Cugalabanza Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Ok, I'm bumping this one more time, because now many Republicans are saying that they will block ANY scotus nominee that Hillary names, for the duration of her term. I'm surprised this doesn't get more attention. How can this be acceptable even to suggest? How is this anything other than crybaby whining and the Republicans being bad losers (before they've even lost)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Ok, I'm bumping this one more time, because now many Republicans are saying that they will block ANY scotus nominee that Hillary names, for the duration of her term. I'm surprised this doesn't get more attention. How can this be acceptable even to suggest? Boiling frog syndrome. Both parties have been escalating for so long, that no one notices that it's completely dysfunctional. Plus...who's going to say "THIS escalation is unreasonable!" when they accepted those previous? How is this anything other than crybaby whining and the Republicans being bad losers (before they've even lost)? Of course that's all it is. The caveat being that: once a nomination is submitted and accepted, the Senate has an exclusive right to do whatever the hell they want with it. It doesn't have to go to a floor vote...it doesn't even have to go to committee. But saying "That's what we're going to do" before a nomination is submitted is just petulant childishness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Boiling frog syndrome. Both parties have been escalating for so long, that no one notices that it's completely dysfunctional. Plus...who's going to say "THIS escalation is unreasonable!" when they accepted those previous? I think that's right. We got one boiled ass dead frog on our hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 I think that's right. We got one boiled ass dead frog on our hands. It's why I'm voting Trump. Hillary, she'll just turn the heat up a little more. With the disaster Trump would be, there's a good chance Congress learns to work together, and might actually unboil the frog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 It's why I'm voting Trump. Hillary, she'll just turn the heat up a little more. With the disaster Trump would be, there's a good chance Congress learns to work together, and might actually unboil the frog. That's why I'm rooting from Trump. The common enemy thing and martians aren't attacking anytime soon......at least I don't think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 It's why I'm voting Trump. Hillary, she'll just turn the heat up a little more. With the disaster Trump would be, there's a good chance Congress learns to work together, and might actually unboil the frog. So, we're gonna SHOOT THE MOON! (oh boy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Ok, I'm bumping this one more time, because now many Republicans are saying that they will block ANY scotus nominee that Hillary names, for the duration of her term. I'm surprised this doesn't get more attention. How can this be acceptable even to suggest? How is this anything other than crybaby whining and the Republicans being bad losers (before they've even lost)? You have to figure the moment Hillary is President, Ginsberg is sure to retire or die shortly thereafter. Then you have an odd number of justices and all is well with the world. No need to replace anyone. That's not going to happen, by a guy can have dreams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 So, we're gonna SHOOT THE MOON! (oh boy) You have to figure the moment Hillary is President, Ginsberg is sure to retire or die shortly thereafter. Then you have an odd number of justices and all is well with the world. No need to replace anyone. That's not going to happen, by a guy can have dreams. I don't know enough about the history of the supreme court (maybe someone else can elucidate), but I believe that the court originally had only six justices, and that additional seats added were probably politically motivated appointments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts