Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Supreme Court discussion thread The Supreme Court discussion thread

09-18-2020 , 07:48 PM
gg america.. had a decent run
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 07:48 PM
Well. This sucks
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 07:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuffle
Wow I just saw that. Watch McConnell ram through a SCOTUS between now and the election.
They can just wait until the election then ram one through if Trump losses, right? Better for them politically.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 07:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecriture d'adulte
They can just wait until the election then ram one through if Trump losses, right? Better for them politically.
Yes, this. In the lame duck.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 07:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by awval999
Yes, this. In the lame duck.
Thanks, awval
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 07:58 PM
How does one pack a Supreme Court? Asking for a friend
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:12 PM
Democrats should refuse to give a hearing.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuffle
That would not stop the Republicans. They will nominate and confirm a right-wing SCOTUS in the next 6 weeks 100% of the time, unless the GOP suddenly loses some of their own votes.
Make them do it without a single Democrat on the floor.

Would be political suicide.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GodgersWOAT
Make them do it without a single Democrat on the floor.

Would be political suicide.
LOL. Why would you ever think that they give a **** about the optics when they can appoint a hack who'll give them unchecked power?
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
LOL. Why would you ever think that they give a **** about the optics when they can appoint a hack who'll give them unchecked power?
“they” include a ton of Senators in dogfights right now including the Judiciary Chair ldo
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:25 PM
ROMNEY MURKOWSKI COLLINS ONE TIMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:29 PM
I listened to a great course on the Romans recently. Kinda feel like there's a chance that rbg's untimely death will be talked about as a small footnote that contributed to the death of any real democracy in America. Assuming that discussions about history are possible at all of course
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:29 PM
Murkowski and Romney have ‘committed’ to not filling a vacancy before Inauguration Day

We’ll see
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:31 PM
Right, obviously GOP senators care more about staying in power than the Court, so the ones in dangerous seats will “do the right thing” and abstain.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecriture d'adulte
They can just wait until the election then ram one through if Trump losses, right? Better for them politically.
This may be the smart move politically but Trump won't allow it. Can you imagine Trump refraining from one of his most potent powers?
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:32 PM
A good fighting point to use in this battle would be to pressure republicans to replace her with a woman.

This **** gonna get ugly.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GodgersWOAT
Make them do it without a single Democrat on the floor.

Would be political suicide.
I think you overestimate how many of their voters care about anything other than owning the libs.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:35 PM
I don't see how the obvious GOP strategy isn't
a.) before the election, say you'll wait for the election, pretend you're not a hypocrite and would never appoint someone if the people didn't give you that mandate, use the open seat to rally your voters like 2016
b.) if you win, great
c.) if you lose, throw that out the window and ram someone through the lame duck because you're Mitch McConnell and you don't give a ****
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tercet
ROMNEY MURKOWSKI COLLINS ONE TIMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
You're 1 short
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GodgersWOAT
“they” include a ton of Senators in dogfights right now including the Judiciary Chair ldo
They can appoint someone who can give them carte blanche to cheat in the election.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:37 PM
somehow adelson is still kicking but they cant keep ginsburg alive until january?
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
I don't see how the obvious GOP strategy isn't
a.) before the election, say you'll wait for the election, pretend you're not a hypocrite and would never appoint someone if the people didn't give you that mandate, use the open seat to rally your voters like 2016
b.) if you win, great
c.) if you lose, throw that out the window and ram someone through the lame duck because you're Mitch McConnell and you don't give a ****
If they're afraid of losing the Senate and subsequent court packing, there's the option of approving a blatant hack who rubber stamps cheating.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 27offsuit
A good fighting point to use in this battle would be to pressure republicans to replace her with a woman.

This **** gonna get ugly.
The republicans coulda chosen literally any milquetoast justice without issue but chose to die on the hill of Rapey McFratBoof

The idea that McConnell gives two shits about a fighting point is laughable
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
If they're afraid of losing the Senate and subsequent court packing, there's the option of approving a blatant hack who rubber stamps cheating.
That appointee won’t be able to do anything for them if they lose in 6 weeks tho.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-18-2020 , 08:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GodgersWOAT
That appointee won’t be able to do anything for them if they lose in 6 weeks tho.
There is absolutely no scenario where the election is resolved in November
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote

      
m