This post infers a great many things that were never said nor implied in the post in which the response is made.
Did to me, otherwise I wouldn’t have said it.
I believe you.
From the old white Senate?
Sounds like a total loser.
Republicans would be stuck with giving Democrats a veto in the senate that would still be there if they win. Democrats would simply reverse any agreement by a majority vote if they take control.
1 Like
They would. Playing nicey nicey doesn’t work with dems especially our modern radicalized ones.
It would be foolish to attempt to do so.
What does filibuster have to do with SCOTUS appointments?
Nope, this time McConnell drew first blood. The Dems deserved Mitch ending the filibuster for Supreme Court Justices after Harry Reid ended for other judges. At that point they were even, then Mitch took it to a whole new level. Enjoy it now because you will hate the pay back!
Or maybe a Constitutional amendment requiring 2/3 majority vote for SCOTUS picks.
I’m exhausted and disheartened by the constant brinksmanship in our politics. I guess this was always the inevitable collapse of a two-party system, but the country has to get off of this train somehow.
You seem to forget how the leftist passed the ACA.
So you’re a party before country guy, right?
2 Likes
If we don’t win, the whole country is rigged, so yea. That ship has sailed bruh.
Why not? Sotomayor was approved 68-31. Kagan was 63-37. Garland was well liked by both sides and if voted on would have likely been approved by a similar vote. When a party poisons the well by refusing to confirm a nominee, this is what you get. They’re about to double down by ignoring their own precedent with this nomination.
Reversing the nuclear option sounds like a great idea. It forces both parties to compromise. The way it should and has been. The Republicans changed things to a simple majority. They could take a step in the right direction by being the ones to change things back.
They won’t. Even though they’re the ones who decided upon this course, they’ll use Democrat hypotheticals to justify their actions. The poisoning of the well continues.
The only times Democrats talk about compromise is when they aren’t in power.
6 Likes
Regarding Roberts. He has a legacy to uphold. I knew it when I boosted his nomination
He has been fair and unbiased in most cases.
Allan
Sorry your mistaken.
It was the dems and Harry that changed things to a simple majority when they thought they had a mandate and were going to rule forever.
Now that they opened the can of worms their doing what leftist do and trying to blame their dirty deeds on the other side of the aisle.
3 Likes
If I remember, Harry Reid changed the rule 6 months before an election they were expected to lose. So no…
And that did not apply to SC nominees.
Uh. Might want to look at the context of my reply.
Harry Reid changed SC justice confirmation to simple majority? You’re mistaken.
Can’t change facts. The leftist started us down this road because they did not want to work with the other side to get their judges confirmed. Just like they used every dirty trick they could to get the ACA passed because they did not want to have to work with the other side of the aisle.
