McConnell: I'd fill a SCOTUS vacancy during 2020 election

[jj22]

(05-29-2019, 09:10 AM)Au165 Wrote: I simply keep saying, all of this will come back to bite the GOP someday.

No it won't. Stealing the SCOTUS seat was the most unconsitutional scheme ever by Republicans, and Americans didn't mind at all. Americans let Republicans get away with corruption and unethical stuff all the time. They only hold Dems to high standards.

No American regardless of party should have applauded such move. We have a constitution for a reason.

Let's rewind when Dems took the nuclear option with judges. They were painted as lawless so much in the 2014 election they lost the Senate. Americans didn't not allow for that game, and Dems paid the ultimate price.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-29-2019, 11:48 AM)GMDino Wrote: I shouldn't answer but you said elsewhere people shouldn't answer if they don't want to in case it might get them in trouble.




But no, I didn't specify it was a the absolutely worst site ever in the history of politics.  God you're hilarious in your attempts to demean me!  I almost wish I cared sometimes!  It would at least make your efforts worth it for you.  

Anything on What MM had to say?  Or would you rather tell me about me some more?  

I don't read tripe from such sites.  In regards to "attempts to demean you", those would only be successful (if they even existed) if you did something questionable.  These posts aren't for you, btw, they're for anyone else who otherwise might take your asinine source seriously. 

(05-29-2019, 12:09 PM)Benton Wrote: If you'd said Second, I'd agree. But, mostly, it's been the far right working to dismantle the first. I'd go into detail, but I'm running late to pick up my kid from her school mandated Bible class. It's the one that replaced biology in this year's curriculum.

I'd say both, but I also think the locations in this country in which we reside affect this perception.

[Au165]

(05-29-2019, 12:18 PM)jj22 Wrote: No it won't. Stealing the SCOTUS seat was the most unconsitutional scheme ever by Republicans, and Americans didn't mind at all. Americans let Republicans get away with corruption and unethical stuff all the time. They only hold Dems to high standards.

No American regardless of party should have applauded such move. We have a constitution for a reason.

Turnabout will be fair play. In the end some of the lines that have been crossed by this administration will be held up as precedent when democrats will eventually use similar mechanisms to push past political norms. I'm not applauding it, I'm saying nothing will happen about no but they will reap what the sow. 

[jj22]

They won't. You don't get the dynamics of American Politics.

Americans hold Dems to higher standards. They get accused (just accused) of doing what Republicans themselves do open to the public, and that is enough to end their political chances.

Until Americans hold Republicans/Dems equal, Dems will never be able to get away with what Americans allow Republicans to.

[*bfine32*]

What Mitch did in 2016 was wrong, he should have let obama's nominee be considered. If there is an opening in 2020 the ones that screamed the hardest about the act in 2016 will be the same ones screaming the hardest that the exact same thing should be done.

The dynamic that is SCOTUS makes it hard to come up with the right answer. I miss the days of my innocence when I thought justice was blind. We all know that they are as partisan as the people who nominate them.

Perhaps we could go to National elections for replacements. The minority and majority leaders each nominate a candidate, each candidate is vetted "kavanaugh style" by congress, and then the Nation votes.

[*michaelsean*]

(05-29-2019, 12:18 PM)jj22 Wrote: No it won't. Stealing the SCOTUS seat was the most unconsitutional scheme ever by Republicans, and Americans didn't mind at all. Americans let Republicans get away with corruption and unethical stuff all the time. They only hold Dems to high standards.

No American regardless of party should have applauded such move. We have a constitution for a reason.

Let's rewind when Dems took the nuclear option with judges. They were painted as lawless so much in the 2014 election they lost the Senate. Americans didn't not allow for that game, and Dems paid the ultimate price.

It was low, but not unconstitutional.  

You do know the Republicans just lost the House right?  

[jj22]

(05-29-2019, 12:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What Mitch did in 2016 was wrong, he should have let obama's nominee be considered. If there is an opening in 2020 the ones that screamed the hardest about the act in 2016 will be the same ones screaming the hardest that the exact same thing should be done.

Only because of what happened to Obama. A stolen seat that will be felt for 20 years. We never screamed for that to happen before (it never has). We've always respected the constitutional rights of a POTUS to nominate a candidate for SCOTUS. Always.

[jj22]

(05-29-2019, 01:02 PM)michaelsean Wrote: It was low, but not unconstitutional.  

You do know the Republicans just lost the House right?  

Not because of the Senate's actions. They gained Senate seats after this.

Maybe Dems didn't do a good enough job painting them as lawless like what happened to them in 2014. But going off of past, Americans probably wouldn't have cared as long as it wasn't the Dems.

[*michaelsean*]

(05-29-2019, 01:07 PM)jj22 Wrote: Only because of what happened to Obama. A stolen seat that will be felt for 20 years. We never screamed for that to happen before (it never has). We've always respected the constitutional rights of a POTUS to nominate a candidate for SCOTUS. Always.

