Jump to content

OT: SCOTUS


thc6795

Recommended Posts

How long before the Republicans just take the nuclear option? It is going to happen, I don't see any other way. My god the Dems are going to explode. How will this be spun? Considering it was the Dems (Reid) who set the precedent. Thoughts?

Let's try and keep attacks to a minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Drummer61 said:

Gorsuch is to liberal,but William Pryor,now he's the real deal..

I agree, but because he was nominated by Trump the Dems are freaking out. IMHO they should just go with Gorsuch. He is as close to liberal thinking as the Dems are going to get. Then fight like hell when either Kennedy or Ginsburg pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Gorsuch will pass through easily. The grilling he's receiving by the democrats is pretty much customary, although there maybe a little extra heat in there because the last president's nominee never even got a hearing.

There's pretty much no way he doesn't get through imo. Let's all hope the "nuclear option" never ever happens. It's a bad idea imo. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said:

I think Gorsuch will pass through easily. The grilling he's receiving by the democrats is pretty much customary, although there maybe a little extra heat in there because the last president's nominee never even got a hearing.

There's pretty much no way he doesn't get through imo. Let's all hope the "nuclear option" never ever happens. It's a bad idea imo. 

IF it does the dems have no one to blame but themselves. See Reid 2013

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thc6795 said:

IF it does the dems have no one to blame but themselves. See Reid 2013

 

 

They only used that rule to get cabinet nominations through, and not something as important as the SCOTUS where a new justice could sit for decades. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending what they did, but the positions they used that option on were only there at the convenience of the president. When the president leaves, those cabinet members do as well, unless the next president chooses to keep them. 

It's certainly regrettable that Reid and the gang did use that option, but a SCOTUS nominee certainly should require bipartisanship rather than a simple majority. Changing the rules midstream is never a good idea. It wasn't in 2013 and it isn't today. It's just like everything else, there's always a next. If changing the rules to simple majority for cabinet positions leads to simple majority for SCOTUS justices: What will be the next from this? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said:

 

 

They only used that rule to get cabinet nominations through, and not something as important as the SCOTUS where a new justice could sit for decades. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending what they did, but the positions they used that option on were only there at the convenience of the president. When the president leaves, those cabinet members do as well, unless the next president chooses to keep them. 

It's certainly regrettable that Reid and the gang did use that option, but a SCOTUS nominee certainly should require bipartisanship rather than a simple majority. Changing the rules midstream is never a good idea. It wasn't in 2013 and it isn't today. It's just like everything else, there's always a next. If changing the rules to simple majority for cabinet positions leads to simple majority for SCOTUS justices: What will be the next from this? 

I don't think it is the right move as well. However the precedent was set. The Dems changed the rules now they may be forced to eat those rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, thc6795 said:

OMG I was just thinking President Trump could actually nominate 3 maybe four of the next Supreme Court Justices. God help us.   

As long as they are Conservative and originalists I'm all in. But then again that idiot John Roberts was supposed to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, aZjimbo said:

As long as they are Conservative and originalists I'm all in. But then again that idiot John Roberts was supposed to be.

Honestly I like a mix. All I really want is a fair ruling. Being that I am not a party guy. I don't get caught up in the Cons/Lib debate. I just want an open honest ruling. Having an all Cons or all Lib court would be horrible.

It could be worse. Killiar could have been deciding this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

Schumer now saying that they're gonna filibuster. He obviously has no interest in ever being Majority Leader. xD

i was trying to figure him out the last few weeks..... last night i realized what was up with him

he is positioning himself as the anti Trump

not from  conviction but rather as a personal political strategy and i think it has merit to him

certainly the Trump backlash  will be the biggest voting block on the left

i can see the 2020 general being between he and Trump as a result

 indeed, his everything opposite trump positions are designed to gain the dem nomination

i think it will work too

as to he beating trump in the general, that is a different story

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the nuclear option is going to happen, watching Schumer's head explode is going to be fun. This morning watching him threaten the Republicans if they try and change the rules. Just like the libs do as I say not as I do. How soon he forgets. Congrats Judge Gorsuch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...