@shavixmir saidwell thought out and articulated comment
It is McConnell’s fault.
The ugly turtle is a blatant hypocrite and very dangerous man.
@no1marauder saidmcconnel only followed reids rule changes
And let's face it; IF McConnell hadn't pulled that partisan stunt with the Garland nomination, there wouldn't be a serious talk about expanding the SCOTUS or any real objection to a vote on a Trump nominee before the next inauguration.
@kevcvs57 saidelections have consequences
Well they can’t just let the republicans set all the precedent’s can they.
Trump and the republicans have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are opportunistic liars.
Just keep packing the SCOTUS until it becomes unwieldy and irrelevant. Better that than an unrepresentative yoke on the shoulders of the majority.
@mott-the-hoople saidSo do actions, elections come around every four years but you can only lose the your good name once.
elections have consequences
1 edit
@no1marauder saidA creative alternative: if the Democrats control Congress and the Presidency, they should legislate a mandatory retirement age of 70 for Supreme Court justices. They'd immediately be in a position to replace two conservative jurists (Thomas and Alito) and would need to replace only one liberal justice (Breyer). The Democratic President would still be in power to nominate Sotomayer's successor in 2024, ensuring that a liberal justice retained that seat; if the Democrats win in that year, they could replace another conservative, Roberts, too.
And the Democrats if they control Congress and the Presidency could and should increase the number of seats on the SCOTUS. If the Republicans get the chance to do so in the future and they do it, so what?
1 edit
@mott-the-hoople saidElections have results !!
elections have consequences
What are you implying by “consequences” ?
That a certain election result can lead to consequences ?
A certain Roger Stone voiced his opinion about a week or so back.
“If Trump loses in November, he should declare martial law and arrest some of his opponents”.
I believe that was the message of his comment.
That it was on Infowars with Alex Jones, which doesn’t qualify as a media outlet, is beside the point.
Is that the consequence you were implying ?
1 edit
@earl-of-trumps saidNo evidence they wouldn’t, but we now know for a fact that republicants are not prepared too. Even though they said they believed that in 2016.
so I wonder if the democrat dictators would consider letting the people vote on packing the SJC.
Yeah, right. note----->dictators<--------democrats.
And anyway if the democrats win in November the people will have voted on it.
@earl-of-trumps saidMaybe we should let them vote for the President first.
so I wonder if the democrat dictators would consider letting the people vote on packing the SJC.
Yeah, right. note----->dictators<--------democrats.
@mghrn55 saidI was quoting hussein obama...
Elections have results !!
What are you implying by “consequences” ?
That a certain election result can lead to consequences ?
A certain Roger Stone voiced his opinion about a week or so back.
“If Trump loses in November, he should declare martial law and arrest some of his opponents”.
I believe that was the message of his comment.
That it was on Infowars with Alex J ...[text shortened]... esn’t qualify as a media outlet, is beside the point.
Is that the consequence you were implying ?
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eight-years-ago-obama-told-republicans-that-elections_b_58e46f57e4b09dbd42f3dbc0