We?  I thought you weren't Democrat or Republican.  

[jj22]

I'm an American.

But I would be supportive of no SCOTUS pick voted on in the last term because of what happened to Obama. So add me in with those who would be all for it now after being against it when it happened to Obama.

[*michaelsean*]

(05-29-2019, 01:09 PM)jj22 Wrote: Not because of the Senate's actions. They gained Senate seats after this.

Maybe Dems didn't do a good enough job painting them as lawless like what happened to them in 2014. But going off of past, Americans probably wouldn't have cared as long as it wasn't the Dems.

No but Republicans were held accountable in the House, and I'm guessing there was more to the Dems losing the Senate than the nuclear option.  

[jj22]

No it was the nuclear option that painted them as lawless through that election cycle under Harry Reid.

[*michaelsean*]

(05-29-2019, 01:13 PM)jj22 Wrote: No it was the nuclear option that painted them as lawless through that election cycle under Harry Reid.

Do you have anything that corroborates that, because I've never heard anyone say that was why they lost.  The Senate's been going back and forth for a long time.  

EDIT: I think Dems had like twice as many senate seats up as Republicans, and they still gained.

[hollodero]

(05-29-2019, 11:23 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: When I look at the anti-liberal (in the classic sense of the term) shifts in the UK and Europe, where people are arrested and even jailed for having the wrong opinions or "misgendering" someone

No one gets jailed in Europe for misgendering someone.

If I'm wrong, I'd need proof :)

[*michaelsean*]

(05-29-2019, 01:58 PM)hollodero Wrote: No one gets jailed in Europe for misgendering someone.

If I'm wrong, I'd need proof :)

A fine?

[CJD]

(05-29-2019, 11:38 AM)GMDino Wrote: And we as voters need to stop this.

Much as I say about Trump, we can't just shrug our shoulders and say "eh" when we KNOW what is happening is wrong.

Republicans will not stop voting for a Republican who puts Republican interests above his own integrity. 

So the only way to stop this is to get a democratic challenger to beat McConnell in Kentucky.

And to that, I say "Good luck."

Kentucky has 6 representatives and 2 Senators. Of the 8 positions, only 1 is a Democrat. The Representative from the district of Louisville.

It'd be like getting Bengals fans to vote against the Bengals winning, even if it is by "shady means."

[hollodero]

(05-29-2019, 02:15 PM)michaelsean Wrote: A fine?

Under everyday circumstances, I'm pretty sure no. Under extraordinary circumstances, I'd still guess no. Should you publish something like all transgenders need to be gassed, you might be in trouble. In lesser instances, you're just deeemed an a-hole, like in the US.

[--- I am obviously not correct on that one, at least regarding the UK. So I edit the rest away for not looking too foolish :) Maybe it's time to emigrate]

[Vas Deferens]

(05-29-2019, 12:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'd say both, but I also think the locations in this country in which we reside affect this perception.

On the other hand, you probably won't have to sign away your right to boycott specific establishments as a state employee.  Would hate for the GOP to get in your wallet.  

[hollodero]

(05-29-2019, 12:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If there is an opening in 2020 the ones that screamed the hardest about the act in 2016 will be the same ones screaming the hardest that the exact same thing should be done.

Would they be wrong?

I'd say Mitch established a principle, he should absolutely be personally held to said principle. Now I'm sure not naive, I know it never was about principle. But if you anticipatory slam Democrats for probably screaming, you demand that they stay fair and just swallow the losses that come with that. And in that instance I get those who say Dems are held to a higher standard. While conservatives have bragging rights for filling a stolen seat and people call it "winning". (I'm aware you call it "wrong", so no slam towards you, but you're a minority among conservatives)

And that's politics. Whoever plays dirtier wins, whoever does not get just as dirty loses, full stop, there is no fairness trophy. At least that's the case with a loyal voter base that does not care.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-29-2019, 01:58 PM)hollodero Wrote: No one gets jailed in Europe for misgendering someone.

If I'm wrong, I'd need proof :)

It's considered a hate crime now at least in Britain.

A 38-year-old British mother was arrested in front of her children and locked up for seven hours after referring to a transgender woman as a man online.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2019/02/british-woman-arrested-for-misgendering-trans-activist-on-social-media/

The case is the latest where police have been accused of being heavy-handed in dealing with people who go online to debate gender issues.




https://spectator.us/misgendering-child-british-journalist/
misgendering’? One British journalist is about to find out

Here we go again. Another woman in Britain is facing a police investigation – and potentially, a jail sentence – because she wrote things online about sex, gender and a person who changed gender.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/02/23/teacher-accused-misgendering-child-told-police-committed-hate/

Teacher accused of 'misgendering' child was told by police that she committed a hate crime.

Didn't lead to jail time that I'm aware of, but another instance in a school.


Joshua Sutcliffe, from Oxford, says he was investigated after he said "well done girls" to a group that included a student who identifies as a boy.

The 27-year-old Christian pastor is now suing the school for constructive dismissal and discrimination.