RBG passed

Tsing Tao said:
Ok, so you've provided evidence that organized religion is active in politics. This isn't surprising. This is what keeps you up at night? The idea that evangelicals are going to take over and run the United States of America? Honestly?
More...
Yes. Honestly. I don’t need such neighbors.
 
Here4money said:
She'll be a great SCOTUS pick when they pack the court next year


Your point being?
More...

My point is that democrats aren’t playing chess. In some ways they weren’t even in the game.

Judges are an issue every cycle in republican campaigns but not democrats. It’s an issue democrats didn’t take seriously enough and got burned when it’s an issue that should unite every wing of the left.
 
UsualName said:
My point is that democrats aren’t playing chess. In some ways they weren’t even in the game.

Judges are an issue every cycle in republican campaigns but not democrats. It’s an issue democrats didn’t take seriously enough and got burned when it’s an issue that should unite every wing of the left.
More...
ok, so then they need to use every underhanded procedural bullshit the right used to halt this confirmation as they did w/Garland. They're already being accused of setting precedent by getting rid of the filibuster to nominate judges Obama had every right to nominate anyway (see that's the dems knowing the importance of the judicial but getting screwed for being nice).
 
Here4money said:
ok, so then they need to use every underhanded procedural bullshit the right used to halt this confirmation as they did w/Garland. They're already being accused of setting precedent by getting rid of the filibuster to nominate judges Obama had every right to nominate anyway (see that's the dems knowing the importance of the judicial but getting screwed for being nice).
More...
Obama has every right
But Trump doesn’t. Amirite?
 
[QUOTE="Here4money, post: 5208743, member: 496573" Obama had every right to nominate anyway (see that's the dems knowing the importance of the judicial but getting screwed for being nice).[/QUOTE]

No one has disputed Obama's right to nominate.

But he had no right to a confirmation hearing or a confirmation.
 
Here4money said:
ok, so then they need to use every underhanded procedural bullshit the right used to halt this confirmation as they did w/Garland. They're already being accused of setting precedent by getting rid of the filibuster to nominate judges Obama had every right to nominate anyway (see that's the dems knowing the importance of the judicial but getting screwed for being nice).
More...

I guess but I don’t think that going tooth and nail on this one makes any sense for two reasons 1. Republicans are still going to get the nominee confirmed and 2. It’s not politically advantageous because by a 2:1 margin the American people want the next president to choose the next justice. It’s a built in losing issue for republicans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top