- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If Republicans Don't Go Nuclear For Gorsuch, I'm Never Voting For Them Again
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:38 pm to PaperTiger
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:38 pm to PaperTiger
The dems will seat a shitass hack with 50 votes plus the vp if they need to regardless of what the republicans do
The republicans need to cease being duped.
The republicans need to cease being duped.
0
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:40 pm to PaperTiger
quote:You actually think Dems won't use Nuclear option just bc Repukes don't?
I don't want the Dems to be able to do it with a terrible nominee down the road
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:40 pm to LuckyTiger
What's the saying, don't brandish a weapon you wouldn't want used against you in the future, something like that.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:41 pm to claremontrich
quote:Why do you think the dems won't filibuster again? It's like some of you think the dems play by rules or laws.
the Republicans can replace them with David Duke if they wanted within 2 weeks and the dems can do nothing about it.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:43 pm to PaperTiger
But if we are going to filibuster every competent candidate from here on our, then we just give up on getting anyone on the court. On the other hand, you go nuclear.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:43 pm to member12
quote:
I don't see a logical, non-partisan reason why Democrats want to filibuster this. Gorsuch is a great choice and he is replacing Scalia, not Ginsburg.
Because their entire playbook is calling Republicans extremist. They want to make the Republicans change the rule so they can yell extremist. They know that their enablers in the media won't mention that Harry Reid started it. Their problem is the electorate is better informed these days.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:49 pm to LuckyTiger
quote:
Republicans Don't Go Nuclear For Gorsuch
quote:
I'm Never Voting For Them Again
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:50 pm to therick711
I'm all for going nuclear and rubbing their faces in it. That's how you keep the puppy from shitting on the rug.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:55 pm to zeebo
quote:
The Dems are going to go nuke next time they can anyway. Let's do it now.
They've already done it, so it's not like it is uncharted territory.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:57 pm to member12
quote:
I don't see a logical, non-partisan reason why Democrats want to filibuster this.
Merrick Garland + momentum from Trump's constant frick ups.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 1:58 pm to PaperTiger
quote:
It's a slippery slope. Even though he is qualified, I don't want the Dems to be able to do it with a terrible nominee down the road
They will use it, regardless of what the GOP does here.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:00 pm to BamaAtl
Garland is what it is, if Democrats refuse to give someone a vote at the of Trump's tenure that is perfectly fine, but there is no winning for Garland anymore.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:00 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Merrick Garland + momentum from Trump's constant frick ups
Gorsuch > Garland in every respect. If people actually cared about the good of the country instead of partisan hackery.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:02 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Merrick Garland + momentum from Trump's constant frick ups.
And you can't stop the nuclear option. Who does that give momentum to? All cabinet choices, lower court appointees, Supreme Court, of which there will probably be 1 or 2 more. You can scream Garland all you want to, but your side started the nuclear options, now you have to live with it.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:07 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
And you can't stop the nuclear option.
Then it's worthless to pretend that there's a filibuster for any SCOTUS nominee. Let's get that out in the open, so voters know the true landscape in this era of Republican obstructionism.
Plus, that's what the Democratic base wants. In a lose/lose, might as well make the base happy.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:11 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Merrick Garland
Again, the right won this fight after they bet the election on it and bringing this up just makes you look like a sore loser.
quote:
momentum from Trump's constant frick ups.
Wait, you think unrelated short term events and 2-3 day news cycles should weigh into battle strategies of a lifetime appointment of someone that will be on the court for 40 years and could have consequences for another politically worse lifetime appointment?
You're a goddamn idiot.
This post was edited on 3/28/17 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:11 pm to RogerTheShrubber
I actually like Garland quite a bit. If the Rs lose the WH/Congress any time soon then Garland is who we should hope for.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:13 pm to Sentrius
quote:
Again, the right won this fight after they bet the election on it
Then they'll have no problem using the nuclear option. If they don't want to go nuclear, they didn't win the fight.
quote:
Wait, you think short term events and 2-3 day news cycles should weigh into battle strategies of a lifetime appointment of someone that will be on the court for 40 years and could have consequences for another politically worse lifetime appointment?
It's not what I think, it's what the Senators are hearing from their constituents. The aura of Trump inevitability has been shattered (bigly) over the last few weeks.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:15 pm to BamaAtl
you are delusional if you think he won't be confirmed.
The left has lost their collective minds. And it is glorious to watch.
The left has lost their collective minds. And it is glorious to watch.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 2:17 pm to roadGator
Page 2 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News