ADVERTISEMENT

The SCOTUS situation is completely the Dems fault (they know it)

HJCane

SuperCane
Gold Member
Jun 2, 2007
14,279
17,327
113
A series of unfortunate events one might say. Mis-calculations by Democrats have put them in this position. In other words it's their own fault.
In 2013 then majority leader along with Chucky Schumer change the rules of the Senate so that the vote for Federal Judges is lowered to simple majority 51 votes from the customary 60 votes in order to make it easier to appoint Obama nominated Federal district Judges. Republicans warned them at the time it would bite them in their azz one day. 1st error
In 2013 at around 80-81 years of age Justice Ginsberg suffered her 3rd or 4th bout of cancer and should have retired which would have allowed Obama to select her replacement but she chose to "roll the dice" thinking like many that the Democrats would continue to keep the White House. error #2
In the history of our country there have been numerous times that 1 party had the White House and another the Senate in the final year of a President and there has been no time that a Supreme Court nominee has been confirmed by the opposing party in control of the Senate. error #3
Conversely, there have been 8 times in our history where the President and Senate were in the same party leading up to an election and in 7 of those instances the nominee was confirmed. The 1 nominee who was not confirmed had been accused of improper financial dealings. error #4
The Democrats treatment of Brett Kavanaugh was a disgrace and this is part payback error #5
The bogus Impeachment of Trump when no member from the other party voted to impeach ( a first in our history) and this is more payback. error #6

This is not new. There is a history. The Republicans have the White House and the Senate and only need 51 votes thanks to the Democrats.
Further President Trump has the right and obligation to submit a nominee. He will fulfill his duty this week. Obama did the same in 16. Then it falls to the Senate.
 
Last edited:
A series of unfortunate events one might say. Mis-calculations by Democrats have put them in this position. In other words it's their own fault.
In 2013 then majority leader along with Chucky Schumer change the rules of the Senate so that the vote for Federal Judges is lowered to simple majority 51 votes from the customary 60 votes in order to make it easier to appoint Obama nominated Federal district Judges. Republicans warned them at the time it would bite them in their azz one day. 1st error
In 2013 at around 80-81 years of age Justice Ginsberg suffered her 3rd or 4th bout of cancer and should have retired which would have allowed Obama to select her replacement but she chose to "roll the dice" thinking like many that the Democrats would continue to keep the White House. error #2
In the history of our country there have been numerous times that 1 party had the White House and another the Senate in the final year of a President and there has been no time that a Supreme Court nominee has been confirmed by the opposing party in control of the Senate. error #3
Conversely, there have been 8 times in our history where the President and Senate were in the same party leading up to an election and in 7 of those instances the nominee was confirmed. The 1 nominee who was not confirmed had been accused of improper financial dealings. error #4
The Democrats treatment of Brett Kavanaugh was a disgrace and this is part payback error #5
The bogus Impeachment of Trump when no member from the other party voted to impeach ( a first in our history) and this is more payback. error #6

This is not new. There is a history. The Republicans have the White House and the Senate and only need 51 votes thanks to the Democrats.
Further President Trump has the right and obligation to submit a nominee. He will fulfill his duty this week. Obama did the same in 16. Then it falls to the Senate.

This works both ways, which means the Dems will proceed to pack the courts with four new SCOTUS picks and get rid of the filibuster, which will not only invalidate whoever Trump picks to replace RBG, but also make the court more Dem friendly for an entire lifetime.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear
This works both ways, which means the Dems will proceed to pack the courts with four new SCOTUS picks and get of the filibuster, which will not only invalidate whoever Trump picks to replace RBG, but also make the court more Dem friendly for an entire lifetime.
This is 2 responses that our country is ****ed...stop the bullshit and do what is right for the country...i am independent and what both parties are doing is disgraceful
 
This is 2 responses that our country is ****ed...stop the bullshit and do what is right for the country...i am independent and what both parties are doing is disgraceful

Bottom line, you can't expect one party to play hardball while the other doesn't. Stop the cheating and you have a chance of moving back towards bipartisanship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear
This works both ways, which means the Dems will proceed to pack the courts with four new SCOTUS picks and get of the filibuster, which will not only invalidate whoever Trump picks to replace RBG, but also make the court more Dem friendly for an entire lifetime.

It will never happen it was tried in 1937 and ruled unconstitutional...

