Support NeoGAF

[Fatalah]

The media should be reporting this as "Obama's seat", every single time the story is reported on.

I don't understand how they can skip mentioning this. It has been painful to watch the Gorsuch coverage.

The news should read: "Donald Trump chose President Obama's supreme court pick today."

This should confuse and frustrate America, goddamnit.

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

Nobody should listen to Michael Moore, even when he's right.

Sad thinking like this is why we are where we are, all this documentaries have foreshadowed this country correctly

The media should be reporting this as "Obama's seat", every single time the story is reported on.

I don't understand how they can skip mentioning this. It has been painful to watch the Gorsuch coverage.

The news should read: "Donald Trump chose President Obama's supreme court pick today."

This should confuse and frustrate America, goddamnit.

If America didn't riot after the Bush 2000 elections, they're not going to give a shit about this

 

[SoundsOfScience]

Jesus Fucking Christ even on this too eh?

Always his fucking fault for everything. These assholes show hypocrisy in the most embarrassing and shameless way and steal a fucking SC seat but somehow its still Obamas fault.

Dude can't do anything right to some people. For his sake, I'm glad he doesn't need to see this shit on a daily basis any more.

 

[geardo]

If this doesn't convince everyone that the democrats are utterly worthless, I don't know what will.

 

[Amir0x]

Sad thinking like this is why we are where we are, all this documentaries have foreshadowed this country correctly

No, understanding Michael Moore is an insufferable twat is not WHY WE ARE HERE™.

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

No, understanding Michael Moore is an insufferable twat is not WHY WE ARE HERE™.

Sorry you feel that way, he's the best voice liberals have right now

 

[MThanded]

If this doesn't convince everyone that the democrats are utterly worthless, I don't know what will.

How? They filibustered and did all they could do here. I come away with the complete opposite view.

Good to see they didn't waver on this.

 

[Maxim726X]

If this doesn't convince everyone that the democrats are utterly worthless, I don't know what will.

Not really sure what you wanted them to do, but okay.

Remember- Democrats did not control the Senate when Garland was tapped for SCJ.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Thanks again, voters..

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

How? They filibustered and did all they could do here. I come away with the complete opposite view.

Good to see they didn't waver on this.

It was a similar act to the republican congress trying to repeal Obamacare 100 times, they knew it was for political show and nothing would come of it

 

[Amir0x]

Sorry you feel that way, he's the best voice liberals have right now

If your well for "liberal voices" is more shallow than a teenager in Hot Topic waxing philosophic or you are still getting your "liberal voices" exclusively from the Young Turks aisle of the supermarket, perhaps.

 

[Knuckle Sandwich]

If this doesn't convince everyone that the democrats are utterly worthless, I don't know what will.

Should they have started a brawl in the senate or something? Schumer takes McConnel down and does some ground and pound?

 

[davepoobond]

I think taking this approach may turned the Supreme Court into a big bigger issue in the election (obviously it should've been a huge issue, but it clearly wasn't) and convinced republicans who weren't fans of trump to vote for him to get a republican Supreme Court nominee.

Obviously its difficult to look back knowing what we know now, but I maintain that based on the information he had at the time, Obama made the right choice. Trying to push Garland through wouldn't have worked and would have hurt democrats more than it would've helped.

yeah making it a bigger issue would have been better, not worse, IMO. we know what happened right now -- trump got elected and they got their own nominee.

Obama probably made the right choice in the long view on that specific issue, but how many different issues are now fucked because of Gorsuch and the nuclear option pulled on supreme court appointments?

the republicans play by a different set of rules in this government. Its about time Democrats started punching too.

 

[Carpe Carnim]

Sorry you feel that way, he's the best voice liberals have right now

LOL. If that's true, we are fucked.

 

[Oblivion]

A heist America should never forget or forgive.

Seriously.

Just one question though: what's the Supreme Court?

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

If your well for "liberal voices" is more shallow than a teenager in Hot Topic waxing philosophic or you are still getting your "liberal voices" exclusively from the Young Turks aisle of the supermarket, perhaps.

Never once watched or read anything from the Young Turks, thanks for projecting

 

[Pai Pai Master]

LOL. If that's true, we are fucked.

Lol yep

 

[Sushi Nao]

It was a similar act to the republican congress trying to repeal Obamacare 100 times, they knew it was for political show and nothing would come of it

There's a pretty significant difference between a racially motivated waste of taxpayer money in an effort to obstruct a popular and necessary legislation which was designed to save millions of lives in a cynical effort to regain power and secure corporate control of government, and trying to keep the government functioning the way it has been for 230 years

like is factual relativism that fucking deep that this isn't easy to see

If that's the case, no wonder liberals have next to no control in the U.S.

