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.
When the Dems take back the Senate I hope they restore the 60 vote requirement for SC judges. We have seen what a partisan fiasco the simple majority vote is. Needing "the other side" would lead to better choices and eliminate the spectacle and the pressure on the only decent senators we have, the moderates.
They're not my leaders. I am an IND with positions from both extremes of left and right. Always have been. But, I have not heard any leadership in the Dems advocating impeaching him. It would be ridiculously difficult. It would be a lot easier to pack the court - say 15 justices - as it would take but a simple vote to do that. It might be a good idea anyway if it resulted in more moderates on the bench and less clear ideological division than 9 allows. Coupled with my call for 60 senators to approve, we could actually configure a court where we would not be able to predict the outcome before a case was even heard.
The Congress has rarely expanded the USA supreme court. Expanding the supreme court as you suggested would be political suicide for the Democrats. Only left extremist are advocating such a measure. Such an act would destabilize the USA government. A subsequent Republican government would reduce or further expand the supreme court.
You are not an independent, but a left wing extremist who is advocating a "by any means" policy.
I'm confidant that the vast majority of Americans will not advocate expanding the supreme court simply to annul the conservative advantage on the supreme court. That only happens in countries like Venezuela, dictatorships, or one party countries.
Forgot to mentioned, no corporation regardless of political affiliation will advocate or support such a policy. An unstable government is very bad for business.
What next? Democrats gonna exhume JFK to see if Kav had anything to do with that too?
Wait, you know what, investigate his wife too. The fact that he refused to answer the question "Do you feel good when you pee on your wife?" means he's not fit for the judiciary.
Nevermind that the Democrats said they'd withhold money from Senators who support Kav... cuz' you know Senators don't gotta answer to voters, just superPACs.
Since Democrats like hashtags so much, here's a few they can choke on:
Roberts, more than ever, is being forced into a moderating position on the Court. Hopefully, he's been pondering long and hard through this spectacle. He is said to be very concerned that the Court not appear partisan.
Kavanaugh will decide lockstep w/Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch.
Sotomayer, Kagan, Ginsberg, Breyer will be on the opposite side.
Roberts in the middle - as he was on the ACA - which, even though I was in favor of ACA, I believed his reasoning to uphold very tortured.
Democrats last hope of any semblance of reasonableness lies with Roberts. Who would have thunk it?
He is said to be very concerned that the Court appear inbiased.
That is a conservative malady that the democrats are immune to...........democrats would load the court with as far left liberals as they could...and tell you to stick it if you don't like it
Damn, have you seen the photos of the Kavanaugh supporters verses the Kavanaugh protesters?
No wonder those women are so damned pizzed off and loud.
It's the only way someone will pay them any attention.
The supporters are articulate, dressed nicely and reserved.
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.