Printable View
Why should they wait? Unwritten rules?Quote:
Originally Posted by drt1010
The excuses that both sides make up is is so ridiculous....so basically you are saying is the President should not do his job in the final few months of his term?
Ginsberg said thst a President should pick a nominee during an election year...
What is hilarious is that if a Democrat was in the same shoes right now you would be agreeing and quoting Ruth but since it is Trump you think we have to wait.
So laughable Dr.
Pelosi is a disgrace for her performance on Sunday.
Mush, they should wait till the election is over. That would be the honorable thing to do, especially since McConnel stood on that platform and said that it was but is now chan ming his mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
The Rs are going to really regret it if they push too hard. If the Dems win and take the senate? I am going to laugh like hell as they undo everything Trump has done in literally the first few months Biden is in charge.
Are you sure you want to go there Nick? The "unwritten rules" were enforced by Mitch and friends. But this administration plays by it's own rules and believe they are above the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
That gives mush and people like him, the proverbial erection.Quote:
Originally Posted by drt1010
They love that Trump doesn't follow any standard because it makes him "different". But when the Dems do it and they will, they will lose their shite and scream about how unfair it is.
Yep. He's a maverick, an outsider, their savior from the evils of status quo. They buy the act and swallow the shtick whole. I don't get it. As your sig suggests "ignorance is bliss" and I would add.... "none so blind as those that refuse to see."Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinkotheclown
Clown both parties play this dumb unwritten rule game. No President has to wait because of an election year. That is stupid and ridiculous. If the Dems were in control of the Senate and they had a Dem President the same thing would be done with their agenda as well. The difference last time with Obama was he didn’t have the Senate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinkotheclown
Well we agree on one thing!Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
Who wrote the so called "unwritten rules"? Who enforced them? All the D's are seeking is equal treatment. Basic fair play. But I am guessing that is asking far too much from the other side of the aisle.
McConnell, refused to consider Garland for the court, saying that the next president, not a lame-duck president, should name Scalia’s replacement.
The move enraged Democrats, and prompted Lindsay Graham, to promise two years later that if a future Republican president found himself in the same situation, “we’ll wait to the next election.”
Graham added that “you could use my words against me, and you’d be absolutely right.”
On Saturday, Graham tweeted that “I will support President @realDonaldTrump in any effort to move forward regarding the recent vacancy created by the passing of Justice Ginsberg." Twitter
So it appears the sycophant's will get in line and in lock step support the presidents choice EVEN BEFORE they know who that might be! Talk about blind loyalty!
Then McConnel should have had the sad to say that instead of preaching about doing the right thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
As I said, the Rs could be selling themselves down the river.
If Trump wins, no big deal for them . If he loses and the senate turns blue...
McConnel will **** his pants with rage.
Nick what is clearly laughable and what you and other supporters of the orange guy fail to consider, what makes the R's maneuver so egregious is what they did in ‘16, when they stone-walled Obama’s pick for 9 months, arguing “let the people decide.” What changed? We are only 42 days from an election, in fact several states have already begun early voting.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
It really is simple, if you are secure in your belief Trump will win re-election the point is moot and no need to rush things, right? Just wait for results.
Unintended consequences pro lifers. Less children will be born as fewer young woman elect to give birth in the coming years as the courts hurt the middle class and poor in favor of the rich. Book it
The real toll of Covid-19 is even higher than 200,000. Between mid-March and late August, 259,000 more Americans have died than would in a normal year. https://nytimes.com/interactive/2020...h-toll-us.html
Doc, exact same scenario but it was a press you liked and a democratic senate, what would you say? I would personally sound like Ralph from the Simpsons. "Ha-Ha!" and walk away.Quote:
Originally Posted by drt1010
I would not care one bit about the far right or their wants. If my president was picking s SCOTUS that I liked? **** the Rs.
If this happens, I can actually see senators losing seats. If the Dems get the senate and Biden wins, they can add Justices and stack the Court.
There is also some issue regarding a lifetime appointment. There is the option to argue that only means to a federal court.
Also, if he doesn't put Lagoa forward, he doesn't gain ground in Florida. He may lose it.
it was looking that way before ginsburg died..in this case they get a conservative judge for 30-40 years on the bench..plus knowing how old and showing signs of being senile biden is in 2 years the gop can take back the house and in 4 years win back the white house.. both in clinton and obama case after 2 years the gop scored a massive election victory in the midterms..Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinkotheclown