The Amygeddon!

[NVGiant]

2 minutes ago, retrofade said:

Hey now, I'm not calling for it. I'm just memeing it.

I was reacting to it, not to you

[NVGiant]

2 minutes ago, retrofade said:

Hey now, I'm not calling for it. I'm just memeing it.

DP

[retrofade]

11 minutes ago, NVGiant said:

I was reacting to it, not to you

Never mind, read it wrong. 

[Maji]

Your point isn't very good, Faithful. Mitch has demonstrated that he will do anything within his power. Before Trump was in office, there was a Democratic president. With a GOP president, the calculus changed completely. The Senate confirmed a ton of judges during Trump's term. If all the Democrats voted against the nominees, none of them would've crossed the 60 vote threshold. It's delusional to think Mitch would let that happen.

[Guest #1Stunner]

11 minutes ago, Danimaji said:

Your point isn't very good, Faithful. Mitch has demonstrated that he will do anything within his power. Before Trump was in office, there was a Democratic president. With a GOP president, the calculus changed completely. The Senate confirmed a ton of judges during Trump's term. If all the Democrats voted against the nominees, none of them would've crossed the 60 vote threshold. It's delusional to think Mitch would let that happen.

Mitch is a shrewd politician, I completely agree.

People need to watch that guy, he'll figure out a way to get it passed/past.  Married to a lady from Taiwan.  He's from Kentucky.  Very shrewd.

[Guest #1Stunner]

 

[sactowndog]

3 hours ago, retrofade said:

Okay? I didn't argue with the reasoning behind it. I simply stated the the GOP were the latest to eliminate the filibuster. For better or worse, the Democratic response to Gorsuch was due 100% to the fact that McConnell refused to even let Garland's nomination go to committee. 

Exactly.  McConnell and the GOP ultimately pulled the trigger.  You can try to explain it away with a lot of justifications but it doesn’t negate the gun was in your hand and you pulled the trigger.  
 

When the Dems kill the legislative filibuster the same will be true of them despite all the whataboutism we hear from them.  Whataboutism isn’t a defense.

[thelawlorfaithful]

42 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Exactly.  McConnell and the GOP ultimately pulled the trigger.  You can try to explain it away with a lot of justifications but it doesn’t negate the gun was in your hand and you pulled the trigger.  
 

When the Dems kill the legislative filibuster the same will be true of them despite all the whataboutism we hear from them.  Whataboutism isn’t a defense.

The Democrats went nuclear and then the Republicans went out and won two straight elections, giving them the senate and the presidency. But sure, they held the gun when the trigger got pulled the second time because the elections don’t matter when it would make the Democrats really, really, really upset. Now this is some revisionist history.

[toonkee]

Mitch did not hold up Garland's appointment to follow any unwritten rule about election years. He did it because he could. He will get RBG's replacement confirmed before the election because he can. End of story.

We spend half the time on this board accusing the others if hypocrisy.  It doesn't matter here and it doesn't matter to Congress or the President.

 

 

 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

4 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Mitch did not hold up Garland's appointment to follow any unwritten rule about election years. He did it because he could. He will get RBG's replacement confirmed before the election because he can. End of story.

We spend half the time on this board accusing the others if hypocrisy.  It doesn't matter here and it doesn't matter to Congress or the President.

 

 

 

They will do what their political capital allows, as is precedent.

There is not another time in history when Garland would have been confirmed.

[toonkee]

Just now, halfmanhalfbronco said:

They will do what their political capital allows, as is precedent.

There is not another time in history when Garland would have been confirmed.

That may be true however I that was not Mitch's reason for holding it up. It was his excuse. He did it because he could, and my point is clearly made because of what he is doing now.

And you're right about the political capital thing.  The problem is that we've become so tribal that the concern of acting out of bounds is no longer the check on things it used to be. 

So, it matters not that Mitch and Lindsay are hypocrites of the highest order. The worst R is still better than any Dem.

 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

4 minutes ago, toonkee said:

That may be true however I that was not Mitch's reason for holding it up. It was his excuse. He did it because he could, and my point is clearly made because of what he is doing now.

And you're right about the political capital thing.  The problem is that we've become so tribal that the concern of acting out of bounds is no longer the check on things it used to be. 

So, it matters not that Mitch and Lindsay are hypocrites of the highest order. The worst R is still better than any Dem.

 

Yes, Mitch made up some BS in 2016 and it is biting the GOP now.

