- 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
2
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:12 pm to wadewilson
quote:
That's true. Still doesn't make it okay.
Says the registered republican
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:12 pm to wadewilson
quote:
Just tell me what you think I don't understand.
The infield fly rule.
Nobody understands the infield fly rule.
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:12 pm to TigerstuckinMS
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:13 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
That's true. Still doesn't make it okay.
quote:
Says the registered republican
Ok, have a good night.
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:19 pm to wadewilson
quote:
That's true. Still doesn't make it okay.
Just curious...Why is it that, in your opinion, one side has to play by the "traditional" rules, yet the other side can bend or change the rules as they see fit. Once the "traditional" rules are changed, why does the other side have to be restrained by the original rules?
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:21 pm to TidenUP
Wade is the definition of RINO
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:24 pm to TidenUP
quote:
Just curious...Why is it that, in your opinion, one side has to play by the "traditional" rules, yet the other side can bend or change the rules as they see fit. Once the "traditional" rules are changed, why does the other side have to be restrained by the original rules?
My opinion is that your question is based on a projection of what you think my opinion is.
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:27 pm to wadewilson
quote:
McConnell removed that exception to shoehorn Gorsuch in, after blocking Obama's nominee for several months.
Do you think Gorsuch wasn’t qualified and deserved the political games Democrats were playing as usual? How does that compare to Republican treatment of La Raza member and sexist Sotomayer or even of RBG or Obama’s own Solicitor General & Doug Heffernan look-a-like?
Don’t have to go into detail about what Democrats did to Kavanaugh or Thomas or even Bork (Democrats have been doing this for decades including showing some bias against Catholic nominees). Parker was immediately put in as chief to limit games Democrats play by limiting hearings that would have happened if pushing existing member.
Also don’t think for a moment Reid or next Democrat wouldn’t have taken next step. They just didn’t need it yet in 2013. Reid opened the door & just said they wouldn’t use it for SC to keep some kind of faux high road in press. He did it when Republicans were treating all nominees better than Democrats ever do when in same position and especially treating SC nominees of Democrats better. Just saying he wouldn’t use again means nothing they lost Senate before next Supreme Court position opened, but He made it possible. If they controlled Senate in 2016 they would have done it and Obama’s nominee wouldn’t have been considered closer to being a centrist but another leftist judicial activist like his first 2.
quote:
A Supreme Court nominee used to require 60 votes for confirmation if any senator objected. However, in 2017, McConnell invoked the "nuclear option," a procedural maneuver changing Senate rules. This was made possible when Democrats last controlled the Senate. Majority Leader Harry Reid used the nuclear option in 2013 to confirm lower court judges.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-vacancy-process-nomination-senate-confirmation/
This post was edited on 9/19/20 at 10:34 pm
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:31 pm to wadewilson
When did you graduate from Southeastern?
Posted on 9/19/20 at 10:34 pm to wadewilson
quote:
My opinion is that your question is based on a projection of what you think my opinion is.
quote:
what's happening now was the natural result of Reid's actions.
That's true. Still doesn't make it okay.
Your quote. So my question is NOT based on a projection of what I think your opinion is.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 7:58 am to wadewilson
quote:
You can probably count Mitt as a no, just to get some attention.
Collins is probably a no.
I don’t Mitt and Collins vote no.
I believe they Vote “present“ (much different than a no vote) which Doesn’t change the fact that Donald Trump will nominate a Supreme Court justice and the vote will take place either before or after the election and they will be seated resulting in a 6-3 conservative advantage.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 8:21 am to wadewilson
quote:
But the Trump faction of the party has gone further right,
I’m curious about this. What things have his faction actually done that Republicans 15 years ago wouldn’t have approved or at least been ok with?
Posted on 9/20/20 at 7:17 pm to munchman
Posted on 9/20/20 at 10:05 pm to munchman
Huge if true.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 10:08 pm to Geauxtiga
The Supreme Court will be totally ruthless.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 10:35 pm to Geauxtiga
What is having a more "conservative" supreme court do for the country?
Posted on 9/20/20 at 10:37 pm to yatesdog38
We should strive to have great people who don’t care about right or left in the SC.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 10:38 pm to yatesdog38
quote:
What is having a more "conservative" supreme court do for the country?
Prevents shite like Obamacare from happening
Page 27 of 28
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News