TakeYouToTasker Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 But the Senate used as an excuse the bull **** reasoning of "The next President should be the one to nominate a Justice...just because." The Senate may have done its duty, to the letter of the Constitution. But what they did to Garland was still nonsense. I suppose this is true, but at the same time I'm hard pressed to care, given what Senator Biden had to say about nomination to the Court. The Democrats showed their hand, putting on display how they planned to rule. Given that, the opposition part really has no choice but to play by the rules set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 I suppose this is true, but at the same time I'm hard pressed to care, given what Senator Biden had to say about nomination to the Court. The Democrats showed their hand, putting on display how they planned to rule. Given that, the opposition part really has no choice but to play by the rules set. I don't disagree. The Democrats made this bed, now they have to eat it too. But both parties are acting like children. One thing people typically don't understand about cloture: it ends filibusters, but does so by putting a limit on the time remaining for open debate. As I recall, it was something like eight hours before Reid went nuclear. But because the Republicans were blocking 170+ nominations or something, it wasn't enough to just lower the votes needed for cloture to 50. He also had to change the floor rules on remaining time for debate after the cloture vote to something ridiculously low (like an hour) so his Senate had time to approve all the blocked nominations. So it's a lot more than "the minority party can't block Senate business." Now, the majority party in the Senate can invoke cloture to silence the minority party and practically keep them off the Senate floor. Thanks, Reid, for opening this Pandora's box, you worthless slug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Dems shoulda waited for a bad nomination to pull this stunt. Crying wolf on everything ruins whatever credibility they ever had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Dems now really have to hope Ginsburg stays healthy for at least 2 more years & realistically at least 4. If she or Breyer is gone, the swing vote is no longer Kennedy but either Roberts or Gorsuch. And they really have no way to stop the next nominee now. Very short sighted of them to fillibuster this one. The R's would have gone Reid Option at that point, but they could've faced pressure introducing that on a nominee that altered the balance of the SC. Now, they'll have already killed the fillibuster, so the left won't have nearly as much leverage. And we thought progressives were acting unhinged for the past 3 months. That'd definitely turn it up to an 11. Ginsburg, Kennedy, & Breyer all born in the 30's. Thomas is oldest from the right & he's just a smidge under 10 years younger than Breyer. Likely won't happen, but President Obama's 2 could be the only ones left from the left by the time President Trump leaves office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Ooh, they'll yell and write a blog and go boo hoo hoo at 11? 25 of the 33 Senator slots aren't GOP in 2018, that's usually a pickup for the minority side of the draw, so the GOP should increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Ooh, they'll yell and write a blog and go boo hoo hoo at 11? 25 of the 33 Senator slots aren't GOP in 2018, that's usually a pickup for the minority side of the draw, so the GOP should increase. Wouldn't want to have money against the R's picking up some Senate seats in '18 but it isn't a slam dunk. Midterm elections usually see the side holding the WH lose seats in Congress. Gut feel would be D's pick up from a handful to a dozen of seats in the House & R's pickup 2-3 in the Senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Nevertheless, he persisted........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Historically the House changed less than the Politburo, but Clinton and Obama got massacred in their first mid-terms. What is the fear, abortion overturned goes back to the states and those that perform the most have entrenched full rights so nothing would change. And I would be super-shocked if they overturned it at the SC level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 (edited) Nothing happened to Garland. The Senate did it's duty.Even though you and Tom argue that no Senate ever has to advise and consent on any pick (because they are allowed to hold a vote 100 years from now-nice logic fellas) despite what the Constitution says, let's not confuse duty with politics. The Senate played party politics st every step on both sides. Are you proud today then? Historically the House changed less than the Politburo, but Clinton and Obama got massacred in their first mid-terms.What is the fear, abortion overturned goes back to the states and those that perform the most have entrenched full rights so nothing would change. And I would be super-shocked if they overturned it at the SC level.Massacred. Go look at Congress re-election stats. The Republicans can rejoice today but in 4-6 years they may be in the minority with no voice. Awful outcome. All are to blame. Edited April 7, 2017 by Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Have to wait and see. Hopefully nobody voting GOP talks to a pollster so they all read the Dems have 98 percent of people who will talk to them. The Politburo comment was from the late 1980s after the House had consistently titled the same way for decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richstadiumowner Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Even though you and Tom argue that no Senate ever has to advise and consent on any pick (because they are allowed to hold a vote 100 years from now-nice logic fellas) despite what the Constitution says, let's not confuse duty with politics. The Senate played party politics st every step on both sides. 1) I've never denied they were playing party politics. 2) I'll point it out AGAIN..."advise and consent" is defined exclusively by the Senate. It begins when the Senate chair receives the nomination (on paper) from the White House. After that, it is entirely the Senate's prerogative as to what to do with it. Senate bylaws do NOT require that anything be done with the nomination after its received - the chair is not required to forward it to committee, the committee is not required to bring it to the floor, the floor is not required to put it to a vote. The constitutional requirement of "advise and consent" is met simply by accepting the nomination. Period. If the Senate chooses to define its bylaws so that advise and consent is met by putting the nomination through a shredder, burning the confetti, and feeding it to goats, then that is "advise and consent," and entirely Constitutional. Not sending Garland's nomination to committee, or bringing it to the floor, was petty, juvenile, and spineless, but it was done according to Senate procedure and was entirely constitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Don't kid yourselves, it will be the GOP who is remembered as the party who went nuclear. Harry Reid won't even be remembered in the conversation. The GOP better pray they get more than 1 SC justice out of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Thank you AD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 I just finished reading a newspaper piece on yesterday's "nuclear option" wherein the writer stated that the Senate's tradition of bipartisan cooperation was forever shattered. In the words of that great 20th Century philosophe, Aretha Franklin, "Who's Zoomin Who?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 I don't think anyone is really going to care the nuclear options was used. Most Americans won't even know this happened or what it was about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 CNN says Gorsuch has been confirmed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Don't kid yourselves, it will be the GOP who is remembered as the party who went nuclear. Harry Reid won't even be remembered in the conversation. The GOP better pray they get more than 1 SC justice out of this. If you could guarantee the obliteration of the memory of harry reid and the damage he did to the lives of normal Americans, I would be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 CNN says Gorsuch has been confirmed Dear Harry Reid and Entire Progressive Left, Thank you for the Gorsuch confirmation. Absolutely, positively could NOT have done it without you. Sincerely, Everyone you hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Don't kid yourselves, it will be the GOP who is remembered as the party who went nuclear. Harry Reid won't even be remembered in the conversation. The GOP better pray they get more than 1 SC justice out of this. Hell, even when Harry Reid is mentioned, it's still the GOP's fault for forcing the choice on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts