Jump to content
halfmanhalfbronco

The Amygeddon!

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Nevada Convert said:

WTF is wrong with you people? Obama didn’t have the votes for Garland, so you shouldn’t be thinking a seat was stolen. There isn’t any legal problem with nominating and confirming a judge near an election. You guys would be doing the exact same thing right now and you know that. Dems Packing or subtracting just to bypass GOP judge appointments that were done perfectly legal/ethical is really dangerous. The same goes for impeaching Trump just to sabotage his court pick. That’s not what impeachment is for. 

I never wrote that a seat was stolen. If the GOP was honest about the situation, I wouldn't care very much. Instead, all their public statements promoted a new "rule" where SCOTUS nominees wouldn't be approved on an election year. There are multiple senators on tape saying as much. There's already voting going on, yet they're breaking that promise. Mitch and company lied instead of being honest about the situation.

"You guys?" Who are you referring to? I'm not a Democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Danimaji said:

I never wrote that a seat was stolen. If the GOP was honest about the situation, I wouldn't care very much. Instead, all their public statements promoted a new "rule" where SCOTUS nominees wouldn't be approved on an election year. There are multiple senators on tape saying as much. There's already voting going on, yet they're breaking that promise. Mitch and company lied instead of being honest about the situation.

"You guys?" Who are you referring to? I'm not a Democrat.

You have been consistent on this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ACB seems like the favorite. She's very popular with social conservatives, but I don't see the optics playing out well. The average voter leans left on social issues.

Trump hasn't handled presidential optics well. Trump is too focused on his base during a time when Trump needs to broaden appeal

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nevada Convert said:

WTF is wrong with you people? Obama didn’t have the votes for Garland, so you shouldn’t be thinking a seat was stolen. There isn’t any legal problem with nominating and confirming a judge near an election. You guys would be doing the exact same thing right now and you know that. Dems Packing or subtracting just to bypass GOP judge appointments that were done perfectly legal/ethical is really dangerous. The same goes for impeaching Trump just to sabotage his court pick. That’s not what impeachment is for. 

The issue was Garland never got a vote.  The tendency of leaders of both sides to bury shit so their members don’t have to go on record is a problem on both sides.   I would prefer to see a requirement for some items to have to have a vote.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

Nancy can't do a filibuster. They don't do that in the House of Representatives. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/02/07/a-house-filibuster-like-the-one-nancy-pelosi-gave-hasnt-happened-in-more-than-a-century/

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

If the roles were reversed, would the Dems be able to ram this through? Or would McConnell be able to run out the clock? 

The Dems have proven themselves incompetent when they've had power. So, it's not a stretch to believe that Mitch could run out the clock

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nevada Convert said:

WTF is wrong with you people? Obama didn’t have the votes for Garland, so you shouldn’t be thinking a seat was stolen. There isn’t any legal problem with nominating and confirming a judge near an election. You guys would be doing the exact same thing right now and you know that. Dems Packing or subtracting just to bypass GOP judge appointments that were done perfectly legal/ethical is really dangerous. The same goes for impeaching Trump just to sabotage his court pick. That’s not what impeachment is for. 

Wrong.

Moscow Mitch chose to quash the nomination. It never saw the light of day. It was all about Mitch getting in a "Reverse Borking".  He had been waiting for his moment for decades.

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Using what tactics though?  

Not the right ones, obviously.  The R's in the House and Senate out maneuvered Obama every step of the his presidency

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spaztecs said:

Not the right ones, obviously.  The R's in the House and Senate out maneuvered Obama every step of the his presidency

I mean, maybe holding the impeachment card longer.  I just do not see what tactics available to the Senate minority could possibly delay it.  As savvy as Mitch is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, NVGiant said:

Why is that different? The partisan warriors all justify their nonsense by the rotten shit that the other party did the last time. It’s not like the Republicans haven’t abused the filibuster before. Seems like just the next step in the continuing race to the bottom. 

