Liberals: Deal or No Deal?

[Stranger in a strange land]

No, because I don't even want the SCOTUS to do that anyway. Better to let the states do it themselves to get some legitimacy to it and then let the courts force the remaining states like Oklahoma and Utah and all that ahead.

IMHO, it's much better if SCOTUS does it 10-20 years from now, once a supermajority of public opinion is firmly in support of gay marriage and more than half the states have already legalized it. Certain states will never legalize gay marriage unless the Feds force them to, but there's a danger in getting too far ahead of public opinion.

Marriage equality is clearly gaining momentum, and most states will have it in 10 years. While equality is important, it's certainly not worth sacrificing a whole host of other issues for something that's coming relatively soon anyway.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Deal. A GOP president almost guarantees Ted Cruz will be a one-term Senator. But then again, Ted Cruz almost guarantees Ted Cruz will be a one-term Senator. So never mind. No deal.

Not worth it, because Cruz is, at the end of the day, just one senator, and one who's disliked by most of his colleagues. Scalia and Kennedy being replaced by young firebrand conservatives - think Cruz, but on the Supreme Court - is a far, far worse outcome. That's not to mention the probability that a Republican President will start a war with Iran, seek to curtail women's rights and gay rights, and weaken environmental protections.