Resident_UA
Member
Seriously? You've learned nothing from what happened over the past few years? None of this matters. This is how politics work. Just ask Republicans. None of what they did made any sense, but it got them to control everything!
Democrats filibuster Gorsuch nomination, GOP triggers "nuclear option"
- Thread starter DOWN
- Start date
- Status
Seriously? You've learned nothing from what happened over the past few years? None of this matters. This is how politics work. Just ask Republicans. None of what they did made any sense, but it got them to control everything!
metalslimer
Member
And if the senate wouldnt go nuclear no matter who the pick is
People really think the republicans have any integrity lol? Gorsuch is not a good pick.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
Most of the GOP are just trolls and are trying to get under peoples skin while they know what they are doing and they don't give a shit. They are horrible people.
sunshine and gasoline
Banned
Full steam ahead, Dems.
Is this guy actually serious? How can you be so hypocritical and not see it?
Of course he sees it. He doesn't care.
Epsilon-delta
Banned
Good will, or something. We all just need to work together! The last thing Democrats need is to look bad while The Pussy Grabber Russian Collaborator Racist Take away your insurance, party is in charge.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
That's what the "nuclear option" is.
Remember that the standing situation for the last decade has been "don't use the filibuster or we'll get rid of the filibuster".
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
what does political cover mean? last year proved that procedural abuse when it comes to the supreme court has no traction with the electorate; so suppose gorsuch passed, and then RBG died next year, and then Trump nominated Don Jr. to the Supreme Court, why do you think Republicans would have less political cover to act then, given that a) the seat is worth infinitely more than this one, and b) their base cares more about results than procedure?
benicillin
Banned
Because then Democrats can do the same thing in the future. It's giving themselves one less tool in the future just to force Gorsuch through.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
There is zero upside. Dems are simply doing what they can to show any kind of resistance they can. This entire situation has been a shit sandwich ever since Republicans betrayed the integrity of their office by blocking Garland's vote.
Whompa02
Member
You're assuming Republicans have foresight, which categorically they've shown to have very little of.
There is nothing to be gained from supporting Gorsuch. Quite the opposite.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
It will. Republicans will pass laws once the filibuster laws go down and dramatically change the country and thats the way it should be. If they control all three branches of government then they deserve to change it to whatever they like. that's democracy.
Maybe this will convince the idiot liberals who stay home on midterms or voted third party against Hillary to actually pay attention. it's like that woman who had her illegal husband sent back to mexico. Liberals wont learn until shit actually starts affecting them.
It's also worth noting that Democrats tried to make a deal where if they let Gorsuch through, Republicans wouldn't kill the filibuster for the next nomination - a way for Republicans to not fuck themselves in the ass in the future while still allowing them to get their way in regards to Gorsuch and Garland.
They didn't take it, because they are both stupid and evil.
They didn't take it, because they are both stupid and evil.
excelsiorlef
Member
Because in the future they could push through anyone anyway?
metalslimer
Member
Its only for SC nominees. At this point we need to drop the pretense that it isn't about being lucky enough to appointment your side when someone died
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
hell, in the future they could just expand the size of the supreme court to 1000 members and appoint 991 more gorsuch (not joking, nothing limits the size of the supreme court except legislation)
GoldenEye 007
Member
It's like people have memories of goldfish and keep thinking the GOP will act in good faith despite plenty of evidence against it for the last 10+ years. They've proven they don't give a shit.
This is the best move for the Dems. It sets a precedent for the future. Rollin over will accomplish nothing.
This is the best move for the Dems. It sets a precedent for the future. Rollin over will accomplish nothing.
This is not legislature. It's supreme court picks.
GOP: We'll just make a law to go around them.
thecouncil
Banned
Can you imagine the hassle to fill the seat if Hillary had won and nominated someone more liberal than Obama's pick? You can say that Republicans gambled and it paid off but they didn't really gamble. They'd have given the next nominee hell too.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Trump could nominate a conservative ham sandwich to replace Ginsburg and the GOP would do everything in its power to put it on the Court. The filibuster would never ever ever ever survive the next Court appointment, no matter what.
The only way to avoid a conservative Justice replacing a liberal one is to elect a Democratic Senate. That's it. There's nothing else that can be done.
The only way to avoid a conservative Justice replacing a liberal one is to elect a Democratic Senate. That's it. There's nothing else that can be done.
Lord Frieza
Member
When you compare him to other Trump picks he is AMAZING!!!
He's not really. I don't know where people are getting that he's not that bad of a pick. His record is sickening on several levels, and his personal views seem prettt bad, too.
GoldenEye 007
Member
How? Math doesn't allow this.
metalslimer
Member
There is no battle it will be over in a few days and gorsuch confirmed.
Also if hill had won and the Republicans kept the senate we would have never confirmed anyone
Angelus Errare
Banned
They can push through who they want regardless; I think this is the thing people are not understanding. The fillibuster for all intents and purposes is pointless and is merely symbolic.
Democrats can wait till the next nominee and fillibust that person and republicans can simply use the nuclear option and tadaa that nominee is pushed through.
Semantics really because the end result doesn't change. No matter how Democrats play this they lose. Let Gorsuch go by now, they lose support among their base, next nominee will get fillibusted, nuclear option used, nomniee appointed anyway.
Like it's near 99% certain that the next nominee will be worse than Gorsuch regardless if Democrats fillibust Gorsuch or not.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
They're not the majority so they don't control the vote.
Jeffolation
Banned
I don't see any tangible political ramifications for the democrats doing this. Happy it's being done.
Metroidvania
People called Romanes they go the house?
Well, the republicans had the majority at the time, so they could afford to actually not show up, as the dems couldn't do anything without majority i.e. call a vote.
If the dems don't show up for Gorsuch vote, since they're the minority, Repubs could just vote him in and be done with it.
Exactly, save the theatrics for a truly terrible judge. I don't agree with all of Gorsuch's rulings, but he's not the end of the world.
Exactly.
If Ginsburg, Kennedy or Breyer retire/die then the next pick is FAR more important than Gorsuch. It would allow the GOP to completely alter the court. Anyone who thinks they wouldn't immediately go nuclear is insane.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
i know. my first post talked about how this will potentially pave way for the legislative filibuster.
THIS IS A JUDICAL FILLIBUSTER REMOVAL NOT A LEGSISLATIVE FILLIBUSTER REMOVAL, GAF
THE
LEGISLATIVE
FILLIBUSTER
IS
STILL
THERE
The senate will NEVER remove the legislative filibuster since as we've seen with the AHCA, the majority party is always uncomfortable with holding the reins of power 100% of the time and having no fall back with clearly bad legislation that reveals rifts in their own party.
McConnell said:
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
It's not a battle, it's the logical, natural fallout from actions taken years ago.
Several posters in this thread are seeing this as a possible miscalculation for Dems, but I think that Gorsuch is poised to be a lifelong thorn in the side of Republican efforts to stack the court, especially if Trump is eventually forced to step down as President. Every close Supreme Court decision coming down the line will be asterisked in the minds of left-leaning voters if it's been swung by a judge in a stolen seat who was brought in without a 60-vote consensus under an illegitimate president.
Gorsuch could well be the gift that keeps on giving for Democrats.
edit: The Dem base also demands this.
Gorsuch could well be the gift that keeps on giving for Democrats.
edit: The Dem base also demands this.
metalslimer
Member
Trump has likely committed multiple acts of treason. You don't roll over and let him appoint lifetime slots
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Gorsuch is the kind of pick any Republican would make. If your position is that all Republican picks are disgusting, fine, there's nothing wrong with having that position. But when people are talking about Trump being different, they're not referring to competent and qualified but scary arch-conservatives, they're referring to him appointing totally incompetent cronies who have no idea what the hell they're being appointed to.
Ah...is that process harder to do than this one?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll