Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 10 of 31 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 457
  1. #136
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,348
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    2016 was different in that Republicans could block it (as they did). All these differences are just window dressing to hide the underlying fact: the reason 2016 and 2020 happened the way they did is because the Republicans could.

    Which, fine. If thatís how they want to play, OK. They just donít get to be mad when the Democrats expand the SC because they can (if that ends up happening).
    It's a big difference when the Senate and Prez are in different parties. That is actually traditional for that to be a bigger issue for confirmations (regardless of the party in control of the Senate). It really is a significant difference.

    And what the Dems could do in 2003 and 2013 they did.

    And of COURSE they get to complain. Dems get to complain every time the Reps do something they don't like, the same is true the other way.

  2. #137
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    103,368
    Btw I would not be surprised if Trump loses to see Thomas retire and give him another position to fill like that dems wonít get any shot at possibly replacing him in the next 4 years.

    And if you think the republicans would not do that with a lame duck president and senate then you have to be ****ing delusional.

  3. #138
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    14,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    Btw I would not be surprised if Trump loses to see Thomas retire and give him another position to fill like that dems wonít get any shot at possibly replacing him in the next 4 years.

    And if you think the republicans would not do that with a lame duck president and senate then you have to be ****ing delusional.
    You mean do what Ruth should have done?
    Bachelors III . . . In the Inn. . . Lanas Garage 4/18/75 . . . lpswitch with Snake, Hards and Mendy . . .B.D.W.B. . . Ambition: I want Dooleys Job . . . Saturday Night Live . . . Bathroom Brawls . . . Living at Snakes . . . WHERE IS MUSKY. - John Tortorella

  4. #139
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    It's a big difference when the Senate and Prez are in different parties. That is actually traditional for that to be a bigger issue for confirmations (regardless of the party in control of the Senate). It really is a significant difference.

    And what the Dems could do in 2003 and 2013 they did.

    And of COURSE they get to complain. Dems get to complain every time the Reps do something they don't like, the same is true the other way.
    It is only a big difference because it changes what either side can do. Which goes back to my point: all these differences are only a matter of what each side can and cannot do.

    If you're only selling point is "it's different because of what they can do" then if you complain about the other side doing something simply because they can, you're hypocritical (whether the other side is also hypocritical for doing something similar. Figured I'd pre-empt the both sides).

  5. #140
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    14,671
    Quote Originally Posted by Walter_White View Post
    This is all about what happened in 2016. If Garland was confirmed there wouldn't be much squawking about this.
    Lol dumb post is dumb

  6. #141
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    103,368
    Quote Originally Posted by fingerbang View Post
    You mean do what Ruth should have done?
    Oh yeah, Iíve told people I know that she should of retired in 2012 after Obama got re-elected.

  7. #142
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    14,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    Oh yeah, Iíve told people I know that she should of retired in 2012 after Obama got re-elected.
    Very poor judgement.
    Bachelors III . . . In the Inn. . . Lanas Garage 4/18/75 . . . lpswitch with Snake, Hards and Mendy . . .B.D.W.B. . . Ambition: I want Dooleys Job . . . Saturday Night Live . . . Bathroom Brawls . . . Living at Snakes . . . WHERE IS MUSKY. - John Tortorella

  8. #143
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    103,368
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    2016 was different in that Republicans could block it (as they did). All these differences are just window dressing to hide the underlying fact: the reason 2016 and 2020 happened the way they did is because the Republicans could.

    Which, fine. If thatís how they want to play, OK. They just donít get to be mad when the Democrats expand the SC because they can (if that ends up happening).
    I donít think they have the balls to do it, not Schumer, Harry Reid would not Schumer.

  9. #144
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    103,368
    Quote Originally Posted by fingerbang View Post
    Very poor judgement.
    I understand the power being a SCJ gives people and how hard it would be to give it up, but if you want your legacy to be continued by the next guy, then retire when you can be replaced by somebody that has similar views.

  10. #145
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    103,368
    Also today Lady G. Said he would accept if the SC gives Biden the win.

    Why should it get to that point? Surely he knows that Trump will try to invalidate any win by Biden and take it to the SC to stay in power and guess what? That SC is not going to give Biden ****!!!

  11. #146
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,010
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    It is only a big difference because it changes what either side can do. Which goes back to my point: all these differences are only a matter of what each side can and cannot do.

    If you're only selling point is "it's different because of what they can do" then if you complain about the other side doing something simply because they can, you're hypocritical (whether the other side is also hypocritical for doing something similar. Figured I'd pre-empt the both sides).
    Correct. That's why we have checks and balances and elections to help decide these matters.
    But it is different than 2016. Obama and the democrats did not have the senate. So they couldn't push through their nomination. Trump and republicans do hold the senate. So they can push through who they want. They are doing nothing wrong.

  12. #147
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    34,184
    Itís such a futile argument to point out ďhypocrisyĒ since itís everywhere. The democrats didnít have an issue with a lame duck president nominating a justice in an election year in 2016. They have an issue with it now in 2020. Why? Party lines. And itís reverse for Republicans now. Why? Because party lines. Silly to try and pretend like one side is any different than the other on this.


    NE Patriots Forum HOF (Class of 2011)

  13. #148
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    27,419
    Quote Originally Posted by hugepatsfan View Post
    Itís such a futile argument to point out ďhypocrisyĒ since itís everywhere. The democrats didnít have an issue with a lame duck president nominating a justice in an election year in 2016. They have an issue with it now in 2020. Why? Party lines. And itís reverse for Republicans now. Why? Because party lines. Silly to try and pretend like one side is any different than the other on this.
    No, it's never been an issue until 2020. Its always been normal to let the acting president nominate. Until the Trump administration was on its way in.

    This isn't an it goes both ways situation

    However, now the dems are obligated to do whatever they can to block the current nomination due to what happened in 2016.

    Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

    Click here to register!

    Hope to see some new posters around here soon.

  14. #149
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hell on Earth- Missouri
    Posts
    14,966
    Quote Originally Posted by blams View Post
    However, now the dems are obligated to do whatever they can to block the current nomination due to what happened in 2016.

    Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
    Which is absolutely nothing. Deal with it.

  15. #150
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    6,123
    Quote Originally Posted by blams View Post
    No, it's never been an issue until 2020. Its always been normal to let the acting president nominate. Until the Trump administration was on its way in.

    This isn't an it goes both ways situation

    However, now the dems are obligated to do whatever they can to block the current nomination due to what happened in 2016.

    Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
    Again you fail to realize that the Dems played the shady game back in Ď13 which many republicans back then said wait until the tables are turned etc


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Page 10 of 31 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •