- 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: Is Merrick Garland an objectionable nominee?
Posted on 2/1/17 at 6:45 pm to Ag Zwin
Posted on 2/1/17 at 6:45 pm to Ag Zwin
I think the Democrats opened the door for the nuclear option. It was fricking stupid.
Now Republicans would be stupid to not go that route if necessary. I guarantee that Democrats would have no problem doing this.
Now Republicans would be stupid to not go that route if necessary. I guarantee that Democrats would have no problem doing this.
0
Posted on 2/1/17 at 6:50 pm to LSURussian
quote:And I personally encouraged by the fact that she only diasagreed with Scalia 1/3 of the time..
Compared to Sotomayor Karl Marx is moderate...
In other words, it's probably the only place in politics where individuals exteme ideological differences still agree far more than not.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 6:51 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
Keep the SC balanced but your hand on the wheel. Keep the Congress in GOP hands, but don't make it so conservative that you become a lighting rod. Leave room for the Dems to have a token presence, but keep them marginalized.
This country is generally right of center. If you don't lurch it too far right, you can stay in control a hell of a lot longer and keep ownership of the message and direction.
Give the left reason to paint you as extreme, and you will get another Obama. The media will help them do it every time.
That may have been true in the past but in this last election the MSM exposed to the American people that they are just political hacks for the Dumocratic Party.
Also, after the way the Dumocrats and the progressives acted in this last election and are still acting, I doubt if the Dumocratic Party will gain control of the presidency, Senate, House of Reps or judiciary for a long time if ever again.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 6:53 pm to bamafan1001
quote:
Why would we nominate a leftist shill? I hope we nominate three Scalia clones
#MAGA
Posted on 2/1/17 at 6:55 pm to Roger Klarvin
He had to w/ a Republican Senate. I would be in favor of this only if the wise Latina agreed to resign for his appointment, which would never could never happen. If that old poli hack hag Ginsburg dies, no dice. Same for a mod or conservative resigning.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 7:00 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
I was surprised Obama nominated him to be honest.
I was, too. I figured that Obama would nominate someone in one of the Dem's identity politics target audiences, then when he/she/it was not given a vote, Dems would cry "racist!/sexist!/homophobe!/whatever-ist or -phobe" and let slip Hillary's campaign upon the Republicans.
This post was edited on 2/1/17 at 7:01 pm
Posted on 2/1/17 at 7:05 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
Some of you can't see past your own hostility
Some of you don't know how to win. Playing scared and timid is what the republicans have been doing since the 1950s and this country consistently moves left.
quote:
Leave room for the Dems to have a token presence, but keep them marginalized
That's why the Court can go 7-2. Two is a token presence.
quote:
If you don't lurch it too far right, you can stay in control a hell of a lot longer and keep ownership of the message and direction
Absolutely no evidence for this. In fact, Trump's election flies in the face if it. No candidate has ever spoken so boldly and outrageously about very conservative items like walls and travel bans. It's when the republicans get wish washy like McCain that they falter.
quote:
Give the left reason to paint you as extreme, and you will get another Obama. The media will help them do it every time
When have you been? McCain and Romney were painted as extremists playing the game you're suggesting. Nope, a republican is going to get misrepresented regardless.
quote:
Play the long game
I am. Your Mr. Nice guy, not too hot not too cold plan has more closely approximated the republicans since the 1950s. Have they ever had a run of power like the Democrats who owned the House for 40 years? Nope. When you have the chance, you pull as far right as you can just to move the trajectory of this mass a few degrees to the right.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 7:10 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
I was surprised Obama nominated him to be honest.
Wut? He was nominated bc Dems thought they were never losing power again. It was a pure political play that didn't work.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 9:18 pm to buckeye_vol
Merrick Garland seemed pretty mainstream. He should at least had the privilege of hearings and an up or down vote by the entire Senate.