Honestly I think it's probably because they're less likely to exploit cognitive biases for short-term power grabs

 

[Sirpopopop]

Sorry you feel that way, he's the best voice liberals have right now

If that's the case, no wonder liberals have next to no control in the U.S.

 

[Bolivar687]

Thank God.

 

[Oblivion]

Hope it backfires on them. When Democrats get back in control(soon), they will put up even more liberal judges. Garland, Republicans are going to wish they would have confirmed him, its going to be even more left.

Shame that's most likely never going to happen. It's hard to see Dems winning back the senate before 2020, and by then, RGB, Kennedy, and Breyer will either retire or die and Republicans will have even more of an ironclad control on the SC.

 

[Amir0x]

Never once watched or read anything from the Young Turks, thanks for projecting

projecting means one who is doing the thing you claim another is doing. Thus projecting. Just fyi. And I wasn't really claiming you were doing those things, but mocking the idea of how shallow one's "liberal voices" well must be in order to choose Michael fucking Moore as one of the best.

So. Michael Moore is a lunatic who routinely dishonestly alters his documentary works to create false narratives and routinely abuses or manipulates data or facts to support his agenda. Just because he is a liberal doesn't mean he is one of the best voices.

 

[whyamihere]

LOL. good job Dems.

Literally there is nothing they could've done. Jesus christ, keep your hyperbole to yourself.

 

[Oblivion]

Literally there is nothing they could've done. Jesus christ, keep your hyperbole to yourself.

Seriously, what is wrong with people? Dems deserve a lot of shit in many cases, but this isn't one of them.

 

[Amir0x]

Literally there is nothing they could've done. Jesus christ, keep your hyperbole to yourself.

It's more people with literally no clue how Congress works desperately clinging to the "we need a New Democratic party" agenda without understanding the tiniest aspect of what happened.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't terrifying.

 

[whyamihere]

DEMOCRATS SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe you all should've voted in mid terms. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

It's not hypocrisy if you realize that no one actually has any opinions about procedural or process issues, only policy issues. No one actually had opinions about minting trillion dollar coins during the debt ceiling crisis. No one actually has opinions about the filibuster. No one actually has opinions about reconciliation. No one actually has opinions about presidential debate rules. No one actually has opinions about bills being long or short, about amendments being germane or irrelevant, about earmarks. Literally all of these opinions are just illusory projections of someone's overall ideology and party ID; people support whatever rules they think help them achieve their goals. I suspect this goes even further: no one actually has an opinion about federalism (i.e. whether decisions should be made locally or nationally); no one actually has an opinion about direct democracy or ballot initiatives.

Even Supreme Court justices, who you might believe are the most likely humans on earth to have opinions about process separate from their opinions about ideological goals, seem to do a very good job of reconciling this tension in a way that their process opinion almost always supports their ideological opinion. You very very rarely, very rarely, see justices voting against their own policy preferences because the strictures of process bind them to do so.

Of course all these "no ones" and "nevers" are actually "few people" and "rarely". And it's not even insincere. I'm sure Mitch McConnell literally believes there's a difference between what he's doing now and what he was doing then. Even when people do recognize they've been caught switching positions, they rationalize that they've grown and changed their minds. But very few people can be introspective about what is actually motivating their thinking. So when someone claims they do have an opinion about process, I would discount it and assume it is primarily motivated by justifying whatever outcome they want.

Is it wrong to hope/believe that there are people in our government with even a shred of objectivity? Is all this talk of democratic integrity and constitutional respect really all just bluster? Is objective compromise something that humans are even capable of? I guess maybe objectivity isn't valuable (enough), or at least not to all that many. *sigh*

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

I'm surprised that more fingers aren't being pointed at voters.

They knew what Republicans were going to do if they won, and held the door open for them.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

DEMOCRATS SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe you all should've voted in mid terms. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES.

Makes me curious about those making these post, if they only vote once every 4 years, and/or are completely ignorant of the electoral process.

 

[whyamihere]

If we had a President Clinton, Senator Feingold, Senator Ross, Senator McGinty... we'd have Merrick Garland on the court.

Fuck, if we had a President Clinton and a Senator Hagan and Senator Udall, we'd have Merrick Garland on the court.

 

[Amir0x]

If we had a President Clinton, Senator Feingold, Senator Ross, Senator McGinty... we'd have Merrick Garland on the court.

Fuck, if we had a President Clinton and a Senator Hagan and Senator Udall, we'd have Merrick Garland on the court.

but the Democrats are at fault for letting this happen, if only they would have overturned the will of the people and not allowed Hillary to win the primaries!!!

