I knew you would be like that. You do not have higher standards to appeal to. Whatever you can get away with. yet you flout religion all the time. that figures. Religious hypocrites are the noisiest ones.
Your president will select a supreme count judge on one issue.
- Thread starter jbander1
- Start date
I knew you would be like that. You do not have higher standards to appeal to. Whatever you can get away with. yet you flout religion all the time. that figures. Religious hypocrites are the noisiest ones.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
The next Presidential election, isn't till towards the end of 2020.
Weren't you aware of all that?
Loving91390
Verified User
No .... Trump will select the woman ... And it will be very hard for the left to say NO !
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
we have to be noisy......to be heard over your bigoted clamor.....and i only "flout" religion when some idiot says something about it that is inaccurate.......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
not really......it will be automatic......
Mason Michaels
Verified User
You're right
But Democrats were venal enough to impose the nuclear option under Reid and set new filibuster records blocking Bush's appointments. Those are just tactics the parties use to win. One party is no more moral or ethical than the other---that is just lame rhetoric both sides uses to make themselves seem better. They use the tactics available at the time and their supporters will favor whatever it takes to win.
Assume Democrats win the presidency and Senate. Trump is leaving office in January and nominates a SC justice in June. Republicans have enough votes to confirm but Democrats can block it with a filibuster. Would you support Democrats blocking a vote on that nomination until they take office?
So a midterm is now not an election? I did not know that.
Is it the voice of the people, or do we only count votes during presidential elections? Were you aware that in Nov. the people will be voting, and their votes will count. That will be called the voicelof the people. Maybe the McConnell rule only applies in elections that Trump runs in. If he is not in jail 2020, then it will vount. After that, throw it out again.
Think you are an idiot. You play games like a kid. The filibuster records were set by the Repub senate during Obama. It was the Repubs who used the nuclear option. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court-senate.html Obamas court ap[pointees were routinely filibusterd by the Repbs. When Gorsuck came along, they went nuclear.
In November 2013, Senate DEMOCRATS used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments. A 3/5 supermajority was still required to end filibusters unrelated to those nominees, such as for legislation and Supreme Court nominees. On April 6, 2017, Senate Republicans invoked the nuclear option to remove the Supreme Court exception created in 2013. This was after Senate DEMOCRATS filibustered the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court of the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option
You didn't answer the question, old man. Would you support DEMOCRATS blocking a vote on that nomination until they take office?
Nobody said it's not an election, old man.
Do you suppose a midterm election determines who gets to pick nominees for the USSC?
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
Stuff that Biden said five minutes ago isn't taken seriously. That's one constant in his long, pathetic career in public disservice.
It is a hypothetical. Would you support the Democrats blocking a Trump Supreme Court appointment?
Bush was before Obama. The Democrats set new filibuster records blocking Bush nominees. Republican surpassed the Democratic record blocking Obama nominees. One side breaking the record before being surpassed by the other side does not make either side the better party.
Republicans would not have had the nuclear option for Gorsuch if Reid had not established that rule
"Reid, Democrats trigger ‘nuclear’ option; eliminate most filibusters on nominees"
"Senate Democrats took the dramatic step Thursday of eliminating filibusters for most nominations by presidents, a power play they said was necessary to fix a broken system but one that Republicans said will only rupture it further.
Democrats used a rare parliamentary move to change the rules so that federal judicial nominees and executive-office appointments can advance to confirmation votes by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote supermajority that has been the standard for nearly four decades.
The immediate rationale for the move was to allow the confirmation of three picks by President Obama to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit — the most recent examples of what Democrats have long considered unreasonably partisan obstruction by Republicans."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d2ca728e67c_story.html?utm_term=.6cbdd497ccec
That could lose the votes of Collins and Murkowsky
I would now. I would not have approved before the Repubs stole Obamas pick. Now fuck them, the rules are gone. They let the court with 8 judges for a damn year. If Hillary won, the seat would still be empty.
That is what both sides say. Republicans increased the filibusters because the Democrats had done so previously. Republicans imposed the nuclear option because the Democrats had done so previously. They justify their actions because the other party did it "first" or "worse."
The Republicans could have just voted on Garland and defeated his nomination. Would that still be "stealing" it?
No one stole anything; you parrot the lies you are fed from the DNC.
Biden Rule on Nominees – 1992
Senator Joe Biden in 1992: "President Bush should consider following the practice of the majority of his predecessors and not, and not, name a nominee until after the November election is completed."
2015, McConnell has a warning for Democrats as they invoke what's known as the nuclear option