• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats secure votes to block Gorsuch as Senate panel considers nominee

Absentglare said:
You're confused, the "activist" judge is the one who follows the "activist" laws that the legislature passes.
Click to expand...

If you only knew how confused you are. You are still trying to give the legislative branch the final word on any contested legislation. At some point, you are going to have to learn that the judicial branch is not and should not be part of the legislative branch. It's the legislature's job to write law, however if that law is contested in the courts, it is the judicial branch that decides whether the law is constitutional or not.
 
NIMBY said:
Those points were never implemented, making McConnell the ultimate liar.

Just 4 years earlier, a Majority Democratic Senate seated Kennedy during the POTUS election year of 1988.

Before the August break, McConnell will finish killing the filibuster, on legislation .
Click to expand...

McConnell has no intention of eliminating the filibuster in regards to legislation. It was the democrats who did that when they passed Obamacare. And former democrat senate leader Harry Reid killed the filibuster in regards to appointing federal judges. The democrats left McConnell no choice in regards to the latest Scotus appointment. They were not going to allow any justice appointed by Trump to be confirmed. All McConnell did by going nuclear is that he merely changed the rules back to what they were as late as the year 2000. You know....the same rules that had been in place for over 200 years?
 
ObamacareFail said:
I suggest that you improve your reading comprehension. I really don't care whether the court was full when Crazy Joe Biden gave his speech. It does not change the points he was attempting to make.
Click to expand...

Your argument is that context is irrelevant? I consider the suggestion absurd.
 
ObamacareFail said:
If you only knew how confused you are. You are still trying to give the legislative branch the final word on any contested legislation. At some point, you are going to have to learn that the judicial branch is not and should not be part of the legislative branch. It's the legislature's job to write law, however if that law is contested in the courts, it is the judicial branch that decides whether the law is constitutional or not.
Click to expand...

You're very confused because you don't realize that you're actually making my point. The judicial branch is not supposed to change the laws however their ideology sees fit.
 
ObamacareFail said:
But then, considering how badly the pollsters blew the 2016 election, why take those ratings seriously? Remember, Trump was given a 16% chance of getting elected president based on averaging polls.
Click to expand...

Once again, there is a huge difference between an opinion poll and an election poll... The election is a compound poll that consists of an opinion poll complicated by the forecast of voter turnout. It also is reflective (looking back a couple of days) as a determinate of a fixed future event. Nonetheless, the 2016 election poll had Hillary up at 2 points (she won the popular by.... drum roll .... 2 points).

The US presidential election poll is extremely complicated, because it is 51 separate election polls (you know, the complicated type) amalgamated to one.... even so, if you have a 16% chance of winning AND you won, it doesn't mean the polling is wrong. You have a 16% chance of rolling a 1 when you roll a single die.... ... IF you had zero chance of winning, then they would be wrong.

That all said, opinion polls are based on statistical sampling AND are pretty spot on.
 
ObamacareFail said:
McConnell has no intention of eliminating the filibuster in regards to legislation. It was the democrats who did that when they passed Obamacare. And former democrat senate leader Harry Reid killed the filibuster in regards to appointing federal judges. The democrats left McConnell no choice in regards to the latest Scotus appointment. They were not going to allow any justice appointed by Trump to be confirmed. All McConnell did by going nuclear is that he merely changed the rules back to what they were as late as the year 2000. You know....the same rules that had been in place for over 200 years?
Click to expand...

How quickly you GOPosters forget what the GOP senate majority did to Clinton Justice appointments his last two years, precipitating DEM action during Bush-43.

How quickly you GOPosters forget the threat by Frist/McConnell to use the nuclear option in 2005. You can't have the Biden rule without the far worse Frist rule.

And how quickly you GOPosters forget what McConnell did to Obama after he was reelected by blocking his cabinet and judicial choices, forcing the nuclear option to fill desperately needed positions.

GOP Senators I respect, like Corker of TN, fully accept that the filibuster is dead for legislation. You underestimate McConnell's word as much as DEMs did in 2009 .
 
NIMBY said:
How quickly you GOPosters forget what the GOP senate majority did to Clinton Justice appointments his last two years, precipitating DEM action during Bush-43.

How quickly you GOPosters forget the threat by Frist/McConnell to use the nuclear option in 2005. You can't have the Biden rule without the far worse Frist rule.

And how quickly you GOPosters forget what McConnell did to Obama after he was reelected by blocking his cabinet and judicial choices, forcing the nuclear option to fill desperately needed positions.

GOP Senators I respect, like Corker of TN, fully accept that the filibuster is dead for legislation. You underestimate McConnell's word as much as DEMs did in 2009 .
Click to expand...




Senate Democrats have more than 40 votes to filibuster Neil Gorsuch’s nomination to the Supreme Court. In response, Republicans appear to have more than 50 votes to invoke the “nuclear option” — that is, to vote Thursday morning to lower the cloture threshold for Supreme Court nominations to a bare majority. Apocalyptic rhetoric abounds. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) referred to the likely filibuster as “a new low,” while Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) suggested that lowering the cloture threshold risked “forever damaging the United States Senate.”
But the truth is, there’s less to the theatrics than meets the eye. The filibuster for Supreme Court nominees was already dead — it just hadn’t stopped moving quite yet. Before Democrats vowed to filibuster Gorsuch’s nomination, they almost certainly knew that using the tactic would mean its elimination. And this may not be the last nuclear option detonated, either: The history of Congress shows that once parliamentary tools become big enough obstacles for the majority party, they are abolished or reformed. If Senate Democrats stymie Republicans enough over the next few years, the legislative filibuster could soon be gone, too. . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom