I LOVE FACTS (if they're real) On the Supreme Court Nomination Hearing

Snowman999

Member
I'm going to ASSUME that his statistics are true. From 1:50 to 3:00 are great to know. Again, if it's true. I'm not digging into it to find out for myself. The simple fact is, if there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court the President nominates someone, the Senate has their hearings, and votes on them.

His statements on what's going on is interesting up to 7:00, he touches on quite a few things.

He stutters a bit. But, it's worth while.

To be absolute up front: The Republicans in 2016 did say "We won't have a vote because it's an election year." Which is BS. They didn't vote because the branches were divided. In that respect, they gave the Dems ammunition.

 

miroslav

Cosmic Cowboy
To be absolute up front: The Republicans in 2016 did say "We won't have a vote because it's an election year." Which is BS. They didn't vote because the branches were divided. In that respect, they gave the Dems ammunition.

It may seem like a fine line...but it comes down to the Senate and the President being of the same party at the time.
When the Reps didn't vote in 2016...Obama was not on their side, and lets face it, Obama and the Dems locked the Reps out of many things during his 8 years, and Obama used many executive orders to circumvent the Reps...so them not voting was the right thing to do.

Now we have a Rep President and Rep Senate...so it's a different situation...and the Dems know this. If it was the other way around, they would do exactly the same thing and rush someone into the SC before the election for fear of losing that opportunity.

It's not even a debatable point...and the Dems know this, but they will throw up as many arguments because they want that SC nomination...assuming Biden wins and they also get the Senate.

If Biden wins and they don't get the Senate...I'm sure the Reps wouldn't "Bork" every Dem nominee...or pull the ridiculous stunts like the Dems did with Kavanaugh.
Of course...it will be another "Hillary surprise" when Trump wins again, and they also keep the Senate and get a few House seats back. :)
 

Supercreep

Lizard People
It really just comes down to the exercise of political power. Republicans are confirming a justice because they can. Democrats would do it if they could. All of the reasons given by republicans regarding Garland were just sophistry.
 

DM60

Well-known member
It may seem like a fine line...but it comes down to the Senate and the President being of the same party at the time.
When the Reps didn't vote in 2016...Obama was not on their side, and lets face it, Obama and the Dems locked the Reps out of many things during his 8 years, and Obama used many executive orders to circumvent the Reps...so them not voting was the right thing to do.

Now we have a Rep President and Rep Senate...so it's a different situation...and the Dems know this. If it was the other way around, they would do exactly the same thing and rush someone into the SC before the election for fear of losing that opportunity.

It's not even a debatable point...and the Dems know this, but they will throw up as many arguments because they want that SC nomination...assuming Biden wins and they also get the Senate.

If Biden wins and they don't get the Senate...I'm sure the Reps wouldn't "Bork" every Dem nominee...or pull the ridiculous stunts like the Dems did with Kavanaugh.
Of course...it will be another "Hillary surprise" when Trump wins again, and they also keep the Senate and get a few House seats back. :)

To expand this a bit, for Obama, the Reps still controlled the senate. Mitch knew his nomination wasn't going to get through, plain and simple so why bother? What was the point since it was an election year and it wasn't going to happen until after the election. If the Dems had of won, then they the Republicans then would have had to vote on a nomination. So they waited.

Now, back to your point, they have the senate, they have the WH, and they have the opportunity. Why wouldn't they put who they want in?

This opportunity doesn't come along that often and based on the age of everyone Samuel Alito being 70, might be awhile.
 
Top