gonna play coy whenever this question is brought up before the election But the day after that election, I better start hearing a firm plan to pack the court Term limits expand the court. I don't know But you can't just allow there to be a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court and watch all of the civil rights and civil liberties That activists fought for for decades to just be overturned like that Not acceptable. So you've got to fight and that means you fight fire with fire So Ed Marquis is right on the money here by explicitly saying we're gonna pack the court now. Sorry Republicans packed the court. So we have no choice. We have to do that as well Now even someone who I wasn't expecting To be open-minded about this is starting to change his tune a little bit independent Angus King and as Sahil Kapoor of NBC news reports Senator Angus King of Maine on the Senate floor tonight said I don't want to pack the court I don't want to change that number. I don't want to have to do that But if all of this rule-breaking is taking place, what does the majority expect? What did they expect? They expect that we are going to be able to break the rules with impunity and when the shoe is maybe on the other foot Nothing is going to happen. The people over here are going to say, oh, well, we can't change the rules One of the things that's amazed me since I've come here is how people feel They can do things to one another and never have it have any consequences never have it come back on them The shoe may be on the other foot. We don't know what's going to happen next week. So that right there is really big He's saying you guys are playing dirty. So maybe it's time. We play dirty as well now on top of that Brian Schatz is Starting to use rhetoric that might suggest that he's becoming a little bit more open to the idea So he tweeted out his speech from the Senate forum and he added the old Senate has been destroyed We need to build something better. So what we're starting to see now is some really small signs that some Democrats are Actually going to fight Possibly we'll have to see and it's incumbent on us to hold them accountable, but we're seeing some signs of life Signs that maybe they're finally willing to fight because the Republican Party has proven that it is ruthless They will do whatever they have to do To make sure they get what they want. So it's time you start fighting as well Now there's going to be a number of senators who Are not going to budge on this Diane Feinstein is one of them Now she's not up for reelection until 2024 does that mean we just give her a pass? No If she's not going to budge on this there should be a tremendous amount of effort grassroots pressure For her to resign because we just don't have time to wait until 2024 Democrats if they take back the Senate we have to assume they're going to have a very small window to act They'll have the Senate for two years. We can't wait For stubborn senators to maybe lose their reelection campaigns. We don't have time and in fact There's already grassroots pressure for Chuck Schumer to commit to expanding the supreme court Because it's ryan grim tweets out more than 20 new york progressive elected officials are calling on schumer to commit to expanding the supreme court Schumer is up for reelection in 2022. This looks like a shot across the bow. And that's what I want to see We don't have a choice now I'm going to make the same argument that I've been making in all of my videos where we talk about court packing because I want Democratic party loyalists leftists everyone to get this through their head We don't have a choice the argument that bernie sanders used He said look, I don't want to do anything to expand the supreme court because what is that going to lead to We add a couple justices then republicans are going to add a couple justices Do we really want to go tit for tat? and um My answer is yes We try not to go tit for tat But it's better than the alternative if we do nothing and we do not expand the supreme court. What happens? We have 30 to 40 years of non-stop conservative rulings But if we add some justices and have a liberal majority and then republicans add more justices and have a conservative majority At least there's going to be periods where there are liberal Majorities some good decisions inaction means conservative rulings 100 of the time And court packing even if republicans ago tit for tat means Once on a while there will be some good rulings still so even if republicans end up packing the court too Again, we have no choice 30 years Of republican rulings is just not acceptable. We can't Allow all the fights that we already won To be rehashed. We just can't allow that now. Of course democrats have to take action to stop Republicans from expanding the court as well So what do we do? We make sure that it's really difficult for them to win elections And we don't do that by resorting to voter suppression as they would do We actually further enhance democracy consolidate democracy and make sure that more people Have voices we do the opposite of what they wanted to what individuals like ted cruz want to do He wants a constitutional amendment to block democrats from ever expanding the court But what democrats have to do is they actually have to be savvy They have to immediately make sure that dc is a state because that is two more senators that will most likely be democrats Then you extend its statehood to portorico. You allow them to vote because self-determination is important Um if they join maybe entice them to join That's two more democratic senators most likely allow guam other u.s. Territories to become states And if republicans don't like that and they say well, you're just Making it so that way, you you know, you further tip the balance of the senate in your favor They have to make that anti democratic argument. They have to argue against democracy. We're enfranchising people We're making more people's voices heard Are you really against that? Now they could play dirty here, too They can try to take red states and carve them up like texas so that way they get more senators as well Then we have to start playing even dirtier Carve up california and other blue states like new york to make sure that we keep the balance of the senate in democratic control And if they want to win they've got to actually appeal to more people They can't just bank on winning elections by suppressing the vote and doing voter suppression But on top of that we have to make sure we stop them from doing voter suppression We are basically taking a radical democracy approach So what we do is institute compulsory voting. We require people to vote Every single person Has to vote Now I don't care what you do to entice people to vote You can use the carrot or the stick approach I would prefer the carrot approach to where you're required to vote by law And if you don't vote you are not eligible for a particular tax credit of some sort. I don't know figure it out Um and what I would also say is that since the options typically in our system are garbage We um make sure that there is a none of the above options So people have to vote But still even if there's a none of the above option people who are forced to come out to vote Will most likely vote against republicans Because republicans are a minority party with very unpopular ideas So if everybody votes of 100 of the population votes even 95 percent of the population votes republicans know when turnout is high They lose So you stop them from winning by enhancing democracy And if they don't like that they have to make the anti-democratic case They have to tell us and explain to us why enhancing democracy Is a bad thing they have to explain to us why further enfranchising more americans Giving statehood to more states Is a bad thing Why because they'd have to actually appeal to people And they can't just be openly fascist anymore Oh, no So we don't have a choice and I've said this once I will say it every time we talk about court packing Democrats have to do this. They don't have a choice and as leftists We absolutely have to pressure them with everything that they've got To where if they're not going to you know explicitly Support court packing They've got to go they've got to be primaried if Chuck Schumer is not going to budge We're going to have to primary him with aOC We've got no fucking time for this. So, um We've got to be ruthless at least as ruthless as the republicans at least as ruthless as mitch mcconnell and Lindsey Graham and donald trump. We don't have to be hypocritical like them We don't have to suppress the vote and be undemocratic But the way that we win and stop them from winning is by being more democratic So expand the court We have no choice