The Democrats are in trouble because of the Supreme Court nomination

[Revoltingest]

Our wars have been won by men citing For God and Country. I doubt many will be won by citing "FOR MAXINE WATERS".

Country....worth defending.
God & Maxine Waters...2 of the least defenseworthy individuals around these days.

 

[columbus]

Just curious, did you feel the same way when Obama (or any other President in our history) nominated his Supreme Court Justice choices?

Do you remember Merrick Garland?
He had previously been put up for nomination by Republicans. When Obama nominated him, they played hard core partisan politics and refused to even vote.
Demonstrating to anybody who cares that all the Republicans really care about is their party, not the USA.
Again.

Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you remember Merrick Garland?
He had previously been put up for nomination by Republicans. When Obama nominated him, they played hard core partisan politics and refused to even vote.
Demonstrating to anybody who cares that all the Republicans really care about is their party, not the USA.
Again.

Tom

Wait....you mean to tell me that parties will
play tricks to stack the SCOTUS with their ilk?
And that the Republicans do this too?
I am shocked, I tell you...shocked!

 

[columbus]

Wait....you mean to tell me that parties will
play tricks to stack the SCOTUS with their ilk?
And that the Republicans do this too?
I am shocked, I tell you...shocked!

How was Garland "of their ilk"? He had previously been put up for nomination by Republicans.
So show me a similar episode, from the Democrats. One where they rearranged the process of SCOTUS appointments for partisan purposes.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

How was Garland "of their ilk"? He had previously been put up for nomination by Republicans.
So show me a similar episode, from the Democrats. One where they rearranged the process of SCOTUS appointments for partisan purposes.
Tom

Did I say every appointment was significantly partisan?
No.
But they so often are.

Btw, in the movie, Deadpool 2, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a candidate for Deadpool's X-Force team.
(That one should earn me an <informative> frubal.)

 

[columbus]

Did I say every appointment was significantly partisan?
No.
But they so often are.

Is that your response to my question?

So show me a similar episode, from the Democrats.

I take it that means that you can't think of an episode so transparently partisan and unConstitutional?
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Is that your response to my question?

Yes.

I take it that means that you can't think of an episode so transparently partisan and unConstitutional?
Tom

What part of the Constitution is being violated?

 

[Phantasman]

Yeah I am sure God takes sides in petty human wars.

It's funny, every nation claims God is on their side in war, it's laughable.

BTW
Dying for your country, is not noble, it's foolish.

Thank God and the men who died that you can even say that. There's many who can't.

See it as you will.

 

[Phantasman]

Country....worth defending.
God & Maxine Waters...2 of the least defenseworthy individuals around these days.

A minority thought...my friend.

 

[`mud]

Who thinks Trump is going to stick to the approved list of four ?
Any guesses before the doom of fate lowers ?
It could be Lee or that Jeanne pseudo judge !
Surprise or not ?

 

[Mox]

Thank God and the men who died that you can even say that. There's many who can't.

See it as you will.

I see any glorification of war as distasteful.

 

[columbus]

What part of the Constitution is being violated?

There's nothing in the Constitution about waiting until the next election before voting on the President's SCOTUS nominee.
And then there's the deep irony of waiting until "The People" have spoken, and Clinton got more votes than Trump by millions, and yet Trump nominated someone who is now on SCOTUS. The People spoke and were ignored in favor of Republican partisanship.
Tom

 

[Riders]

But we will get even mid time election November!

 

[tytlyf]

I think the founding fathers would be rolling in their graves from a lot of what the liberals are wanting. Taxes being one. Over extension Government control being another. Lowering taxes and eliminating job killing regulations make them rest better, for sure

Nonsense. More RW talking points repeated by every conservative. Do you know what the separation of church and state is?

Our wars have been won by men citing For God and Country. I doubt many will be won by citing "FOR MAXINE WATERS".

? Wow, Fox is an entertainment outlet, it's not news.

Does it anger you that the original Pledge of Allegiance didn't have 'under god' in it?

 

[columbus]

But we will get even mid time election November!

Is that kinda like the 2016 election where Clinton had a 90% chance of winning?
Then the BernieBros voted to let Trump take office because Clinton was so evil and establishment?

Leftist purists are the Republican's best allies. And I rather expect the combination of Deplorables and BernieBros to result in Trump getting a solid vote of confidence in November.
Tom

 

[BSM1]

Do you remember Merrick Garland?
He had previously been put up for nomination by Republicans. When Obama nominated him, they played hard core partisan politics and refused to even vote.
Demonstrating to anybody who cares that all the Republicans really care about is their party, not the USA.
Again.

Tom

Not even close to what this conversation was about...

 

[columbus]

Not even close to what this conversation was about...

You don't think that this conversation is about Supreme Court nominations?
Oh, that's right. You're a deplorable Trump supporter. You don't think that facts matter.
I forgot. My deepest apologies.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

There's nothing in the Constitution about waiting until the next election before voting on the President's SCOTUS nominee.
And then there's the deep irony of waiting until "The People" have spoken, and Clinton got more votes than Trump by millions, and yet Trump nominated someone who is now on SCOTUS. The People spoke and were ignored in favor of Republican partisanship.
Tom

Politics is full of irony & hypocrisy.
But neither is inherently unconstitutional.
So what's the basis for the claim?

 

[Shad]

There's nothing in the Constitution about waiting until the next election before voting on the President's SCOTUS nominee.

There are a lot of loopholes regarding nominees, reviews and voting in general. Dems are playing the same card now.

 

[metis]

I believe that it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that Trump will get his nominee through if it's any of the four he's mentioned.