CHECK MATE .... You LOSE again..!!!
 
Bottom line, you can't expect one party to play hardball while the other doesn't. Stop the cheating and you have a chance of moving back towards bipartisanship.
Lol, bipartisanship. Nancy says she'll impeach a sitting President if he pursues what he's elected to do under The Constitution...yeah, they're all about bipartisanship...
 
Lol, bipartisanship. Nancy says she'll impeach a sitting President if he pursues what he's elected to do under The Constitution...yeah, they're all about bipartisanship...

A pity the Republicans decided to cheat on SCOTUS 4 years ago for it to devolve into what we have today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear
A series of unfortunate events one might say. Mis-calculations by Democrats have put them in this position. In other words it's their own fault.
In 2013 then majority leader along with Chucky Schumer change the rules of the Senate so that the vote for Federal Judges is lowered to simple majority 51 votes from the customary 60 votes in order to make it easier to appoint Obama nominated Federal district Judges. Republicans warned them at the time it would bite them in their azz one day. 1st error
In 2013 at around 80-81 years of age Justice Ginsberg suffered her 3rd or 4th bout of cancer and should have retired which would have allowed Obama to select her replacement but she chose to "roll the dice" thinking like many that the Democrats would continue to keep the White House. error #2
In the history of our country there have been numerous times that 1 party had the White House and another the Senate in the final year of a President and there has been no time that a Supreme Court nominee has been confirmed by the opposing party in control of the Senate. error #3
Conversely, there have been 8 times in our history where the President and Senate were in the same party leading up to an election and in 7 of those instances the nominee was confirmed. The 1 nominee who was not confirmed had been accused of improper financial dealings. error #4
The Democrats treatment of Brett Kavanaugh was a disgrace and this is part payback error #5
The bogus Impeachment of Trump when no member from the other party voted to impeach ( a first in our history) and this is more payback. error #6

This is not new. There is a history. The Republicans have the White House and the Senate and only need 51 votes thanks to the Democrats.
Further President Trump has the right and obligation to submit a nominee. He will fulfill his duty this week. Obama did the same in 16. Then it falls to the Senate.
I stopped after your simple majority bullshzt. Dems took this position because Republicans refused to entertain Obama's nominations. They didn't want any of his nominations to pass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear
This works both ways, which means the Dems will proceed to pack the courts with four new SCOTUS picks and get of the filibuster, which will not only invalidate whoever Trump picks to replace RBG, but also make the court more Dem friendly for an entire lifetime.
Raoul this is why Democrats are lousy. You hit the nail right on it's head. You people want to change our country, our institutions, our traditions. All in the name of power. We wouldn't be in this position if Harry Reid didn't change the vote count needed to appoint a Federal Judge WHICH THE REPUBLICANS objected too! They told him exactly what would happen and now in 2020 it's about to happen.
 
I stopped after your simple majority bullshzt. Dems took this position because Republicans refused to entertain Obama's nominations. They didn't want any of his nominations to pass.
Well now look what is going to happen, you're screwed.
 
This is 2 responses that our country is ****ed...stop the bullshit and do what is right for the country...i am independent and what both parties are doing is disgraceful
I’m not independent but I’m a centrist. This is bullshit and has been since they lowered to 51. No one ever thought they’d turn the actual SCOTUS into pure politics but here we are.

the erosion of our institutions is on us. It’s not even far left v far right the gap which was a schism is cavernous. There were once conservative and liberal Dems, conservative and liberal GOP and so middle ground could be found. Now conservative equals one party and liberal another and no one cares that what we’re conservative and liberal values aren’t even represented anymore.
So yeah, they’ll act as if 2016 Garland never happened and ram through a justice, Dems won’t vote 3rd party protest and rout Trump and the Senate and promptly undercut more tradition by stacking courts, impeaching under qualified federal judges.

you think the Dems are going to reestablish the independence of the inspector generals? **** no. You think they are suddenly going to go to the American people and say ignore what Trump said about the CIA and FBI we should trust them (clue, Dems were the ones that didn’t trust them to begin with).

Rome...instead of a fiddle we got a remote control.
 
A pity the Republicans decided to cheat on SCOTUS 4 years ago for it to devolve into what we have today.
They didn't cheat. They held the Senate and the White House was Democrat. That wasn't the 1st time in our history that happened. Obama's pick had ZERO chance of being confirmed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
They didn't cheat. They held the Senate and the White House was Democrat. That wasn't the 1st time in our history that happened. Obama's pick had ZERO chance of being confirmed.

