"Nuke Em"

This is better called the Reid Option since he started it back in 2003. He didn't want to let Bush have those judges so he invented the idea of the filibuster. They didn't do it but the idea was hatched. A decade later Reid then changed Senate rules to allow lower judges to get by on a majority vote except for the Supremes.

So this is the Reid Option and for the first time in history a Supreme Court nominee is being filibustered. The democrats are the ones changing the rules. McConnell is just putting things back to 2003 and the way they were for over 200 years. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

actually, the filibuster rule was not an original rule at the time of the founding. It first appeared in use during the jackson administration during the 1820s. so, it was a democrat idea.

All McConnel did was restore the 1970 filibuster rule that was in effect prior to 2003.

Democrats started this, first in 1830 with the filibuster rule.

Prior to 1970 rule, filibuster was rarely used.

They changed the rule in 1970 to make the filibuster easier to use, this backfired on them as it created more filibuster oportunites instead of less.

In the 1980's, democrats toxicity level increased when they borked Robert Bork from the Supreme Court nomination.

They did it again in 2003 when they changed the filibuster rule on judges only to have it backfire on them when the Republicans used their rule against them in 2013 against Obama's judges.

Democrats seem to have a problem staying within the rules, its rules for everyone else, but exempt themselves from those same rules. All good for thee, but not for thou.

I'm very much in favor of ripping the filibuster root & branch from the senate. the house got rid of theirs along time ago.

Melt down much, Gey Rey?

If you had the intellectual capacity, you'd see what harm was done by Yertle the Turtle and his cronies in the scheisstag yesterday.

But you don't.

Blissfully ignorant.

And hypocritical. Along with all of you assholes who refused to allow Garland a hearing.

scheisstag?

I'll answer that proposal now.

FUCK YOU. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I consider your post to be a violation of the current rules for this forum and I hope you suffer the consequences.

BTW, it is a joyous occasion when we sneak one by you liberals as we have done with Mr. Justice Gorsuch.

Just as when you liberals rejoiced at Mr. Justice Scalia's demise, I hope two more liberal Supreme Court Justices die very soon, and we get two more justices to the right of Scalia. Maybe then we can bring back the old and better America.

DBD!

Melt down much, Gey Rey?

If you had the intellectual capacity, you'd see what harm was done by Yertle the Turtle and his cronies in the scheisstag yesterday.

But you don't.

Blissfully ignorant.

And hypocritical. Along with all of you assholes who refused to allow Garland a hearing. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Who on this august forum denied Garland a hearing? I know I didn't, though I'm very happy THE SENATE denied him a hearing!!!

DBD!

So if a Supreme Court seat opens up in the last year of Trump's presidency, you think the current Senate will wait until after the election before considering the replacement?


. Originally Posted by WTF

That depends. If the Senate remains in the Republican majority, they will attempt to confirm Trump's pick for SCOTUS. If Democrats get a majority, they will delay hearings until after the election.

Whichever party is in the minority will attempt to undermine the nomination. This is usually done through character assassination.

If a vacancy needs to be filled while Trump is in office, he will probably try to fill the seat with the same type of judge that vacated it. If a conservative leaves the court, Trump will attempt to replace them with a cobservative. If a liberal leaves, Trump will nominate a liberal, although they will not be liberal enough to satisfy the Democrats.

In short, Democrats will bitch no matter who Trump nominates. The minority party will attempt to delay. The majority will get their pick amidst a media feeding frenzy.

Abortion will still be legal when the dust clears.