Presidential Election: 11/3/20 ---Now the President Elect Joe Biden Thread

[Larry]

6 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

but Dems can't let two seats be bullied right from them.

 

One.  And it happened four years ago.  

 

Appointing Justices, and confirming them, within a year of an election, is a routine government function.  

 

[Cooked Crack]

10 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

One.  And it happened four years ago.  

 

Appointing Justices, and confirming them, within a year of an election, is a routine government function.  

 

It happened four years ago and the guys who did are now claiming what happened has no effects on what happens now. Sorry, but hard pass on that.

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

Everybody is acting like it’s a sure thing the Dems will win the Senate and get to pack the courts. Trump will block and contest every state until he finds a loophole to win. I expect the Senate races to be included in that same plan.

[Larry]

3 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

It happened four years ago and the guys who did are now claiming what happened has no effects on what happens now. Sorry, but hard pass on that.

 

So they're lying hypocrites.  And Dallas sux.  

 

Appointing and confirming justices within a year of an election is a normal function.  

 

In fact, back when Skippy was refusing to allow a vote on Garland, I pointed out that the last time a President with an opposition-party Senate appointed a SC Justice within a year of leaving office:  

 

1)  The President was Reagan

2)  The Senate was Dem.

3)  And the nominee was confirmed, 2 months later, by a vote of 93-0.  

 

Yes, it sucks.  This is going to harm the country for the next 50 years.  But the fact that they cheated four years ago does not mean that they're cheating now, nor that "make up cheating" is justified next year.  

[mammajamma]

7 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Yes, it sucks.  This is going to harm the country for the next 50 years.  But the fact that they cheated four years ago does not mean that they're cheating now, nor that "make up cheating" is justified next year.  

Everything they're discussing now to make up for it next year is not cheating and well within the rules too.  Including increasing the amount of justices

[Larry]

4 minutes ago, mammajamma said:

Everything they're discussing now to make up for it next year is not cheating and well within the rules too.  Including increasing the amount of justices

 

So was refusing to vote on Garland.

 

So is impeaching every Republican-appointed judge simply because they were appointed by a Republican.  

 

And doing so is still cheating.  

[TheGreatBuzz]

I think what @Larry is saying (and he can correct me if I am wrong) is that there are two options and either one means the GOP only “stole” one seat, not two.

 

Either:

 

1) A judge should not be seated within X amount of time of an election.  If this is the case, then they will have been fine with the Scalia seat but will have “stolen” the RGB seat.

 

or

 

2) A judge should be seated during election time and they will have “stolen” the Scalia seat but will be fine with the RGB seat.

[Larry]

1 minute ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I think what @Larry is saying (and he can correct me if I am wrong) is that there are two options and either one means the GOP only “stole” one seat, not two.

 

Either:

 

1) A judge should not be seated within X amount of time of an election.  If this is the case, then they will have been fine with the Scalia seat but will have “stolen” the RGB seat.

 

or

 

2) A judge should be seated during election time and they will have “stolen” the Scalia seat but will be fine with the RGB seat.

 

2.  

[PokerPacker]

3 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

So was refusing to vote on Garland.

 

So is impeaching every Republican-appointed judge simply because they were appointed by a Republican.  

 

And doing so is still cheating.  

How about impeaching a Republican-appointed judge because they're a rapist and perjurer?

[Momma There Goes That Man]

That’s fine. So we will jus take their subversion of democracy in the face and let them determine the next 50 years of this country because we are gentlemen of Harvard or some such logic. We will keep playing by the unwritten rules and the GOP will keep breaking the written ones and pushing us toward fascism. 
 

but hey, at least when the country went to hell, we went politely

[TheGreatBuzz]

2 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

2.  

 Well I thought you were saying that no matter which argument someone chooses, they can’t argue two seats were stolen.  If that wasn’t what you were saying, then it’s what I am saying.

[Larry]

2 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

How about impeaching a Republican-appointed judge because they're a rapist and perjurer?

 

Pretty sure both of those are crimes.  (And yes, I know what you're saying.)  

[AJ*]

10 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

So was refusing to vote on Garland.

 

So is impeaching every Republican-appointed judge simply because they were appointed by a Republican.  

 

And doing so is still cheating.  

 

At this point who cares anymore? Republicans blocked a Supreme Court justice, laughed and bragged about it, raised money on it and got rewarded with the Presidency, the House, and the Senate last election.  Americans obviously don't care about cheating so have at it.  It's time for Democrats to stop with that "when they go low we go high" BS and simply wield their power when they attain it. Republicans are never shy about doing it.

