This sounds an awful lot like a single party dictatorship in lieu of a Republic.But now, Trump might be inspired to pick an extreme candidate,
knowing that he'd get his way without Dem cooperation.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
This sounds an awful lot like a single party dictatorship in lieu of a Republic.But now, Trump might be inspired to pick an extreme candidate,
knowing that he'd get his way without Dem cooperation.
Not all of us are that partisan. You and the rest like you keep blaming the Democrats or Obama for the actions taken by the Republicans and Trump.Hmmmmm......
From what you say, it seems the Dems might've shot themselves in the foot.
Had they given Gorsuch a few votes, they'd still have the super majority voting
standard. But now, Trump might be inspired to pick an extreme candidate,
knowing that he'd get his way without Dem cooperation.
You have a low threshold for determining dictatorship status.This sounds an awful lot like a single party dictatorship in lieu of a Republic.
As you have mentioned many times, Trump is just getting started. Give him time.You have a low threshold for determining dictatorship status.
I say it's not a dictatorship until he can legally ban unflattering pix.
Russia bans 'extremist' picture of Vladimir Putin as a gay clown
<snicker>Not all of us are that partisan.
I'm not blaming them any more than the Pubs.You and the rest like you keep blaming the Democrats or Obama for the actions taken by the Republicans and Trump.
I agree with you -- what goes around comes around. One day (as is always the case in politics) the other side will be in control, and then the side that just invoked the "nuclear option" to suit their own purposes will scream "unfair!!!!" That would be (make that will be) a classic example of "hoist by their own petard."We should remember that what goes around comes around.
Frankly, I have never been a fan of the filibuster and the cloture rule.
Sure, but from what I understand, they are attempting to circumvent a bipartisan process because they understand that is the only way they are willing to succeed. That makes me uneasy in any context.You have a low threshold for determining dictatorship status.
I say it's not a dictatorship until he can legally ban unflattering pix.
Russia bans 'extremist' picture of Vladimir Putin as a gay clown
You begin to understand!As you have mentioned many times, Trump is just getting started. Give him time.
Tom
Actually, the simple majority has been the standard in the past.Sure, but from what I understand, they are attempting to circumvent a bipartisan process because they understand that is the only way they are willing to succeed. That makes me uneasy in any context.
This is not the past. Trump just lost the election by millions and turned down the bipartisan nominee because a Democratic president nominated him.Actually, the simple majority has been the standard in the past.
This isn't all that extreme a measure.
Nuclear option - Wikipedia
If Trump lost the election, then the Democrats must beThis is not the past. Trump just lost the election by millions and turned down the bipartisan nominee because a Democratic president nominated him.
With all the current and future investigations into his methods and entanglements looming a compromised court could be a huge liability to the country. And the Republicans know that.
Tom
And Obama? What about his nominee?And under the laws & rules, he's getting his nominee.
I agree that the Democrats are lame. But this thread is about the need to change the rules in order for the Republicans and Trump to get their guy on the bench. Unlike Garland.If Trump lost the election, then the Democrats must be
incredibly lame sheep to allow him to get sworn in as Prez.
But I think you're in error on this. Trump won.
And under the laws & rules, he's getting his nominee.
Dems & Pubs both use the system to get what they want.
And they each have varying degrees of success.
Under the rules, Obama didn't.And Obama? What about his nominee?
I agree there's no need.I agree that the Democrats are lame. But this thread is about the need to change the rules in order for the Republicans and Trump to get their guy on the bench. Unlike Garland.
Tom
At least you are able to acknowledge the Irony and hypocrisy of the situation. Then again, that's politics.Under the rules, Obama didn't.
I never said things were fair.
They just are what they are.
Twice.I agree there's no need.
But they did it anyway.
I just stand back & watch....not rooting for or against Gorsuch.At least you are able to acknowledge the Irony and hypocrisy of the situation. Then again, that's politics.
Let me get this straight....Tw
Twice.
The first time was when they refused a vote on Garland.
Tom
.