Ginsburg on the fritz.....again.....here comes another SCOTUS appointment!

a reply to: Wayfarer

But Garland wasn't a favorable choice in the Senate in 2016 was he 😃 😃 😃

a reply to: UKTruth

I don't see his re-election as much of a challenge at all. The dems have yet to put up anyone that could beat him. I could see him naming a nominee and showing his confidence in being re-elected.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
I disagree
I would encourage the senate to use their duly elected majority; similar to what is going on in the house currently.......

You forgot to mention that's because its good when your side does it, but bad when the other side does it.

originally posted by: UKTruth
This would be extremely problematic for Republicans.
It was the Republicans who refused to even bring Obama's SC Justice nomination to the floor because Obama was in his last year of office.
If they changed their mind just because they have the right President for them to install a favourable pick, it would not play well with moderates. It would be seen as the height of partisan politics - because, well, it would be.
No, if RBG does pass away, then the seat will be open until AFTER the 2020 election.

Well holy crimeny I never thought I'd hear a fair take on this from you.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: carewemust
I showed a lady a partial list of Trump achievements. She exclaimed, "He's a TERRIBLE President!".

Your post reminded me of her.

What do you like about Kavanaugh, other than the fact that dear leader appointed him? The patriot act? "Constitutionalist" my a$$.

I like that he appears to be neutral. He has refused to just rubber stamp eveything Republicans want. He's ruled for and against the Govt. That is good, no?

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
I disagree
I would encourage the senate to use their duly elected majority; similar to what is going on in the house currently.......

You forgot to mention that's because its good when your side does it, but bad when the other side does it.

Oh...the "it's not fair" argument....nice.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Notoneofyou
If she does pass away, it will lead to even more desperation to get rid of the President.

I dont think the poor dems could handle another "loss" , which is how they see any appointment made by Trump.

If she passes away obviously the Senate should hold off on confirming any replacement until the American people have spoken on November 4th 2020.

Why would they do that?

The same reason McConnell refused to hold confirmation hearings on Merrick Garland:

Its imperative the American People have a say in this after 2 Trump nominations..........

Meh... with the way the dems are acting right now I am completely fine with not waiting. It's likely that is all this whole impeachment thing is about. They know RBG isn't going to last.

Thats totally cool but I think its probably healthier just to admit/accept that its OK when your side does it, but not OK when the other side does it.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Oh look its the guy who's never cried 'not fair'...../sarcasm

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Notoneofyou
If she does pass away, it will lead to even more desperation to get rid of the President.

I dont think the poor dems could handle another "loss" , which is how they see any appointment made by Trump.

If she passes away obviously the Senate should hold off on confirming any replacement until the American people have spoken on November 4th 2020.

Why would they do that?

The same reason McConnell refused to hold confirmation hearings on Merrick Garland:

Its imperative the American People have a say in this after 2 Trump nominations..........

so are you saying obama and the dems were actually wrong to attempt to get the senate to confirm obamas nominee?

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: UKTruth
This would be extremely problematic for Republicans.
It was the Republicans who refused to even bring Obama's SC Justice nomination to the floor because Obama was in his last year of office.
If they changed their mind just because they have the right President for them to install a favourable pick, it would not play well with moderates. It would be seen as the height of partisan politics - because, well, it would be.
No, if RBG does pass away, then the seat will be open until AFTER the 2020 election.

Well holy crimeny I never thought I'd hear a fair take on this from you.

I call balls and strikes as I see them. I might appear to be biased in favour of Trump, but that is because 90% of the attacks on him are complete BS.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: carewemust
I showed a lady a partial list of Trump achievements. She exclaimed, "He's a TERRIBLE President!".

Your post reminded me of her.

What do you like about Kavanaugh, other than the fact that dear leader appointed him? The patriot act? "Constitutionalist" my a$$.

I like that he appears to be neutral. He has refused to just rubber stamp eveything Republicans want. He's ruled for and against the Govt. That is good, no?

