A Long List of GOP Senators Who Promised Not to Confirm a SC Nominee During an Election Year

Well said, but don't worry. Truth survives any government. Truth is even surviving DPRK.

So the trash behavior and all the bullshit, all the subverting of norms, suppressing of votes... all the craven lying... it will all be recorded for history.

But it will get erased in family histories. Just like you never hear of people's grandparents being for "America first" and being vocally pro-Hitler in the 1930s, but plenty of Americans were. So too, when grandkids of some of these posters ask about these crazy times, they won't get a straight answer about what grandpa was up to. "Oh, he just kept his nose down and worked hard. Those were tough times for everybody." Mmmm-hmmm. Grandpa was straight cheering for Bill Barr and the destruction of our governing fabric that you're reading about, junior. We barely survived when enough decent people woke up and voted while they still could.

 

Such a silly argument to me.

Most abortions happen early in the pregnancy, this idea that a woman carries a baby for 7 months then decides she doesn't want it just doesn't exist.

Late term abortions are basically always because of the health of the mother and the mother should get to decide if she wants to risk her life for a baby that might not survive, not you, not her doctor, and definitely not her bible thumping politician.

 

GOP senators are known to care deeply about "gotcha" videos and looking hypocrites to their own voters. I'm sure these owns will prevent them from walking back their statements and actions in 2016! Surely their voters will make them rue the day they went against their word!

 

I don't like it, but Trump should nominate someone and the Senate should confirm, if the nominee is acceptable. The travesty is not that a president and Senate are doing their jobs in 2020; the travesty was McConnell refusing to do his job in 2016. If Democrats somehow blocked this proceeding now (fat chance) it'll only perpetuate the bad precedent further into the future.

Of course the Democrats will try to block, and they will vote reflexively against the nominee no matter how fit she might be. And Republicans will try to cram it through no matter how unfit she might be. And the justice nominee process will be more of a joke than ever. And the Supreme Court will be more of a joke as a consequence.

And I think it becomes much more likely that if Democrats take the presidency and the Senate, Biden will pack the court with 2 or 4 more judges. To Democrats' eyes, that'll right the 'injustices' of Republican SC chicanery, but what it will really do is further cheapen and undermine the Supreme Court and further erode the institutions of the republic. I feel like we're on a downward spiral because every incentive to 'fix' partisanship actually encourages us to make it worse.

 

this is mitch mcturtles senate and he is the one who set the precedent that a sitting president does not get a SC in the final year of their term. if obama couldnt get his with 10 months before the election then there is no way you can support trump getting his 6 weeks out. of course the tradertexxxes and partisan hacks will argue otherwise and try to spin, but if you are being consistent then you cant support trump picking now.

i always thought that if a seat opened up during a presidents term that it was their right to fill it...but that was before merrick garland. obama should have had his pick and trump should have his now...however, the republicans made a cynical power-grab and screwed over obama so its fair play for for dems to fight tooth-and-nail to prevent trump getting his pick. im tired of seeing them continually get rolled over by a party that clearly is not playing by the same rules or ethical standards.

if republicans dont like it then they have nobody to blame but themselves. there should absolutely be consequences for what they did in 2016. and i think dems should be very vocal about the ramifications of what the trumpublicans are doing. if they hypocritically nominate trumps pick then dems should vow to pack the court and end the filibuster. and not just say they will do it....f***ing do it. if republicans are going to play dirty then dems need to as well.

if i was schumer i would promise that if mcconnell goes through with this then they will pack the courts and end the filibuster. i would also point out that unlike the hypocritical, lying republicans, dems will stay true to their word.

 

Trump: You're my b**** and you know it, right?
Graham: Yes sir...

 

Pelosi needs to do the Impeachment block. It is time for Dems to play dirty like the Republicans.

 

Basically what you are stating is "Democrats need to be the better person".

Understand the sentiment. But also understand these are lifetime appointments which obviously I know you know which makes the stakes of just "giving in" more grave.

One thing your tactic would accomplish is it will basically pull the rug under the GOP's attack dog campaign stating the Democrats are blocking a SC justice. I feel like conservatives care more about justices than Democrats to the point where I'm confident plenty of conservatives hold their nose voting for Trump just because of SC picks. The GOP is probably betting on and hoping to bait Democrats into attempting to block the nomination.

 

That was pure lip service. Democrats didn't have the Senate so Merrick Garland had no chance.

After the Democrats forced Obamacare down the Republicans' throats, it was clear the Republicans weren't going to help out President Obama in any way, shape, or form. RBG should've retired years ago. More than anything, this current predicament is her fault.

 

Yes, which is why I think we're stuck in a vicious cycle that increasingly degrades our republic. I don't expect Democrats will actually take the high road. And if they did, Republicans wouldn't reciprocate.

 

How is passing legislation ramming something down someone's throat especially when the core aspect of the bill, the mandate, comes from a conservative think tank (the Heritage Foundation)?

 

How many Republicans voted for it?

 

And? It's still a gop think tank idea which shows how hyper partisan the GOP was at the time where they just didn't accept anything from Obama.


Can you imagine the current president being this cordial and expressing this much nuance against 100 Democrat legislators?

 

What do you mean "and"?

Zero Republicans voted for it. That's the definition of legislation being rammed down their throats. If you can't acknowledge this fact, then you aren't discussing things in good faith.

 

Again, the core legislative aspect of the ACA was the individual mandate, a GOP think tank idea (Heritage Foundation). The Heritage Foundation changed their position and called the mandate unconstitutional in... 2011. Gee I wonder what made them all of a sudden change their minds?

Again, this shows me the GOP is going to act in bad faith and vote no regardless of context and then push their message to lemmings such as yourself that it was "rammed down".

 

What would the Dems do if the shoe were on the other foot? Let's face it. Both parties are hypocrites. There's a good chance that the vote doesn't happen until after the election and a decent chance the nominee is not confirmed if Trump loses. With "All options on the table", the democrats response will be on full display. This may turn into a huge troll by the republicans.

 

Again. Zero Republican votes. I'm sorry you seem to think that's a bipartisan vote.