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.
Well Scalia gambled and list then the republicans needed to change the rules because they were having a coronary. They could have just allowed a vote on Garland but they couldn’t bring themselves out of their total panic.
Everyone gambled. If the Republicans had lost the White House and the Senate in 2016, then it would have been a worse outcome. The bet on red and won. Scalia bet and red and almost lost, but lucked out. Ginsberg bet on blue, doubled down and then lost.
Ultimately, the only rule is that when you can do a thing, you do it. McConnell and the GOP could stall the replacement of Scalia, therefore they did. The Democrats cannot stall the process of replacing Ginsberg right now, therefore they won't. It's the same game with the same rules and the same stakes as always.
The really stupid thing is the Democrats screeching about knocking over the game board, taking their toys and going home. Packing the Supreme Court is a terrible idea. Figuring out ways to add states is political f-ckery at it's finest. I hope that it's all bluster. If they just wait, the pendulum will swing back to their side sooner than you think. One of the biggest reasons the Dems can't stop it is because Harry Reid decided to change the rules on cloture in the first place, and now here we are. Changing policy because you're having a temper tantrum just creates more chaos in the future.
This just means he will vote. Could be yes, could be no, no?
No, there is zero chance he will vote down a nominee with the same leaning right views as he and his constituents hold. Nice try though in keeping your hopes up.
No, there is zero chance he will vote down a nominee with the same leaning right views as he and his constituents hold. Nice try though in keeping your hopes up.
I asked a simple question. A simple answer is all that's needed. No need to project your thought in answering my question. I don't know how he will vote. And neither do you.
I didn't think there was ever a doubt. Especially since Roe v. Wade is now on the line.
It's good to see that he actually is behaving like a a pro-life conservative. I recall having some reservations given his recent conversion. I still need to see his vote, but this is very encouraging.
Everyone gambled. If the Republicans had lost the White House and the Senate in 2016, then it would have been a worse outcome. The bet on red and won. Scalia bet and red and almost lost, but lucked out. Ginsberg bet on blue, doubled down and then lost.
Ultimately, the only rule is that when you can do a thing, you do it. McConnell and the GOP could stall the replacement of Scalia, therefore they did. The Democrats cannot stall the process of replacing Ginsberg right now, therefore they won't. It's the same game with the same rules and the same stakes as always.
The really stupid thing is the Democrats screeching about knocking over the game board, taking their toys and going home. Packing the Supreme Court is a terrible idea. Figuring out ways to add states is political f-ckery at it's finest. I hope that it's all bluster. If they just wait, the pendulum will swing back to their side sooner than you think. One of the biggest reasons the Dems can't stop it is because Harry Reid decided to change the rules on cloture in the first place, and now here we are. Changing policy because you're having a temper tantrum just creates more chaos in the future.
The democrats didn’t suddenly panic and change the rules that was the republicans on Feb 2016 and it caused us to go without a justice for a year. McConnell should have just been honest rather than making up some fairy tale. What McConnell did has not one thing to do with the filibuster. Complaining about packing when the republicans put in SC 3 justices in one term, come on.
The democrats didn’t suddenly panic and change the rules that was the republicans on Feb 2016 and it caused us to go without a justice for a year. McConnell should have just been honest rather than making up some fairy tale. What McConnell did has not one thing to do with the filibuster. Complaining about packing when the republicans put in SC 3 justices in one term, come on.
Hopefully during his next term, President Trump will appoint at least one (Beyer) and maybe two (Thomas) more SC justices. That will make 5 of 9.
It's good to see that he actually is behaving like a a pro-life conservative. I recall having some reservations given his recent conversion. I still need to see his vote, but this is very encouraging.
He is definitely voting along his party line and his religious belief. I don't know why anyone would be surprised.
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.