[NVGiant]

9 minutes ago, toonkee said:

That may be true however I that was not Mitch's reason for holding it up. It was his excuse. He did it because he could, and my point is clearly made because of what he is doing now.

And you're right about the political capital thing.  The problem is that we've become so tribal that the concern of acting out of bounds is no longer the check on things it used to be. 

So, it matters not that Mitch and Lindsay are hypocrites of the highest order. The worst R is still better than any Dem.

 

 

5 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Yes, Mitch made up some BS in 2016 and it is biting the GOP now.

This is why the Dems would be smart to take the L here. They’re going to lose one way or the other. They can lose now, and use the Republicans’ hypocrisy (I am aware of the Dems’ hypocrisy, too) to wipe them out in November. Or they can string this along, doing stupid stuff like impeachment hearings, and they can watch Republicans swear in this justice and whoever they choose to replace Breyer in a couple years.

Of course, they’re not smart. 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

Just now, NVGiant said:

 

This is why the Dems would be smart to take the L here. They’re going to lose one way or the other. They can lose now, and use the Republicans’ hypocrisy (I am aware of the Dems’ hypocrisy, too) to wipe them out in November. Or they can string this along, doing stupid stuff like impeachment hearings, and they can watch Republicans swear in this justice and whoever they choose to replace Breyer in a couple years.

Of course, they’re not smart. 

If Trump were smart he would nominate Garland, soar in approval ratings and the GOP's odds of keeping the Senate and Presidency would increase significantly.

[NVGiant]

Just now, halfmanhalfbronco said:

If Trump were smart he would nominate Garland, soar in approval ratings and the GOP's odds of keeping the Senate and Presidency would increase significantly.

Of course, he’s not smart either. 

[CPslograd]

34 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Mitch did not hold up Garland's appointment to follow any unwritten rule about election years. He did it because he could. He will get RBG's replacement confirmed before the election because he can. End of story.

We spend half the time on this board accusing the others if hypocrisy.  It doesn't matter here and it doesn't matter to Congress or the President.

 

 

 

I mostly agree.  Its all about power.

Im not 100% sure he can get it over the finish line though.  Not sure he can hold everyone on his side together.  He can only take a couple defections, it will be close.

[toonkee]

1 hour ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

If Trump were smart he would nominate Garland, soar in approval ratings and the GOP's odds of keeping the Senate and Presidency would increase significantly.

Anita f'ing Hill

[SalinasSpartan]

2 hours ago, toonkee said:

Mitch did not hold up Garland's appointment to follow any unwritten rule about election years. He did it because he could. He will get RBG's replacement confirmed before the election because he can. End of story.

We spend half the time on this board accusing the others if hypocrisy.  It doesn't matter here and it doesn't matter to Congress or the President.

 

 

 

It’s not a done deal, as it sounds like there are already 49 confirmed no votes.  And if it drags on till after the election, Biden wins, and Kelly replaces McSally you’re up to 50 no votes and are a Mormon away from Biden and the new Senate picking RBG’s replacement. I think getting the seat filled before the end of the year should be the betting favorite, but it’s not a slam dunk. 

[sactowndog]

4 hours ago, toonkee said:

Mitch did not hold up Garland's appointment to follow any unwritten rule about election years. He did it because he could. He will get RBG's replacement confirmed before the election because he can. End of story.

We spend half the time on this board accusing the others if hypocrisy.  It doesn't matter here and it doesn't matter to Congress or the President.

 

 

 

Of course.  Most are reacting to the @thelawlorfaithful trying to blame the Dems for Mitch’s actions.  

The Dems will end the legislative filibuster next.   They will do it because they can.   That state is where we are today and both parties are at fault.  You can try to lay the blame on one or the other but both sides have contributed greatly to destroying Senatorial collegiality.  

if you want to blame anyone blame the boomers as a generation.  

[sactowndog]

2 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

It’s not a done deal, as it sounds like there are already 49 confirmed no votes.  And if it drags on till after the election, Biden wins, and Kelly replaces McSally you’re up to 50 no votes and are a Mormon away from Biden and the new Senate picking RBG’s replacement. I think getting the seat filled before the end of the year should be the betting favorite, but it’s not a slam dunk. 

Alexander came out supporting having the vote.  That was a big loss for those hoping they would wait until January.   

It’s now as simple as if people feel Christian  religious beliefs should not be the foundation of our legal system like the Koran is in Muslim countries then they better vote Dem.