A SCOTUS Opening

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2020, 03:38 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This discussion is silly.  You made a mistake, just own it an move on.

I fully expect the population that gave Brad a hard time about his "Is Biden a Mexican" thread to soon chime in and chastise Fred in similar fashion.



No I don't

[*PhilHos*]

(09-21-2020, 03:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I fully expect the population that gave Brad a hard time about his "Is Biden a Mexican" thread to soon chime in and chastise Fred in similar fashion.

Same here.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

Trump made multiple racist attacks against an American judge's integrity, Gonzalo Curiel, because he was "Mexican" even though he was born in Indiana.

[Dill]

(09-21-2020, 01:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Obviously there's a thread going on about the passing of RBG and I didn't what to hijack it anyone with internal squabbling. So I started this thread to discuss who you think POTUS would/should nominate and all the shady shit that will go down during it.

Mightn't the "shady shit" already be here if McConnell promises to confirm a new appointee before the election?


 McConnell and Graham argued they were establishing a precedent during Obama's last year in office--"let the voters decide"! 

Settle the matter of appointment by allowing the American people to elect a president in the upcoming election.

Now we have an unpopular president up for re-election, trailing 7-9 points in the polls, so the criterion is the 2018 election.

"The American people" decided back then that they wanted a Senate to work WITH Trump, not be a check ON him. McConnell is going to do what the people intended.

And Lindsay wholly supports him. 

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2020, 04:37 PM)Dill Wrote: Mightn't the "shady shit" already be here if McConnell promises to confirm a new appointee before the election?


 McConnell and Graham argued they were establishing a precedent during Obama's last year in office--"let the voters decide"! 

Settle the matter of appointment by allowing the American people to elect a president in the upcoming election.

Now we have an unpopular president up for re-election, trailing 7-9 points in the polls, so the criterion is the 2018 election.

"The American people" decided back then that they wanted a Senate to work WITH Trump, not be a check ON him. McConnell is going to do what the people intended.

And Lindsay wholly supports him. 

I was against not considering Garland and I'll be against not considering a Trump nomination. I can look in the mirror and honestly say I feel the same for both. It'll be up to Mitch, Graham, Schumer, Biden, ect... to determine if they can do the same

IMO we elect POTUS for 4-yr terms

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

There is a saying, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

"The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president." -Mitch McConnell 2016

Here's the definition for some folks . . . https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/what%27s%20good%20for%20the%20goose%20is%20good%20for%20the%20gander

Basically, treat similar situations similarly.  Except in this case, Mitch McConnell is the goose and the gander who is treating the same situation differently.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-supreme-court-vacancy-election-year-senate/

[*bfine32*]

2016

https://www.newsweek.com/biden-2016-president-has-constitutional-duty-nominate-supreme-court-justice-even-months-1533106

Quote:"I made it absolutely clear that I would go forward with a confirmation process as [Senate Judiciary] chairman, even a few months before a presidential election, if the nominee were chosen with the advice, and not merely the consent, of the Senate, just as the Constitution requires," Biden told attendees of a Georgetown Law School event in 2016.

"The Senate will need to fulfill its constitutional responsibility by considering, debating and voting on that nominee," the then-vice president wrote in the March 2016 Times op-ed, which detailed the rule named after him decades earlier. "My purpose was not to obstruct, but to call for two important goals: restoring a more consultative process between the White House and the Senate in filling Supreme Court vacancies, and encouraging the nomination of a consensus candidate who could lower the partisan temperature in the country."

2020
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/20/biden-says-senate-should-honor-ginsburgs-dying-wish-and-not-vote-on-nominee-before-election.html

Quote:“If Trump wants to put forward a name now, the Senate should not act until after the American people select their next president, their next Congress, their next Senate,” Biden said.

“To jam this nomination through the Senate is just an exercise in raw political power. And I don’t believe the people of this nation will stand for it,” he said.

IMO Biden is in a lose, lose. Trump cannot be accused of hypocrisy in this matter. The worst thing he can do is exactly what Obama did: Nominate a candidate.

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2020, 03:38 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This discussion is silly.  You made a mistake, just own it an move on.

I did not make any mistake.

You mentioned Trump nominating a "Hispanic" judge.

I pointed out that Trump said he could not trust a Mexican judge.  A Mexican judge is a Hispanic judge.

We are both talking about a Hispanic judge.

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2020, 04:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Trump cannot be accused of hypocrisy in this matter. The worst thing he can do is exactly what Obama did: Nominate a candidate.

