RBG DDF shortlist and how it will shape the Elections

[YitzyS]

Hilarious how

1- Republicans absolutely definitely cannot admit that it is 100% hypocritical beyond belief.

@YitzyS - Nice n”m but Graham literally spelled out how 2020 would be the exact same in his opinion.

2- Just like it is completely and obviously false to claim that Democrats wouldn’t do the same exact thing with the shoe on the other foot.

@biobook - 2016 wasn’t the ultimate precedent. There were many previous instances of similar nominations/votes.

I'm not defending any specific politician. It's really my own opinion. The politicians are mostly saying a different n"m, that it makes a difference who controls the Senate.

[S209]

I’m aware that you seem to usually have a more objective view of things.

[S209]

I'm not defending any specific politician. It's really my own opinion. The politicians are mostly saying a different n"m, that it makes a difference who controls the Senate.

..... which they very clearly did not say in 2016, and Graham’s words show they (or at least he) never intended that either

[YitzyS]

..... which they very clearly did not say in 2016, and Graham’s words show they (or at least he) never intended that either

I believe McConnell said it then.

[Kobe Bryant]

President Trump - I will be announcing my Supreme Court Nominee on Saturday, at the White House! Exact time TBA.

[S209]

I believe McConnell said it then.

Link? Either way, Graham most certainly did not. And he’s having trouble with his foot. Hope it tastes ok.

I find it funny that our DDF loyalists refuse to admit its hypocritical. It’s quite obvious if you just take a step back out of it.

[YitzyS]

Romney just said he would vote for the nominee.

[shaulyaakov]

Romney just said he would vote for the nominee.

People were putting way to much stock in the Romney-Trump feud. SCOTUS very much transcends that.

[S209]

Romney just said he would vote for the nominee.

Makes sense, he has no real reason to vote against and is generally a principled conservative. Voting to impeach hurt Trump without causing damage to the country, but this would potentially damage the country in his eyes.

....of course, as always, it’s much easier to explain a decision after it’s been made than to predict one in advance

[YitzyS]

People were putting way to much stock in the Romney-Trump feud. SCOTUS very much transcends that.

He sometimes cuts off his nose to spite Trump.

[shaulyaakov]

1. The fact that Dems lobbied against holding up an election year nominee in 2016 is irrelevant. Republicans clearly set a precedent there.

2. What we Biden meant in 1992 is irrelevant as it was never put in practice by Democrats. Moreover, if the "Biden rule" really was the basis for the Garland situation, even more basis for Republicans not to move ahead now.

[S209]

1. The fact that Dems lobbied against holding up an election year nominee in 2016 is irrelevant. Republicans clearly set a precedent there.

2. What we Biden meant in 1992 is irrelevant as it was never put in practice by Democrats. Moreover, if the "Biden rule" really was the basis for the Garland situation, even more basis for Republicans not to move ahead now.

Honestly. Do you believe the Democrats would have behaved differently, then and now?

This is obviously not a valid stand-alone excuse. I’m just curious what you think.

[zh cohen]

1. The fact that Dems lobbied against holding up an election year nominee in 2016 is irrelevant.

Why? Democrats did everything they could to push forward a nominee. How does the fact that they failed change anything?

[YitzyS]

Link?

I can't pull it up now (all Google searches are giving recent news pieces), but here is a piece from earlier this year, before RBG died. It's CNN saying that in his name. Note, it's not a direct quote, and CNN is saying it themselves, which is a more compelling proof that it actually happened:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, has repeatedly vowed to fill a vacancy this year and has said the difference between now and 2016 is that by the time Obama, a Democrat, nominated Garland to fill the vacancy left by Scalia, Republicans controlled the Senate. Right now, Republicans control both the White House and the Senate.

[Kobe Bryant]

Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, said on Tuesday that he would support moving forward to fill the Supreme Court seat left open by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, all but assuring that President Trump has the votes he needs to cement a conservative majority on the high court.

In a statement Tuesday morning, Mr. Romney echoed Republican leaders who have said historical precedent supported filling the seat in an election year when the presidency and Senate were controlled by the same party.

“The Constitution gives the president the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees,” he said. “Accordingly, I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”

[aygart]

1. The fact that Dems lobbied against holding up an election year nominee in 2016 is irrelevant. Republicans clearly set a precedent there.

2. What we Biden meant in 1992 is irrelevant as it was never put in practice by Democrats. Moreover, if the "Biden rule" really was the basis for the Garland situation, even more basis for Republicans not to move ahead now.

You are missing the boat! They are both a band of hypocrites! That you are trying to make as if only one side is being hypocritical says more about you than about them. Think past your political preferences! Open your eyes!

[aygart]

Lol at how you guys are arguing whether or not either position here is hypocritical as if any of these differences are why they are taking their positions. If there weren't these reasons they would find a different one.

When I went as a bachur for an interview to be a JC in Camp Torah Vodaath the head counselor asked me what I would do if a kid says "how come you let the other kid do the same thing yesterday?" I answered that I would explain to him why it is different blah blah. They asked me what I would do if I knew it wasn't really different. I told them that I would still tell them why it is different.

[neveryou]

I don't see why we should give in to the  Demokkkrats
If they had a normal party and normal people, not socialist and wacko agendas, alot of Americans would probaly be for waiting till the election
The demokkkrats have gone so far off the deep end that we shouldn't give them an inch (they never give in to Republicans)

If it didn't hurt the Republicans in 2016 than why would it hurt them in 2020?

We're winning so much I'm getting sick of winning

[cks33]

It doesn't.

They can take a lot more cases? Split into sub teams like district courts do. Obviously it helps - now, it gets interesting to see what split goes on each case

[Lurker]

We're winning so much I'm getting sick of winning

Let's see how sick of it you are with VP AOC in '24.