That's right - they held the Senate and not the White House and deprived the President of his constitutional right to select a SCOTUS pick. Once you do that, then flip the script 4 years later, you lose all credibility and moral leverage to cry about it when the other side decide to play hardball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear and cems52
This is why we need conservatives on the bench to keep the constitution as is not like the Dems who want to change it only to help their agenda..

By this logic we would still have slavery and women wouldn't be able to vote. That's the conservative way - preserving the ugliness and inequity of the past instead of facilitating the future.
 
Last edited:
I’m not independent but I’m a centrist. This is bullshit and has been since they lowered to 51. No one ever thought they’d turn the actual SCOTUS into pure politics but here we are.

the erosion of our institutions is on us. It’s not even far left v far right the gap which was a schism is cavernous. There were once conservative and liberal Dems, conservative and liberal GOP and so middle ground could be found. Now conservative equals one party and liberal another and no one cares that what we’re conservative and liberal values aren’t even represented anymore.
So yeah, they’ll act as if 2016 Garland never happened and ram through a justice, Dems won’t vote 3rd party protest and rout Trump and the Senate and promptly undercut more tradition by stacking courts, impeaching under qualified federal judges.

you think the Dems are going to reestablish the independence of the inspector generals? **** no. You think they are suddenly going to go to the American people and say ignore what Trump said about the CIA and FBI we should trust them (clue, Dems were the ones that didn’t trust them to begin with).

Rome...instead of a fiddle we got a remote control.
Thank you Ellu for this post. Fact is in our history there has been 8 times in an election year the White House and Senate were held by same party. All 8 it required the traditional 60 votes ( changed by Harry Reid in 2013) and in 7 out of 8 times confirmed. The 1 time not confirmed the nominee was accused of improper financial dealings. Conversely there have also been times where the Senate was held by the opposing party as was the case in 2016 and several other times in our history. Those nominees did not fare so well. Republicans objected strenuously against lowering the vote count to 51 for Judges but Reid and the Dems didn't want to hear it. They gambled with 2 areas; 1) They wanted Obama's Judge appointments confirmed which is a valid desire BUT 2) They lost the Senate in 2014 just 1 year later and again in 2016 and more so in 2018. They didn't think it through. Now Trump has had around 200 Federal Judges appointed and he will soon have his 3rd Supreme Court Judge appointed. None of which would have happened had they left tradition alone at 60 votes or if the Democrats would have won the vote in either 14, 16, or 18.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
Exactly. The dems nominated someone and he wasn't confirmed. Not the first that has happened. Whoever controls the Senate has the advantage here. Just the way it is. To even think the dems would even consider confirming a pick right now for Trump if they held the Senate is laughable. They are crying foul only because they are on the other end...not because of some principles or beliefs.
They’re professional victims
 
If anyone on here thinks this isn't payback for Kavanaugh or Impeachment you are wrong and honestly I think it's long over due. The Democrats think Republicans are just going to sit back and accept this behavior you're nuts. We see and hear what you are now saying over this pick; burn it down, rioting, disrupting, changing our institutions, etc.....It's nauseating already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
In no way does your party wish for bipartisanship lol. That hilarious you’d even bring that up.

Biden is probably the most biparistan leaning person in American politics. He's tight with a slew of Republican Senators, which is a positive attribute to have as POTUS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear
If anyone on here thinks this isn't payback for Kavanaugh or Impeachment you are wrong and honestly I think it's long over due. The Democrats think Republicans are just going to sit back and accept this behavior you're nuts. We see and hear what you are now saying over this pick; burn it down, rioting, disrupting, changing our institutions, etc.....It's nauseating already.

Easy solution - Don't cheat. And you won't have to deal with the other side attempting to do the same in retaliation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear
Easy solution - Don't cheat. And you won't have to deal with the other side attempting to do the same in retaliation.
Raoul serious question; What cheating are you speaking about? Be very specific.
 
Raoul serious question; What cheating are you speaking about? Be very specific.