 

[Oblivion]

DEMOCRATS SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe you all should've voted in mid terms. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES.

what's a mid term

 

[btrboyev]

If this doesn't convince everyone that the democrats are utterly worthless, I don't know what will.

Worthless in the sense they are powerless, but what else could they do? They did what they could to stop it.

 

[SchrodingerC]

I am goddamn praying Ginsberg stays on for the next 4 years. We cannot lose anymore judges while fucklord is in the Whitehouse.

 

[Blader]

Why didn't Obama push harder against this shit ? Why didn't he cause a riot ?

I feel like he just accepted it and played nice. I love the guy but why was he so nice towards congress and the hateful republicans who tried everything to ruin his legacy ?

He did push hard. He did not accept it and play nice towards Congress. Why are you posting about something you paid zero attention to? He urged the Senate repeatedly and shamed them publicly for abdicating their responsibility in giving Garland a hearing. But when Republicans control the Senate majority and refuse to do move forward on a nomination, there is no amount of "pushing" that can make them do otherwise. The president is not a dictator; he cannot order one party to do something they physically and mentally refuse to do.

"Why didn't he cause a riot," Jesus Christ.

 

[whyamihere]

If this doesn't convince everyone that the democrats are utterly worthless, I don't know what will.

ASDLFK;AJSDFL;AJSEOFIPJACE;JVAS;FHJAS[IOEFCJVA'LSDKCJVASO[D;HF'AOSDFKA
SDF

THERE

IS

NOTHING

THEY

COULD'VE

DONE

OH

MY

GOD

 

[darkwing]

pray to whatever gods you desire that no other justice retires in this term

 

[Ac30]

It was a similar act to the republican congress trying to repeal Obamacare 100 times, they knew it was for political show and nothing would come of it

How so? They had the Republicans to kill the filibuster, which is a lot more than Republiacns sending endless dumb bills. This had actual consequences.

 

[zelas]

The media should be reporting this as "Obama's seat", every single time the story is reported on.

I don't understand how they can skip mentioning this. It has been painful to watch the Gorsuch coverage.

The news should read: "Donald Trump chose President Obama's supreme court pick today."

This should confuse and frustrate America, goddamnit.

This was definitively settled last year.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

If Dems deserve any blame for this, it's the electorate that's truly at fault. This is a direct result of the disaster of 2010.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

Not really sure what you wanted them to do, but okay.

Remember- Democrats did not control the Senate when Garland was tapped for SCJ.

Exactly. Obama could not trigger the same thing. There was nothing Obama could have done to prevent this from happening, except do more for down the ballot and in midterms. But the strongest voting block is also the most brainwashed so who knows how much he could have done there even. For 6 years Republicans had obstructed every thing the Obama admin was trying to do and yet if you asked the average voter including Dems they think it is Obama's fault. The GOP tanked the government and took none of the blame, and instead were rewarded for it.

More and more everyday I am convinced the November result was inevitable. If it didn't happen in 2016 it would have happened in 2020 if nothing changed in the media sphere. If Hillary had won she would have got nothing accomplished and ACA would be in shambles because no one would allow any improvements and all of these fake repeal votes would still be happening, and all the while the media would be talking about how ineffectual she is. She likely wouldn't have got a single Supreme Court pick. Dems would have likely lost even more seats and governor seats in 2018, and get rolled in 2020. So now it happened in 2016 and we have to unmask the hypocrisy of the GOP and their media arm. Just not sure how to do the latter.

 

[Blader]

Obama had to play politics with the pick for the election. Nominate a black woman/man, Hispanic man, or hell even an Asian. The whole Garland issue came and went with barely a blip specifically because he was a concensus moderate. People don't go protest in the streets for that shit. That's what I mean by "excited".

Especially when before Obama even picked anyone McConnell already vowed to block.



The fact that it was great for "both sides" is precisely why Dems ended up not really giving a shit.

This entire post is fucking depressing. If Dems can only care about the Supreme Court when the justices excite them by ticking off certain demographic boxes, because fuck strongly credentialed justices with bipartisan backing, then that is really a goddamn shame.

I barely even understand your argument... if Obama had chosen a woman and/or minority justice, Democrats would've flooded the streets of red states, protested their Republican senators, and forced an end to their obstruction? Is there a significant bloc of liberals in Kentucky who were not enthused by Garland but, had Sri Srinivasan been nominated, they would've taken to the streets and forced McConnell to change his mind? Huh?

 

[digdug2k]

DEMOCRATS SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe you all should've voted in mid terms. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES.

Meh. They are to blame for being awful at communicating.... basically anything. If this was a Dem nomination, I'd have seen 12 hours of footage on CNN about how he one time said he liked the color red, then 30 years later said he also liked blue, and how someone who's a known liar could graduate from Harvard Law.

