Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

[drauz]

Except no, and it has been mentioned in the hearings, anytime opposing parties control the Presidency and the Senate, nominations don't go through in election years. Everytime it has been the same party, except on 2 occasions, they have gone through. There is nothing crazy or unprecedented about this, it is very much business as usual.

Except senate republicans said they wouldn't put up nominations during election years, but apparently they only meant if it wasn't a Republican president.

[Gelston]

Except senate republicans said they wouldn't put up nominations during election years, but apparently they only meant if it wasn't a Republican president.

No, you just didn't hear the addendum (By a Democrat President). Regardless, it doesn't matter. Anyone with a brain knew that if the Republicans held a Senate majority, they are going to fill any SC vacancy while they can, just as they have always done. Just as Democrats have always done.

[Parkbandit]

It's not a difference if its the same....

We are still having to explain it? Ok, I'll give it a go. If the firewall allowed me to use pretty colors, bold, underlines.. I would.. but I can't so here it goes:

2016: Control of Senate: REPUBLICANS Control of Presidency: DEMOCRAT

2020: Control of Senate: REPUBLICANS Control of Presidency: REPUBLICAN

It is the Constitutional authority of the President to nominate a Supreme Court Justice.

It is the Constitutional authority of the Senate to Approve a Supreme Court Justice.

[Parkbandit]

Except senate republicans said they wouldn't put up nominations during election years, but apparently they only meant if it wasn't a Republican president.

Senate Republicans do not have the Constitutional authority to nominate Supreme Court Justices.

Civics 101.

[Gelston]

Senate Republicans do not have the Constitutional authority to nominate Supreme Court Justices.

Civics 101.

I took it as him meaning they wouldn't accept nominations for vote.

[drauz]

No, you just didn't hear the addendum (By a Democrat President). Regardless, it doesn't matter. Anyone with a brain knew that if the Republicans held a Senate majority, they are going to fill any SC vacancy while they can, just as they have always done. Just as Democrats have always done.

I blame democrats for killing the filibuster, politicians are always so short sighted. This wouldn't be a problem with it.

[Parkbandit]

I took it as him meaning they wouldn't accept nominations for vote.

I guess... but if we're still confused about the process at this point in time... you might be giving him too much of the benefit of doubt.

[drauz]

I guess... but if we're still confused about the process at this point in time... you might be giving him too much of the benefit of doubt.

Ok Mr. Nitpick... yes I meant put up nominations for a vote, everyone else but you understood that apparently.

No ones confused, I know exactly whats happening.

[Parkbandit]

Ok Mr. Nitpick... yes I meant put up nominations for a vote, everyone else but you understood that apparently.

No ones confused, I know exactly whats happening.

Your posts tell us otherwise...

They are ramming thru a nomination after in 2016 refusing to even schedule hearings cause it was an election year. It's rules for thee and not me.

Yeah, 9 months and 40 days aren't completely different.....

It's not a difference if its the same....

[drauz]

Your posts tell us otherwise...

It's only confusing for you apparently.