You are veering into dangerous territory here UK.

Your compatriots are about to turn on you for suggesting anything other than TRUMP DO WHAT HE WANT! YOU BAD IF DISAGREE!

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
I disagree
I would encourage the senate to use their duly elected majority; similar to what is going on in the house currently.......

You forgot to mention that's because its good when your side does it, but bad when the other side does it.

what bad is "the other side doing"?

i am curious.....

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Notoneofyou
If she does pass away, it will lead to even more desperation to get rid of the President.

I dont think the poor dems could handle another "loss" , which is how they see any appointment made by Trump.

If she passes away obviously the Senate should hold off on confirming any replacement until the American people have spoken on November 4th 2020.

Why would they do that?

The same reason McConnell refused to hold confirmation hearings on Merrick Garland:

Its imperative the American People have a say in this after 2 Trump nominations..........

so are you saying obama and the dems were actually wrong to attempt to get the senate to confirm obamas nominee?

Say what? Is that really how you parsed that?


Obviously the wrongness was McConnell refusing to even hold hearings on the nominee for 'Reasons'....

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Oh look its the guy who's never cried 'not fair'...../sarcasm

So all the winning IS getting to you then.

a reply to: Wayfarer
so then mcconnell should hold hearings?
you are confusing.....

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
I disagree
I would encourage the senate to use their duly elected majority; similar to what is going on in the house currently.......

You forgot to mention that's because its good when your side does it, but bad when the other side does it.

what bad is "the other side doing"?

i am curious.....

C'mon man, surely you of all people understand this with me having to explain.


When the Republican senate refused to hold confirmation hearings on Garland, it was good to you and yours. When the Republican senate holds confirmation hearings on the 3rd nominee in exactly the same time circumstances (except its for a Republican nominee) then its also good because although the circumstances are practically the same, the only thing that really mattered in the end (not rules or procedure or even the will of the people), was getting an 'R' in there....

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: carewemust
I showed a lady a partial list of Trump achievements. She exclaimed, "He's a TERRIBLE President!".

Your post reminded me of her.

What do you like about Kavanaugh, other than the fact that dear leader appointed him? The patriot act? "Constitutionalist" my a$$.

I like that he appears to be neutral. He has refused to just rubber stamp eveything Republicans want. He's ruled for and against the Govt. That is good, no?

You are veering into dangerous territory here UK.

Your compatriots are about to turn on you for suggesting anything other than TRUMP DO WHAT HE WANT! YOU BAD IF DISAGREE!

I really don't care about 'compatriots' turning on me. I only care to comment based on my own values and what I think is right (or wrong). You can be sure of that, whether I myself ultimately turn out to be right or wrong on a subject.

The bottom line is that SC Justices (and all judges) should be neutral - or recuse themselves if they can't be - and a majority leader who blocked one nomination because of the timing of the nomination simply can't flip his position 3 years later and expect reasonable people to be ok with it.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I mean, these past few weeks have been some of the most entertaining and blissful I've had in the last few years. Watching all this come out around Trump and the dumpsterfire that is him and his administration being displayed publicly now for the remainder of his term actually calms me a great deal and really lowers my stress levels.

So in that sense yes you could say all this winning is getting to me (in a good way).

a reply to: Wayfarer
so which is wrong?
or are both wrong?
and why?

and all of a sudden why is it "wrong" to use the majority?
seems it gets cheered when on the right side......

seems they want to undo my vote, why should I not encourage those I voted for to further my will?


why is the BAMN on the other side so wrong?

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I mean, these past few weeks have been some of the most entertaining and blissful I've had in the last few years. Watching all this come out around Trump and the dumpsterfire that is him and his administration being displayed publicly now for the remainder of his term actually calms me a great deal and really lowers my stress levels.

So in that sense yes you could say all this winning is getting to me (in a good way).

Good to hear. Can't wait to see how it all turns out. I'll check in with you when it's over and nothing happens....just to make sure you're still all good.