RBG has passed away

'credible allegations'. lolz

 

Railroading another SCOTUS? Were Gorsuch/Kavanaugh railroaded into office? They weren't and neither will this SCOTUS. The fact that you dont/wont like any Trump nominee doesn't mean they were railroaded into th SCOTUS. Unless we have different definitions of what railroading is. The law has been followed and hopefully you realize this. What I find disconcerting is Schumer saying if the Dems when the POTUS/House/Senate that they will add more seats to the SCOTUS (Directly against the wishes of RBG.) and add Puerto Rico/DC as states to try to gain political advantage. This should wakeup the Ind/Mod voters and make them ask if they want to see this fundamental change in the foundations this democracy was built upon.

If they do want change then this country will get what it deserves. # Venezuela

 

This dog came back to bite the Dems in the butt.

 

It's not stacking the court. It's balancing and reforming a court system that is already stacked and has insufficient capacity. These are just facts. These facts were mostly true 3 days ago, 3 years ago, and really 3 elections ago.

It's also logically true that if you want to deescalate fights around the court - diluting and reforming it is a way better way of doing it than the status quo.

Fly away home.

 

Yes these are tit for tat moves and one reason why I was against the Democrats "nuclear option" ten years ago. I knew it would come back to haunt them and am pretty sure stacking the court will too.

For the record I opposed stacking the court back in 2016 and 2018 when it was brought up regarding if the Democrats ever took the Presidency and Senate they would do it in response to Merrick Garland and Kavanaugh.

If the Democrats stack the court, which I think is a very strong likelyhood. I predict within the next ten years we will hear moaning about the GOP either adding more seats when they are in office or removing seats of liberal justices. For that matter if the next Democratic Senate does away with the filibuster in general we will see a lot of moaning when the next Republican Senate comes in and runs roughshod over the Democrats.

One of the biggest problems I see is the lack of long term thinking in this country. Too many moves are made for short term political expediency.

 

Again would you support adding more seats to the USSC if it was 5-4 liberal majority and a Republican Congress was in place?

 

You guys are thinking about the senators voted out, I'm thinking about the senators that remain and still have a political record to fight for. Do you really want to be the one that voted for the destruction of the Supreme Court? Or, come 2022-24 do you want to be the one that stood up against the corruption of the now disgraced Trump?

As for those getting voted out, it doesn't work one way. Remember Jeff Flake for example? It doesn't work just one way, someone losing their seat can go either way and some of these anti-Trump Republicans want to reform their party, there is no better time to do that should Trump lose then and there.

And again, what they would be doing is so clearly wrong. It's not just voting on another SCOTUS judge, it's voting on another SCOTUS judge in a lame duck session while the other side has a clear mandate while also pushing it through knowing all that. They would be destroying the SCOTUS as it stands. Classic Republicans love their precedent, we've seen this even on the SCOTUS...so I think there are some that will have respect for the vote and will accept the 5-4 majority they currently have.

The whole Jobs argument, I mean, these people are not going to be suffering for work. Collins will have a stack of offers when/if she's voted out no matter her decision. Sure, some far-right places might not be interested in her but are they now? Right-wingers in Trump country are no fan of people like her and Romney.

They will be fine either way though.

 

Aren't federal courts tradionally packed with conservatives anyways seeing as how someone in Wyoming has 70 times the voting power as someone in California when it comes to nominating federal judges?

 

Early returns are that it has fired up Democrats, IIRC 100million more in donations since her death?

 

I don't want to go down rehashing the Mueller report but it didn't say what you think it is. Further Congress did actually pass legislation and have other hearings during impeachment. Believe it or not they actually can do more than one thing.

As far as moving on you were the one who brought the Mueller report in this thread. Perhaps that is advice you shoudl take.

 

So, you support them pushing through a conservative judge in the scenario that the Dems hold Congress, Senate, and Presidency?

Why? Wouldn't that just mean your team lost and you're just sabotaging the game instead of just accepting the country doesn't want your ideals?

 

Donations dont equal votes.

Ask Hillary about this.

 

Done

 

For McConnell to not do the Constitutional duty in even giving Merrick Garland a hearing and then pushing Gorsuch through was a railroad job.

That was a major change and if you fear we are going the way of Venezuela where a minority party bends the rules for their own benefit that is a far great sign..

 

The SCOTUS is a lifetime appointment and that's much more important than a single election cycle. Even if this is a POTUS election year.

 

I would support ending life tenure, phasing in a sequence of staggered terms and expanding the courts (all of them) and raising judicial salaries regardless of who's in power

https://bbs.clutchfans.net/index.php?threads/justice-scalia-dead.272556/page-4#post-10308246

 

As You're socialist POTUS once said elections have consequences. That as well as changing the filibuster rules (Reid) is coming back to bite the Dems in the butt.

 

I think normally you would be right, but, I think even they would see (I hope) that their actions would rattle through history.

It's one thing to maintain a 5-4 majority that always existed, another entirely to push one through a lame duck session when you're side has been told by the people that they disagree.

I mean, I guess we'll see. I think the combination of these people no longer being under Trump's leash will find a lot more courage and I think the aspiration of someone leading a reformed GOP that distances itself from Trump will hold off this particular power grab.

I also think in that scenario the Democrats mandate will be so clear that it would be silly for them to do it. Usually, the losing side acts like they will play nice and civil for the first 6 months or so. I mean, Trump might be the x-factor here because if it is a close defeat for him he might be contesting the results and acting like he won...

 

Those are not facts, it's definitely an opinion, one that I disagree with but a valid one.

Still don't know why you went so personal after RJ.