Senator Lisa Murkowski to vote "Aye" on confirmation.
- Thread starter TUMe
- Start date
No. The people just want consistency. What McConnell did wasn't strictly against the constitution in 2016, but it was certainly in bad faith to the constitution's intent. Or if it wasn't then 2020 was. One or the other (voting on or not voting on noms in the last year of a president's term) has to be held as the preferable option... and it can't just be based upon the senate being in the same party as the president because the constitution doesn't address parties.
Altering the number of justices on the court isn't against the constitution either, though it might again be in bad faith with the intent of the constitution. Hence why we need to update the constitution to address such an issue.
I'm an equal opportunity offender. I thought Garland deserved a vote based on precedent. I thought doing away with the Senate super majority was a bad decision based on decades of precedent and would result in more partisanship and extremist laws and judges Unfortunately, those in DC are so consumed with power they take the "to hell with what's good for the country long term" approach. Sadly, that thinking is reflected on here from both sides at times.
If the Dems don’t overtake the Republicans and Trump wins (which is more likely than ever now) this issue will be non existent but IMO definitely needs to be addressed and a fair, bipartisan solution created.
There was only one (Strozak) and Mueller fired him. DoJ later cleared hm and his work of any anti-Trump bias.
One difference is that the precedent set by Reid was likely to benefit both sides as the control of the Senate fluctuated. The precedent set (and then unset) by McConnell regarding appointing justices in the final year of a president's term is unlikely to benefit both sides very often. Considering the last time it happened before Obama was Johnson ~50 years earlier (Johnson eventually withdrew his Noms even though the Senate was Blue as well) and it before that it was Benjamin Harrison 120+ years ago.
If Trump wins the election, he has a good chance of nominating a fourth, and upsetting the balance of the court even more. Breyer is 82. That would be something if the same President nominated 4 justices. He would seal it up for a long time if he won, and still had control of the senate.
God help aston and watubryce if Biden wins and Republicans hold the Senate. I can only imagine the tantrum if you’re not only not able to pack the court, but also have to deal with the possibility of McConnell blocking another nominee in the next 4 years. You guys don’t lose well
Last edited:
You always come back to wanting to change the Constitution. That's fine. Just follow the process. Your first paragraph is looser talk, pure and simple. You need to realize that they are not going to make the Constitution fit your guidelines.
If he wins he wins and if he loses he loses. But the voters will decide that. We had a lot of old justices, now it's shift change. I'm still skeptical about Trump winning...I don't think he will. But if he does that is our system. I voted third party last time. I haven't checked to see if that option is available this time. Biden v Trump is a hold your nose choice either way.
I threw my two cents in, but it won't matter in OK. Our electoral votes are gonna go Trump no matter what I do. I just don't like relying on any one president selecting 4 Judges, whether they be conservative or liberal. I doubt the Senate and the Presidency go GOP though. I'm skeptical of a Trump win, and hopeful there isn't one! Course everybody knows how I voted. Nobody would've believed me if I said I voted for Trump.
Third party or Democrat on your actual ballot will change nothing, so go protest!
Protest was interesting last time, not so much this time. The 2012 Libertarian vote was 1 per cent. 2016 the same candidate got 5 per cent. There was a message there, in fact, it was part of the reason Hillary won the popular vote. But it also showed that you need something on the order of Ross Perot to change things very much.
Doj says no bias, his emails say other.
Paige, brennen, comey, Steele. Winestein...
There's always KANYE!
You have him and three others to select from other than Biden and Trump.
What the heck does Weinstein have to do with it. Or is that Winestain? I think you spelled it something like that. Actually that would be a humorous spelling.
I'll be surprised if Biden wins but Dems lose the Senate. Its likely to go one way or the other.
Even if Biden wins and the Democrats take the Senate that still might happen. Don't think the Democrats can hold the Senate thru Biden's full term. I'm sure the Donkeys pack that court up front if they win on both.
Much nicer than yelling "You lie" during the SOU. Not even close to stiffing Garland and pushing through Barrett.