Because it’s obviously different as they didn’t race to the bottom. They allowed the minority to share power. It wasn’t an abuse for Democrats to say these bills don’t work for us, and the Republicans said alright we’ll try again next time. They didn’t get punitive because things didn’t go exactly as they wanted. Which is a marked difference from racing to the bottom. Ignoring that reality is the justification being done by partisans.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Because it’s obviously different as they didn’t race to the bottom. They allowed the minority to share power. It wasn’t an abuse for Democrats to say these bills don’t work for us, and the Republicans said alright we’ll try again next time. They didn’t get punitive because things didn’t go exactly as they wanted. Which is a marked difference from racing to the bottom. Ignoring that reality is the justification being done by partisans.

Lol. They killed the filibuster for SCOTUS. And They really haven’t had a reason to kill the filibuster for legislation because the one piece of significant legislation they tried to pass, the tax bill, they shared power so much that they worked around the filibuster. And Trump barely nominates anyone other than judges. are they heroes?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

The Senate could promise to respond with Court packing, which could scare off the GOP from confirming during the lame duck time period, which would undoubtedly be very unpopular and put some at risk in ‘22; they may feel it wouldn’t be worth it. The Dems would also only need 3 Senators to defect after the election instead of the 4 they need now. 
 

Or the House could just impeach Barr.

Impeaching Barr does nothing but look terrible. The threat of court packing doesn’t hold sway because they already shot the hostage, this was an issue in the Dem primary.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NVGiant said:

Lol. They killed the filibuster for SCOTUS. And They really haven’t had a reason to kill the filibuster for legislation because the one piece of significant legislation they tried to pass, the tax bill, they shared power so much that they worked around the filibuster. And Trump barely nominates anyone other than judges. are they heroes?

Not heroes, but they stand in stark contrast to the opposition. 

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Impeaching Barr does nothing but look terrible. The threat of court packing doesn’t hold sway because they already shot the hostage, this was an issue in the Dem primary.

Looks terrible, but in that scenario the Dems would have already won the presidency, house and Senate, and would have 2 years to deal with the backlash. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Looks terrible, but in that scenario the Dems would have already won the presidency, house and Senate, and would have 2 years to deal with the backlash. 

Why would they need to impeach him if that’s the case? Biden would just replace him anyway. And the senate could just vote to confirm in the lame duck. Impeaching the AG isn’t stopping anything.

  • Like 1

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Not heroes, but they stand in stark contrast to the opposition. 

That’s the silliest thing you’ve said. They wouldn't have any reason to kill it. Not only because of the reasons I mentioned, but because Dems have no reason to abuse the filibuster when the house can stop any legislation. And the filibuster is already dead for judicial confirmations.

the filibuster has gotten in Republicans way for something that mattered exactly twice. The first time they killed it for SCOTUS picks. The second they worked around it through the reconciliation process. Same shit, different party.I can’t believe after all we’ve seen the last 12 years that you’d be that naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, NVGiant said:

That’s the silliest thing you’ve said. They wouldn't have any reason to kill it. Not only because of the reasons I mentioned, but because Dems have no reason to abuse the filibuster when the house can stop any legislation. And the filibuster is already dead for judicial confirmations.

the filibuster has gotten in Republicans way exactly twice. The first time they killed it for SCOTUS picks. The second they worked around it through the reconciliation process. Same shit, different party.I can’t believe after all we’ve seen the last 12 years that you’d be that naive.

The Republicans haven't had to kill the filibuster because Democrats generally don't play hardball. They don't obstruct on principle like Mitch.

 

They should.

 

And if they regain power this election and don't wield it to pummel the ever-living fck out of Republicans and their agenda, they don't deserve power in the first place. Trumpism needs to be taken to the sword.

  • Like 1
On 12/1/2016 at 12:26 PM, WyomingCoog said:

I own a vehicle likely worth more than everything you own combined and just flew first class (including a ticket for a 2 1/2 year old), round trip to Las Vegas and I'm not 35 yet. When you accomplish something outside of finishing a book, let me know. When's the last time you saw a 2 year old fly first class in their own seat? Don't tell me about elite.  

28 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’d happily compare IQ’s with you any day of the week.

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...