- 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: When Republicans blocked Garland curious about process
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:31 pm to thelawnwranglers
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:31 pm to thelawnwranglers
quote:
Garland was an okay pick?
Not in my book. Judges get more liberal, not conservative, with age. That's been my observation for about 50 years.
1
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:31 pm to Sidicous
quote:in a vacuum, i’d agree, but we’re dealing with an adversarial media who would hound weak Repubs into submission. Not taking a vote was the right call. You can tell bc it pissed off the left to no end. It’s pretty easy to read these days: if the media is pissed, it’s good for America
Not true.
Senators can simply cast their vote (yes/no) with the single word and refrain from, or even refuse to state, a reason for it. Much like a simple yay/nay roll call vote.
For the smart ones, knowing they are in a contentious future position, it would be the wise thing to do. One word and shut up. Whenever asked, obfuscate and deflect away giving a non answer like so many usually do.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:34 pm to thelawnwranglers
Obama could have nominated Oliver Wendell Holmes, jr. and coke head wouldn't have given him a vote.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:35 pm to Bestbank Tiger
Republicans ran to stoping another rbg being put on the court in an Obama lame duck session. They kept their promise. To hell with what the press, Dems and Obama thought and said. Trump has taught me one thing, do not worry about bad press say what you believe; if you are Republican they are not going to be honest or objective.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:41 pm to thelawnwranglers
I have to think that if it it had been a liberal justice instead of Scalia who suddenly died, that GOP may have actually voted for Obama’s pick as long as it wasn’t radical.
This post was edited on 9/20/20 at 2:41 pm
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:41 pm to FreddieMac
Garland was more moderate than anyone Hillary would have nominated, but he was left of center. I was skeptical at the time that the Reps would win in 2016 and thought Garland might be the best we could hope for. The Turtle thought otherwise and rolled the dice. The Turtle won.
RBG thought Hillary would win and she would appoint an equally liberal justice to the court. She rolled the dice. She lost.
Now the Turtle is getting ready to roll again.
RBG thought Hillary would win and she would appoint an equally liberal justice to the court. She rolled the dice. She lost.
Now the Turtle is getting ready to roll again.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:44 pm to Homesick Tiger
The fact is that all we heard from Democrats was that elections have consequences back in 2018. Yes. They do. If you are in the executive, and lose the mid-terms for the senate to the other side, it is simply put a vote on the will of the people either for or in support of your leader.
We do not have a parliamentary system in the US, so we have literally only the mid-terms in our power to influence these types of decisions in the midst of a presidential term.
Obama lost badly in that regard in 2014, and thus was the results of his choice to replace Scalia being blocked. Americans maintained overall support for Trump/Republicans in the Senate, thus this is the result of elections have consequences.
In the end, it is simply stupid to think that the Democrats will play by the rules if the roles were reversed and I am more liberal than conservative saying this.
In the end, given the behavior of the left, screw em and put in a replacement ASAP. Their behavior and forcing identity politics led us to this. They have no one to blame but themselves since they didn't learn their lesson in 2016.
We do not have a parliamentary system in the US, so we have literally only the mid-terms in our power to influence these types of decisions in the midst of a presidential term.
Obama lost badly in that regard in 2014, and thus was the results of his choice to replace Scalia being blocked. Americans maintained overall support for Trump/Republicans in the Senate, thus this is the result of elections have consequences.
In the end, it is simply stupid to think that the Democrats will play by the rules if the roles were reversed and I am more liberal than conservative saying this.
In the end, given the behavior of the left, screw em and put in a replacement ASAP. Their behavior and forcing identity politics led us to this. They have no one to blame but themselves since they didn't learn their lesson in 2016.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:49 pm to thelawnwranglers
I don’t care about precedent, ethics and decency anymore. I want the lefts dreams ground to dust.
Right and Left are in the midst of a war and the right has to win
Right and Left are in the midst of a war and the right has to win
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:49 pm to TBoy
quote:
Trump has gone farther with EOs and rule making by regulation than Obama ever did.
