Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off they don't need any votes, the judicial committee can refuse to send a nominee to the floor. The other absurd part of this action is that many times you don't really know how a justice will turn out, Sandra O'Connor appointed by Reagan was moderate.
So flatly delaying a justice with the hope that there will be a republican president that is able to get a right leaning justice approved, and that the justice will lean to the right on all issues is a long shot.
Weigh that against the fact that this could steer not only the presidential election but also congress.
Name the last time a Democrat nominee turned out conservative. Any Republican President's nominee will be better than Obama's nominee(s). Unless Trump nominates his sister.
The Republicans will retain the Senate. A Cruz nominee will not go liberal.
Who is asking for a rubber stamped nominee? Holding hearing on a nominee isn't called a rubber stamp, it is called doing their job, something Congress seems to be extremely bad at doing.
I'm not seeing it. Harry Reid failed to submit over 300 House bills for a vote in the Senate during the Obama Admin. Why? Because he didn't have to. The same is true of the Senate in regards to any Obama SCOTUS Justice nominee. They simply don't have to hold hearings if they choose not to.
I'm not seeing it. Harry Reid failed to submit over 300 House bills for a vote in the Senate during the Obama Admin. Why? Because he didn't have to. The same is true of the Senate in regards to any Obama SCOTUS Justice nominee. They simply don't have to hold hearings if they choose not to.
That isn't the same thing, a Supreme Court Nominee is a bit more important that stupid bills trying to defund ACA.
But don't worry, McConnell will cave once the pressure increases and he begins to worry that this might cost Republicans elections. While you don't understand this, that is what we call playing politics.
It is exactly the same thing: the Senate fulfilling its Constitutional duties.
And not all the 300+ House bills were to defund the ACA.
So you admit the Republicans are just playing politics.....don't be disappointed when McConnell caves and ends up approving whomever Obama nominates.....I know you will need super bummed when that happens.
Name the last time a Democrat nominee turned out conservative. Any Republican President's nominee will be better than Obama's nominee(s). Unless Trump nominates his sister.
The Republicans will retain the Senate. A Cruz nominee will not go liberal.
You think that delaying a supreme court nominee for a year is a recipe for a winning ticket in November? We will see if they follow through on their promise in the next few weeks but right now it appears the Freedom Caucus has taken over congress.
Not at all. The Republican Senate is fulfilling its Constitutional obligations, just like the Dem Senate did under Reid. No difference.
Yes, Republicans are just playing politics exactly like how Reid and the Democrats play politics when trying to jockey their position.....not sure why you aren't grasping this when you are saying this exact same fact in your posts.....very strange, but whatever. I hate having to keep repeating myself so I guess you either get this or you don't......
Yes, Republicans are just playing politics exactly like how Reid and the Democrats play politics when trying to jockey their position.....not sure why you aren't grasping this when you are saying this exact same fact in your posts.....very strange, but whatever.
"Playing politics" is just a one-upmanship game, the goal of which is to prevent the opponent from doing something just for the sake of preventing it. I can easily see that there's a HUGE ideology schism between the 2 parties and rather than this being a game or politics, each side really is adhering to their beliefs.
That said... If Obama and the Dems wanted a rubber stamp of Obama's nominee, they shouldn't have acted so badly that the American electorate gave the Senate to the Republicans.
"Playing politics" is just a one-upmanship game, the goal of which is to prevent the opponent from doing something just for the sake of preventing it. I can easily see that there's a HUGE ideology schism between the 2 parties and rather than this being a game or politics, each side really is adhering to their beliefs.
That said... If Obama and the Dems wanted a rubber stamp of Obama's nominee, they shouldn't have acted so badly that the American electorate gave the Senate to the Republicans.
Have you been up all night???
Having hearings on a nominee isn't called rubber stamping a nominee. Refusing to even hold hearings is just childish. But clearly you are okay with the Republicans acting childish so who am I to argue.
Go get some sleep, this site will be here when you get up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
