Carl
RIP Brother
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 1,372
What is Pat Bowlen's wifes' name.Ah, I see, it's different when you do it, because reasons.
You're proving me right so you carry on.
What is Pat Bowlen's wifes' name.Ah, I see, it's different when you do it, because reasons.
You're proving me right so you carry on.
Because they don't want him to. Simple as that.Anthony Kennedy was appointed by a lame duck Reagan, so I just cannot wait to hear why Obama can't do so as well.
A lame duck, in politics, is an elected official who is approaching the end of their tenure.- WikiReagan was a lame duck now? Good lord.
Hard to say. There will be a major skirmish but the GOP will not lay down for a liberal candidate at that position.Right. So what happens next in your opinion? Does the President get his nominee through?
Why not? It's not like the Supreme Court just shuts down in the mean time.No chance Congresscan put offa new nominee for 300 days.
And what happens in a tie? Doesn't it go to the circuit judges which is heavily democratic? You want to think the GOP will want to risk that for a year?Why not? It's not like the Supreme Court just shuts down in the mean time.
What's the difference if Obama gets his liberal Justice? The result would be the same. Better to have a chance a year from now then doom until the next Supreme Court Justice passes away.And what happens in a tie? Doesn't it go to the circuit judges which is heavily democratic? You want to think the GOP will want to risk that for a year?
Because Reagan is a much better leader and President. I'd agree that the new president should name his replacement.Anthony Kennedy was appointed by a lame duck Reagan, so I just cannot wait to hear why Obama can't do so as well.
Yes, hopefully it is Bernie.Because Reagan is a much better leader and President. I'd agree that the new president should name his replacement.
If I remember correctly the circuit court ruling is upheld and no precedent is set. It's not the end of the world and probably wouldn't even come up that much considering Roberts is a swinger.And what happens in a tie? Doesn't it go to the circuit judges which is heavily democratic? You want to think the GOP will want to risk that for a year?
I understand the sentiment: essentially waiting for the next president to nominate the new justice would indirectly give the voters a chance to have a say in the appointment.Because Reagan is a much better leader and President. I'd agree that the new president should name his replacement.
What it comes down to, is whether Obama can come up with a compromise candidate or will he just demand that they accept a radical activist?I understand the sentiment: essentially waiting for the next president to nominate the new justice would indirectly give the voters a chance to have a say in the appointment.
But, I disagree with that. Voters made that choice already when they elected Obama in 2012. He was given the authority to make these types of decisions for the next 4 years, which includes 2016.
The Senate has the right to disagree with any nominations they don't like, but they shouldn't be holding the whole thing up hoping a republican will be in office a year from now.
I'm pretty sure it was 87 not 88, which makes a difference. Democrats also fought the Bork appointment tooth and nail, and Reagan had to turn to Kennedy (or Roberts, I forget which).Reagan was a lame duck now? Good lord.
What it comes down to, is whether Obama can come up with a compromise candidate or will he just demand that they accept a radical activist?
I believe Roberts was a candidate of the George W. Bush administration.I'm pretty sure it was 87 not 88, which makes a difference. Democrats also fought the Bork appointment tooth and nail, and Reagan had to turn to Kennedy (or Roberts, I forget which).
that's the best play for the republicans, and the population. There's very little chance for a good justice from either set of candidates. Obama trying to continue his legacy through his lame duck year is going to come up with a better bargain than any recently inaugurated president high on their first 100 days and a perceived mandate.I think that's right. A lot of people seem to be missing that point. The republicans may be posturing to try to get a more moderate appointee. Because worst case scenario is they hold up the nomination, the democrats win a majority in the Senate and the presidency, and the republicans are totally screwed with a very far left justice (especially if Sanders wins). And the next president could easily be appointing another 2 or more.
It makes a lot of sense to just comprise and find a relatively moderate justice and let him through.