No, it should not be framed this way, as Democrats have expressed a different rationale, namely: If McConnell proceeds to apply different rules than he did in 2016, he will have effectively stolen at least 1 seat. A reasonable response to this would be to expand the court. https://twitter.com/jackshafer/status/1314936706613874690

The court expansion question has *only* come under debate due to McConnell's own actions. Democrats are generally not in favor of expanding the court just for the sake of expanding the court. Some, however, are in favor of this action *contingent upon* McConnell's behavior.

Given the GOP applied one set of rules in 2016 and have now reversed those rules, it is basically inarguable that they, not Democrats, are trying to pack the court. These actions are enough of a breach of the democratic contract that they merit a response.

It's either that Gorsuch's seat is illegitimate given the GOP's 2020 logic or Coney Barrett's seat would be illegitimate given the GOP's 2016 logic. This level of defection from the democratic contract is untenable. & Democrats have been clear that it has gone too far.

I would like to point out that there is an extreme imbalance in the media's framing here. There is a ton of focus on whether Biden would support court expansion & basically *zero* focus re: that McConnell, right now, is changing his own rules in order to pack the court.

It is McConnell who is wielding power to undermine our democracy. It is McConnell who has been hypocritical re: nominations in an election year. It is McConnell who has repeatedly defected from democratic norms. That deserves at least as much attention as how Biden may respond.

And, again, the *correct* framing is that Biden's position (& the position of Congressional Democrats, who actually have the power to do this) is entirely contingent on how McConnell proceeds.

Democrats are in a peculiar position in a two-party system, as they both want to advance their own goals *and* uphold democracy, whereas the GOP fights to advance their goals by *undermining* democracy.

This places Democrats at a perpetual disadvantage and it also means that, at some level, they tend to tolerate some level of norm breaking behavior on the part of the GOP w/out mounting an equivalent norm-breaking response.

But the contrast between the GOP's 2016 SCOTUS rules & their 2020 SCOTUS rules is goes too far. There comes a point where reluctance to respond to defections is no longer protecting our democratic norms, but allowing them to be violated to the extent we no longer have a democracy

This is, at least, what the rationale of some Democrats seems to be. We can argue about whether they were previously too timid at a diff time, but their reasoning now is clear: McConnell has gone too far if this confirmation goes thru & extreme measures are necessary in response

McConnell created this situation & McConnell is perpetuating it. Even if you believe defections from norms are bad (e.g. court expansion), it is reasonable to argue that allowing *one* side to repeatedly defect w/out consequences is worse.

That is the correct framing.