Correct.  The Senators are the hypocrites, not Trump.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-21-2020, 05:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I did not make any mistake.

You mentioned Trump nominating a "Hispanic" judge.

I pointed out that Trump said he could not trust a Mexican judge.  A Mexican judge is a Hispanic judge.

We are both talking about a Hispanic judge.

Like I said, silly.

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2020, 05:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I did not make any mistake.

You mentioned Trump nominating a "Hispanic" judge.

I pointed out that Trump said he could not trust a Mexican judge.  A Mexican judge is a Hispanic judge.

We are both talking about a Hispanic judge.

Nah, you just showed your ignorance of the difference between Mexican and Cuban cultures. 

Personally, I would have just accepted that I made a mistake, 

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2020, 03:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I fully expect the population that gave Brad a hard time about his "Is Biden a Mexican" thread to soon chime in and chastise Fred in similar fashion.

No I don't

Actually they all realize that I did not make the same mistake Brad did.

He called a Puerto Rican a Mexican.

I called a Mexican and a Cuban both Hispanic.

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2020, 05:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nah, you just showed your ignorance of the difference between Mexican and Cuban cultures. 

Personally, I would have just accepted that I made a mistake, 

I made no mistake.  They are both Hispanic.  SSF and I were both talking about Hispanic judges.


But If you want to get into the discussion about why Trump will trust Cubans judges but not Mexicans judges I am all ears.

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2020, 05:04 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Like I said, silly.

Silly to accuse me of making a mistake that I didn't.

You don't deny that you were talking about Hispanic judges.

And you don't deny that Mexicans are Hispanic.

Case closed.

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2020, 05:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I made no mistake.  They are both Hispanic.  SSF and I were both talking about Hispanic judges.


But If you want to get into the discussion about why Trump will trust Cubans judges but not Mexicans judges I am all ears.

Hey, I said you made no mistake, just showed your ignorance in the difference in cultures.
Hell, even Biden knows the difference:

Quote:Speaking virtually on Thursday to the National Association of Latino Elected Officials conference, the former VP vowed that his administration will reflect "the full diversity of this nation" as well as "the full diversity of the Latino communities."


"Now what I mean full diversity, unlike the African American community and many other communities, you're from everywhere," Biden explained. "You're from Europe, from the tip of South America, all the way to our border in Mexico, and the Caribbean. And different backgrounds, different ethnicities, but all Latinos. We're gonna get a chance to do that if we win in November."

[Dill]

(09-21-2020, 04:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I was against not considering Garland and I'll be against not considering a Trump nomination. I can look in the mirror and honestly say I feel the same for both. It'll be up to Mitch, Graham, Schumer, Biden, ect... to determine if they can do the same

IMO we elect POTUS for 4-yr terms

The issue is not whether Trump is right to nominate.

The issue is whether the Senate majority leader has used a double standard to deny one president a rightful appointment--with the support of his party.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-21-2020, 05:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually they all realize that I did not make the same mistake Brad did.

He called a Puerto Rican a Mexican.

I called a Mexican and a Cuban both Hispanic.

Brad called a song "Mexican" then claimed Biden was pandering to Mexicans who are actually American voters with a Mexican song that wasn't actually Mexican.

You claimed Trump stated Mexican judges can't trusted, which isn't exactly what Trump said, but it's the gist of what he meant.  Also, you never specified Barbara Logoa as the "Mexican" judge which Trump was referring to when he made his racist comments.

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2020, 05:25 PM)Dill Wrote: The issue is not whether Trump is right to nominate.

The issue is whether the Senate majority leader has used a double standard to deny one president a rightful appointment--with the support of his party.

True. But couldn't another issue be a candidate for POTUS using a double standard on the matter-with the support of his party?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-21-2020, 05:25 PM)Dill Wrote: The issue is not whether Trump is right to nominate.

The issue is whether the Senate majority leader has used a double standard to deny one president a rightful appointment--with the support of his party.

He gets it.

[CJD]

(09-21-2020, 01:40 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The smart pick for Trump would be Lagoa.  She's been heavily vetted numerous times, so no skeletons in the closet likely to crop up.  She's been a bench officer for a long time so experience isn't an issue.  She's also Hispanic and I think the nomination would seal Florida for Trump.  She'd also be extremely difficult for the Dems to attack for all the reasons just listed.

I thought Republicans did not like Identity Politics