Its already been mentioned - Obama had a pick and it was denied to be brought out of committee and for a floor vote. Saying "he wouldn't have passed the Senate anyway" is not an excuse to deprive the President of his Constitutional obligation, and once you set the precedent for this level of brazen cheating, you shouldn't be surprised when the other side use the same means to retaliate back - which is what the Dems may well do.
 
Biden is probably the most biparistan leaning person in American politics. He's tight with a slew of Republican Senators, which is a positive attribute to have as POTUS.
Let me fix this for you. Biden is tight with all the RINO’s because they’ve already sold their souls. The Dems do not want bipartisanship unless that means getting what they want & conservatives allowing it to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
Bottom line, you can't expect one party to play hardball while the other doesn't. Stop the cheating and you have a chance of moving back towards bipartisanship.
Problem with that is the pubs never played hardball, until now. Now the dims are like little school girls screaming and yelling. They loot, burn and mess with ordinary people while they are out eating. Yall will lose bigly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
Let me fix this for you. Biden is tight with all the RINO’s because they’ve already sold their souls. The Dems do not want bipartisanship unless that means getting what they want & conservatives allowing it to happen.

So you admit he is bipartisan with Republican Senators. Good to hear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zackbear
Easy solution - Don't cheat. And you won't have to deal with the other side attempting to do the same in retaliation.
Hey both parties cheat...dont act like dems are great people....both parties suck ass
 
Its already been mentioned - Obama had a pick and it was denied to be brought out of committee and for a floor vote. Saying "he wouldn't have passed the Senate anyway" is not an excuse to deprive the President of his Constitutional obligation, and once you set the precedent for this level of brazen cheating, you shouldn't be surprised when the other side use the same means to retaliate back - which is what the Dems may well do.
He met his obligation, nothing was denied. He made his pick. Elections have consequences Raoul. Real consequences. Your Party lost the Senate in 14, 2016, and lost more seats in 2018. That's the way the cookie crumbles.............
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
He met his obligation, nothing was denied. He made his pick. Elections have consequences Raoul. Real consequences. Your Party lost the Senate in 14, 2016, and lost more seats in 2018. That's the way the cookie crumbles.............

Apparently the Presidential election of 2012 didn't have any consequences for Republicans. (see how that works?)

Also, picks aren't made to be ignored, they are made to be voted on, so blocking a nomination with nearly a year to go in a President's term is obviously incredibly disingenuous and then its doubly disingenuous and hypocritical to flip the script 4 years later and attempt the opposite. This is why I hope the Dems go scorched earth from now on - add 4 SCOTUS judges during Biden's term, pack the courts, and we will be even for the shenanigans the McConnell and the Trump cult have pulled over the past 4 years.
 
Apparently the Presidential election of 2012 didn't have any consequences for Republicans. (see how that works?)

Also, picks aren't made to be ignored, they are made to be voted on, so blocking a nomination with nearly a year to go in a President's term is obviously incredibly disingenuous and then its doubly disingenuous and hypocritical to flip the script 4 years later and attempt the opposite. This is why I hope the Dems go scorched earth from now on - add 4 SCOTUS judges during Biden's term, pack the courts, and we will be even for the shenanigans the McConnell and the Trump cult have pulled over the past 4 years.
In case you haven't noticed the US Senate rarely votes when the vote won't pass. Very convenient how you fail to mention Harry Reid changing the vote count needed to pass a Judge from 60 to 51. Your party screwed you guys cause they wanted their Judges passed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mahb and grbcane
In case you haven't noticed the US Senate rarely votes when the vote won't pass. Very convenient how you fail to mention Harry Reid changing the vote count needed to pass a Judge from 60 to 51. Your party screwed you guys cause they wanted their Judges passed.

How about actually taking it out of committee so Senators can actually vote. We all know why it wasn't done - it was to block Garland from even getting a basic vote with nearly an entire year to go, so as to preserve the pro-GOP balance of the court.

And regarding Harry Reid, just wait until the new Dem Senate get rid of the filibuster for good.
 
How about actually taking it out of committee so Senators can actually vote. We all know why it wasn't done - it was to block Garland from even getting a basic vote with nearly an entire year to go, so as to preserve the pro-GOP balance of the court.

And regarding Harry Reid, just wait until the new Dem Senate get rid of the filibuster for good.
In order to do that you will need the required vote of 60. You won't have 60 votes. Raoul you're boring me now......................Reid & Nuclear option futzed you up man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
ADVERTISEMENT