 

[Brandon F]

Just one question though: what's the Supreme Court?

It is the highest federal court in the United States. They have the final say on certain federal (and occasionally state) cases and is the foremost authority on the interpretation of the overarching law in the nation. The member makeup obviously plays a very key role for how the law represents many basic and essential functions and freedoms our society adopts.

The GOP wanted Scalia 2.0, a highly conservative individual that tends to have a similar social outlook to the party line. Gorsuch possibly goes even further as his record shows many of his prior judgments favor corporate gain over individuals on many of his cases. Even in cases that sided on behalf of individuals amid considerable evidence sometimes unanimously in their favor, Gorsuch has written dissent statements showing his disagreement and favoritism for corporate power.

 

[polyh3dron]

Let's just hope this is the only seat Trump gets to choose in the next 3+ years.

RBG isn't exactly a spring chicken.

 

[Blader]

Meh. They are to blame for being awful at communicating.... basically anything. If this was a Dem nomination, I'd have seen 12 hours of footage on CNN about how he one time said he liked the color red, then 30 years later said he also liked blue, and how someone who's a known liar could graduate from Harvard Law.

I'm not sure how much clearer the communication over this seat, and the Supreme Court as a whole, could have been over the past year. Hillary, Bernie, and Obama all talked about it endlessly. Republican voters care about the Supreme Court, but too many Dems just didn't give a shit.

 

[whyamihere]

Meh. They are to blame for being awful at communicating.... basically anything. If this was a Dem nomination, I'd have seen 12 hours of footage on CNN about how he one time said he liked the color red, then 30 years later said he also liked blue, and how someone who's a known liar could graduate from Harvard Law.

Communication had NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.

It's like you people have a pornographic obsession with blaming Democrats with every single thing wrong with the country and Only If They Had Done Things Differently.

But no, it was the Democrats' fault. Jesus christ.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

Stolen seat.

A heist America should never forget or forgive.

Every day this man sits on the court is another reminder how awful Republicans are and to never even entertain the notion of voting for those treasonous scumbags.

This, this, and this.

 

[Joe T.]

Literally there is nothing they could've done. Jesus christ, keep your hyperbole to yourself.

There is always a way to get what you want, no matter how impossible or improbable it may seem. Which takes me to my next gem, from Pirates of the Caribbean:

Will Turner: "You didn't beat me. You ignored the rules of engagement. In a fair fight, I'd kill you."

Jack Sparrow: "That's not much incentive for me to fight fair then, is it?"

Sometimes you have to play "dirty" to get what you want, to think outside the proverbial box. Why is it that Republicans are willing to go that route while Democrats are not? They're politicians, you aren't voting for them so they can uphold a squeaky clean image, you're voting for them because you believe they can best represent you. So, ask yourself, if you were a senator would you strictly play by the rules if you knew it would lose you a supreme court candidate, for example, or would you think that candidate/position was important enough to devise new strategies in order to get him/her appointed? It's easy to say from where I'm sitting, but I would hope my Democratic senator would go to the same lengths his/her Republican counterparts do, if not further. If you're playing it safe just so you can enjoy your $174,000 salary you don't deserve that seat.

I'm looking forward to Elizabeth Warren's fight for her seat next year in Massachusetts as it looks like she'll have a very Trump-like candidate opposing her in Shiva Ayyadurai. It'll probably wind up being the best gauge of the Democrats' ability to fend off Trump in 2020.

 

[whyamihere]

There is always a way to get what you want, no matter how impossible or improbable it may seem. Which takes me to my next gem, from Pirates of the Caribbean:

Will Turner: "You didn't beat me. You ignored the rules of engagement. In a fair fight, I'd kill you."

Jack Sparrow: "That's not much incentive for me to fight fair then, is it?"

Sometimes you have to play "dirty" to get what you want, to think outside the proverbial box. Why is it that Republicans are willing to go that route while Democrats are not? They're politicians, you aren't voting for them so they can uphold a squeaky clean image, you're voting for them because you believe they can best represent you. So, ask yourself, if you were a senator would you strictly play by the rules if you knew it would lose you a supreme court candidate, for example, or would you think that candidate/position was important enough to devise new strategies in order to get him/her appointed? It's easy to say from where I'm sitting, but I would hope my Democratic senator would go to the same lengths his/her Republican counterparts do, if not further. If you're playing it safe just so you can enjoy your $174,000 salary you don't deserve that seat.

I'm looking forward to Elizabeth Warren's fight for her seat next year in Massachusetts as it looks like she'll have a very Trump-like candidate opposing her in Shiva Ayyadurai. It'll probably wind up being the best gauge of the Democrats' ability to fend off Trump in 2020.

what.