I was most disappointed with McConnell's action
I was most disappointed with McConnell's action
Posted on 2/1/17 at 9:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
Obama picked him because Orrin Hatch told the press "well if Obama picked a moderate like Merrick Garland that would be one thing but he'll pick some radical leftist." And Obama was like "a-ha! If I pick Garland then it will make their obstructionism obvious!"
And so he did. And it did. And nobody cared because meta-level principles don't exist outside campaign ads.
And so he did. And it did. And nobody cared because meta-level principles don't exist outside campaign ads.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 9:38 pm to Ag Zwin
It's obvious that most of y'all know nothing about what motivates these selections.
Garland is from the D.C. Circuit, which heard pretty much all of the appeals and challenges to administrative regulations. Over the years that Circuit has become populated by judges who believe that it is appropriate for courts to defer to the administrative rule making of executive agencies. That way most regulations get upheld and administrative interpretations of statutory law are given deference.
Obama nominated Garland under the belief that the Democrats would hold onto the executive but maybe not the judicial branch. A justice like Garland tilts the balance to the executive. He isn't particularly liberal. He is deferential.
If Trump analyzed the issue on a deeper level, he would likely find a judge like Garland would be much more useful to him and would increase his power. However, Trump wants a person who will change abortion law and other civil and voting rights law. So actually Trump,wants an activist judge. The mistake is thinking he can control the activist after he is confirmed.
Garland is from the D.C. Circuit, which heard pretty much all of the appeals and challenges to administrative regulations. Over the years that Circuit has become populated by judges who believe that it is appropriate for courts to defer to the administrative rule making of executive agencies. That way most regulations get upheld and administrative interpretations of statutory law are given deference.
Obama nominated Garland under the belief that the Democrats would hold onto the executive but maybe not the judicial branch. A justice like Garland tilts the balance to the executive. He isn't particularly liberal. He is deferential.
If Trump analyzed the issue on a deeper level, he would likely find a judge like Garland would be much more useful to him and would increase his power. However, Trump wants a person who will change abortion law and other civil and voting rights law. So actually Trump,wants an activist judge. The mistake is thinking he can control the activist after he is confirmed.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 9:50 pm to TBoy
So Trump has also appointed a judge who is an originalist. The risk for Trump there is that most judges who are high level origionalists believe in the separation of powers. They sometimes invalidate regulations and orders.
Republican appointees who have origionalist beliefs also have a track record of becoming what seems more liberal after they are appointed. But actually they have a sense of responsibility to be fair to everyone and to follow the law and jurisprudence. Stability and consistency become more important. They don't follow the daily outrage of right wing talk radio and Fox News.
Republican appointees who have origionalist beliefs also have a track record of becoming what seems more liberal after they are appointed. But actually they have a sense of responsibility to be fair to everyone and to follow the law and jurisprudence. Stability and consistency become more important. They don't follow the daily outrage of right wing talk radio and Fox News.
Posted on 2/1/17 at 10:01 pm to GeorgeWest
quote:
Merritt Garland was done dirty last year for blatant political advantage. He should have had hearings and a vote. If Repubs thought he wasn't qualified, they could have voted NO.
The Republicans just used the Biden rule. You should be happy!
Posted on 2/1/17 at 10:27 pm to Jake88
quote:
Absolutely no evidence for this. In fact, Trump's election flies in the face if it. No candidate has ever spoken so boldly and outrageously about very conservative items like walls and travel bans. It's when the republicans get wish washy like McCain that they falter.
You are a f u c k I n g idiot.
Now, Trump is "Mr. Conservative"? This whole damn board has repeatedly called him out for NOT toeing that line.
You think that this weakness? This is how you win this crap long term and keep the independents that won the got damn election.
How stupid do you have to be to not realize that elections are not won by pissing people off? You appeal to the commonalities.
I swear. You jackasses that think the only approach is swinging your dick in the air are the ones that will squander this opportunity.
This post was edited on 2/1/17 at 10:30 pm
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News