If a lot of Trump’s EOs are reversing Obama’s EOs does that count?
I’m not an Obama hater or anything but a decent amount of Trump’s have been reversals. Humorously, at least 2 of them that I know of have been challenged in court, which means that Obama’s could have been as well.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:51 pm to TBoy
quote:
Trump has gone farther with EOs and rule making by regulation than Obama ever did.
Bwwahhhhahahaaahhhhaaahaaa!!!!!
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:59 pm to TBoy
quote:
Views about federalism are secondary, or lower.
Yes as we’ve seen from the federal covid shutdowns and the federal troops restoring order in the liberal rioting cities
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:05 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
Those who voted would have to go on record as to why they voted no. That would be used against them later
This problem brought to you courtesy of the 17th amendment.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:09 pm to redneck hippie
quote:
Trump should get his pick
Yes
quote:
Obama should’ve gotten his.
Absolutely not.
Elections have consequences. Good guys had and have the Senate.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:13 pm to redneck hippie
quote:If the Dems hadn't rammed a very unpopular Obamacare through in 2010 then tried to go in on gun control, there's a decent chance they could've held onto the majority in the Senate and Obama would've had no trouble getting his pick through. Unpopular policies have consequences.
Trump should get his pick just like Obama should’ve gotten his.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:24 pm to thelawnwranglers
What is so fricking hard to understand about the process? This is 2nd grade level shite. People act like it's nuclear physics.
Obama nominated Garland.
Trump should make his nomination like he has done for every judicial appointment he has ever made and every other president has made. It's this constitutional obligation. He swore an oath to uphold his obligation.
From that point the senate can consider the nominee and per the senate parliamentary rules that decision lies with the senate leader, McConnell. If he decides to consider the nominee the Judiciary Committee vets the candidate and they vote to bring the nominee to the floor for a vote to confirm or deny.
This ain't that complicated.
For Garland, McConnell simply did not consider him. That is the senate leaders constitutional duty. Some people like the decision others don't.
Obama nominated Garland.
Trump should make his nomination like he has done for every judicial appointment he has ever made and every other president has made. It's this constitutional obligation. He swore an oath to uphold his obligation.
From that point the senate can consider the nominee and per the senate parliamentary rules that decision lies with the senate leader, McConnell. If he decides to consider the nominee the Judiciary Committee vets the candidate and they vote to bring the nominee to the floor for a vote to confirm or deny.
This ain't that complicated.
For Garland, McConnell simply did not consider him. That is the senate leaders constitutional duty. Some people like the decision others don't.
This post was edited on 9/20/20 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:33 pm to redneck hippie
quote:Yes. The president nominates, and the Senate decides what to do with it. People keep saying "Obama was denied his nomination!". Nope. He did make his nomination. The Senate didn't approve it. Simple as that.
Trump should get his pick just like Obama should’ve gotten his.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:36 pm to thelawnwranglers
Not holding a vote is the same as voting no when it comes to Senate consent. In my view the President should get to appoint pretty much whomever he wants to his cabinet and the Senate should approve it. However, when it comes to actual lifetime appointments the Senate has to actually advise and consent. The President isn't the only elected official so it makes sense that nominations to the 3rd branch should have the consent of the other 2 branches. I want Trump to nominate someone conservative and hopefully that someone is someone the Senate can support. You don't stop being President in the 4th year of your Presidency.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:41 pm to thelawnwranglers
Elections have consequences. Gop has senate and presidency
Posted on 9/20/20 at 4:23 pm to thelawnwranglers
Ill tell you why Mitch denied it coming to a vote...
Because Republican have rubber stamped whomever the Democrats put up for years.
No reason to risk it.
Because Republican have rubber stamped whomever the Democrats put up for years.
No reason to risk it.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 4:28 pm to thelawnwranglers
The GOP would love to keep being Charlie Brown to the Dem's Lucy.
But Mitch and Donald are gonna go a different way.
Long over due.
But Mitch and Donald are gonna go a different way.
Long over due.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News