Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dead

[pinstripers]

I don't care either way, but the Democrats being so indignant about Trump nominating a Justice, and how unfair it is, ought to remember how they savaged Kavanaugh, how they put our nation through two years of hell chasing a "Russian collusion" lie that every single one of them knew to be untrue, how their guy spied on an opposition campaign, and now they want US to behave as gentlemen? Screw that and screw them.

[RoyalShock]

What year was it, under Obama, that the GOP said they would not consider a SCOTUS nominee because it was an election year?

I'm no Democrat, by a long shot, but McConnell already set a precedent (wrongly, IMO) and is now being hypocritical.

Or am I misremembering that?

[wufan]

What year was it, under Obama, that the GOP said they would not consider a SCOTUS nominee because it was an election year?

I'm no Democrat, by a long shot, but McConnell already set a precedent (wrongly, IMO) and is now being hypocritical.

Or am I misremembering that?

You are not misremembering. The hypocrisy is bipartisan here. The Dems said, you must vote. The Republicans held it up. Now the republicans want to vote and the Dems can’t hold it up. This is politics, not moral consistency. Everyone has switched their argument in this case. The only consistency is that the Senate majority has been republicans both times.

[RoyalShock]

You are not misremembering. The hypocrisy is bipartisan here. The Dems said, you must vote. The Republicans held it up. Now the republicans want to vote and the Dems can’t hold it up. This is politics, not moral consistency. Everyone has switched their argument in this case. The only consistency is that the Senate majority has been republicans both times.

I realize the bipartisan hypocrisy here. I just wanted to point out after 3+ pages of discussion without a single mention that the GOP, and specifically McConnell, can't take the moral high ground on this.

[wichshock65]

I realize the bipartisan hypocrisy here. I just wanted to point out after 3+ pages of discussion without a single mention that the GOP, and specifically McConnell, can't take the moral high ground on this.

Not sure history supports not starting the process, especially when POTUS and Senate are same party.

[ABC]

I think McConnell made it more complicated than it needs to be two years ago.

When there is a Supreme Court vacancy the President can nominate a replacement. The Senate can confirm or not. That's our process. It isn't complicated.

Several judges nominated by a GOP President to the USSC have been borked, or otherwise savaged, or stonewalled. Republicans simply haven't done that.

[ShockingButTrue]

Our President is doing the morally just thing by waiting until after RBG's funeral to announce his pick. Bravo!

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

McConnell has said that the difference between now and 2016 is that in 2016 Republicans controlled the Senate, the chamber that confirms supreme court nominees, while a Democrat occupied the White House. This time, he contends, the same party controls both branches, and therefore the confirmation should proceed.

Besides that, Ginsberg herself has said previously when talking about SCOTUS nominations in election years that they should proceed and there is nothing that says that a Presidents powers stop just because it's an election year.

[ShockerPrez]

Confirm Barrett. Let the Dems do what the dems do. They are already doing it. Trump was elected because he would nominate constitutionalists. If he loses and Biden gets elected and the Senate goes to the Democrats, then so be it. They can start their process of bastardizing everything in plain sight. Make them do it. I don't think it will play as well to the country as a whole as they think it will. After 2 more years, the Dems will get booted out of the House and Senate and Harris will preside over 2 - 6 years of gridlock, which would be a good thing.

[ShockingButTrue]

Confirm Barrett. Let the Dems do what the dems do. They are already doing it. Trump was elected because he would nominate constitutionalists.

BINGO!!!

In the summer 2016 Trump released a list of supreme court nominee's. The Witch didn't.

In the summer 2020 Trump released a list of supreme court nominee's. Ol' Stinky Fingers won't (if his advisors even have a list).

The Deplorable's were looking at the long-term picture in 2016.

[RoyalShock]

McConnell has said that the difference between now and 2016 is that in 2016 Republicans controlled the Senate, the chamber that confirms supreme court nominees, while a Democrat occupied the White House. This time, he contends, the same party controls both branches, and therefore the confirmation should proceed.

This is the type of thing I find troubling, and a microcosm of what is wrong with politics. I'm not satisfied that having a Democrat in the White House in 2016 is a satisfactory excuse to have a double standard. He shirked his Constitutional duty in 2016.

History has not had a problem with election year nominations, regardless of who occupied the Senate or White House. So I don't see an issue with Trump making a nomination or for the Senate to vote on it. But McConnell was wrong in 2016 and he should admit that, rather than give some silly justification that wouldn't pass muster on an elementary school playground.

[pinstripers]

Confirm Barrett.

I'm beginning to think it might be the Cuban chick.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

This is the type of thing I find troubling, and a microcosm of what is wrong with politics. I'm not satisfied that having a Democrat in the White House in 2016 is a satisfactory excuse to have a double standard. He shirked his Constitutional duty in 2016.

History has not had a problem with election year nominations, regardless of who occupied the Senate or White House. So I don't see an issue with Trump making a nomination or for the Senate to vote on it. But McConnell was wrong in 2016 and he should admit that, rather than give some silly justification that wouldn't pass muster on an elementary school playground.

Do you really expect a politician (Dem or Republican) to make this sort of admission?? It will never happen. Further, does it matter in the grand scheme of things? I don't honestly think so. They have a duty to uphold the constitution and make every effort to put forth a nominee and take a vote. They likely should have done the same thing in 2016. But, if the shoe was on the other foot, the Democrats would be doing the same thing and have proven they are just as hypocritical. That is what is funny me. To hear the sanctimony that comes out when something like this happens.

Should President Obama now come out and say that he was wrong for nominating Merrick Garland in 2016 and attempting to have a vote, an election year? Maybe, but I wouldn't expect that to happen. It might be wrong and a glimpse of how sad politics are these days, but it's far from just a McConnell issue.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

I'm beginning to think it might be the Cuban chick.

Yep. Lock up that Florida vote.

[pinstripers]

Should President Obama now come out and say that he was wrong for nominating Merrick Garland in 2016 and attempting to have a vote, an election year?.

he is not capable of saying those words