[Larry]

1 minute ago, AJ* said:

 

At this point who cares anymore? Republicans blocked a Supreme Court justice, laughed and bragged about it, raised money on it and got rewarded with the Presidency, the House, and the Senate last election.  Americans obviously don't care about cheating so have at it.  It's time for Democrats to stop with that "when they go low we go high" BS and simply wield their power when they attain it. Republicans are never shy about doing it.

 

You know, "Two Wrongs make a Right" would have been a lot less typing.  

[bearrock]

12 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

So was refusing to vote on Garland.

 

So is impeaching every Republican-appointed judge simply because they were appointed by a Republican.  

 

And doing so is still cheating.  

 

Refusing to vote on Garland, confirming RBG's replacement before Jan 20, 2021, expanding the number of SCOTUS justices are all within the rules and not cheating.  They are norm breaking (and yes, Garland refusal was norm breaking in 2016 and RBG replacement would be norm breaking in 2020 due to the new norm set in 2016).

 

Impeaching GOP appointed judges without good cause is more than norm breaking, that violates the Constitution (and cooking up good cause where none exists obviously goes beyond mere norm breaking too).

[AJ*]

1 minute ago, Larry said:

 

You know, "Two Wrongs make a Right" would have been a lot less typing.  

 

Or rather many wrongs give you the Presidency, House and Senate, so why stop? It wasn't just the Supreme Court justice Republicans blocked. They were blocking judicial nominees left and right in the lower courts as well....all lifetime appointments.

[bearrock]

10 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

You know, "Two Wrongs make a Right" would have been a lot less typing.  

 

Is it a wrong?  Will the GOP agree?  If so, how do they propose to remedy the wrong? 

 

Imprisoning someone without just cause would be wrong.  Is imprisoning someone convicted of a crime wrong?  How is one supposed to view packing the court to remedy the "wrong" committed by the GOP (whether it be once or twice)?

 

Either norm breaking is wrong or it's not wrong.  If it is wrong, is norm breaking to remedy the result of previous norm breaking also wrong?

[Wildbunny]

Can Trump nominates himself to the SCOTUS?

[Momma There Goes That Man]

35 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

You know, "Two Wrongs make a Right" would have been a lot less typing.  

what do you suggest? We standby with smiles on our faces while our country falls into fascism and say “well , shucks they got us.”

[skinsmarydu]

33 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

Refusing to vote on Garland, confirming RBG's replacement before Jan 20, 2021, expanding the number of SCOTUS justices are all within the rules and not cheating.  They are norm breaking (and yes, Garland refusal was norm breaking in 2016 and RBG replacement would be norm breaking in 2020 due to the new norm set in 2016).

 

Impeaching GOP appointed judges without good cause is more than norm breaking, that violates the Constitution (and cooking up good cause where none exists obviously goes beyond mere norm breaking too).

I'd be fine if most of them weren't deemed "unfit " by the ABA.

[mammajamma]

1 hour ago, Larry said:

 

So was refusing to vote on Garland.

 

So is impeaching every Republican-appointed judge simply because they were appointed by a Republican.  

 

And doing so is still cheating.  

Ok? And again, expanding the supreme court to match the circuit courts would not be cheating OR against the rules. If anything, we're behind and its cheating to NOT have the supreme court match the circuit courts, as intended. Just catching up

[Jumbo]

i can help with visuals

 

HOW TO HANDLE THE GOP CONGRESS

 

WRONG:

 

 

 

RIGHT

 

 

 

[mammajamma]

 

you could really argue that they "cheated" 3 times.. once for refusing to even vote on a judge that was nominated in March of that year, twice for approving a judge that was not qualified and who broke the law during the appointment process, and third by rushing through a new judge after the election (if the guy nominating the judge is voted out)

 

all of which are way worse than expanding the SC to the amount of seats needed to represent a growing population

[NoCalMike]

What make this situation worse is the voters themselves.  If there was huge pressure by the GOP voters for them not to do this, real "you will lose your seat" pressure, they would start backing off, but right-wing media has been so effective and coordinated that anything they do is always justified by pretzel logic. They can do no wrong in the eyes of their base, currently.

[Hersh]

Since this isn't the right thread for a total derailment, I won't even bring up how many judicial seats across various courts Moscow Mitch refused to have votes on. I really don't think RBG death changes the race. Everyone on the right voting because of the SC was already doing so and anyone that was GOP and is voting for Biden already understood that Biden would get to nominate a SC justice. 

 

If anything, it reinforces the importance to Dems of getting out to vote at all costs. 

5 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

What make this situation worse is the voters themselves.  If there was huge pressure by the GOP voters for them not to do this, real "you will lose your seat" pressure, they would start backing off, but right-wing media has been so effective and coordinated that anything they do is always justified by pretzel logic. They can do no wrong in the eyes of their base, currently.

 

The gop NOT bending the rules in their favor would be doing wrong in the eyes of their base.