U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead at 87
Tricks @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:31 pm
https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1307172635298725888
Sen. Lindsey Graham (3/10/16): "I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination."
Hey look, another ratfuck republican. 
rickc @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:36 pm
Tricks Tricks:
rickc rickc:
What hypocrisy? The President of the United States nominates candidates for the Supreme Court. The Senate calls ALL the shots on the nomination process. The Senate decides whether to proceed. The Senate confirms or rejects nominations.
The way that the senate is elected is stacked in favour of Republicans because it's not real representation. To ignore this is hilarious to me. But hey, democracy is going down the shitter in your country and you, along with millions of other Americans, don't really seem to give a shit.$1:
Its that simple. What is so hard to understand about that? The party that controls the Senate controls the Supreme Court nomination process. The Senate has not filled a Supreme Court vacancy in an election year when there was a divided government since 1888.
Oh I see your listening to your republican talking points. Tell me, how many Supreme Court vacancies have there been in an election year of a divided government while the senate has been sitting since 1888?
I'll give you a hint, it's zero. So lets dispense with this meaningless statistic.
$1:
That is a long time. Long before any of us were born, so lets not pretend that the whole Merrick Garland thing is a new thing created by the GOP.
Except it is. It absolutely is. 6 justices have left a vacancy in an election year since then. 4 were not a divided government. 1 was 1888. 1 the justice left in the middle of october when the senate wasn't sitting (for the election), so one was appointed during recess and later confirmed after the election. The last one the could have occurred was 1888. And guess what? They were allowed to vote on it. So yes, Moscow Mitch not allowing for a vote on Merrick Garland was the first time that had happened in history as far as I can see. Not even CONSIDERING the nomination, that from as far as I can tell was the first time in history. He set the precedent.
$1:
Divided government, election year, no Supreme Court confirmation. Long track record. 132 years to be exact. Divided government being the catch phrase here. There is no divided government now. The GOP controls the White House and the Senate. They are free to proceed with the confirmation process.
That was the last time it could have happened. I'm curious, of the last 6 times there has been a vacancy during an election year, when was the last time it was literally weeks away from an election? I'll give you a hint, the only time it was even remotely this close, confirmation happened after the election. $1:
Senator Reid and the democrats were the first to use the nuclear option to kill a filibuster. Now its going to bite them in the ass. What goes around, comes around. They made their bed, let them lay in it. What is hypocritical about that?
$1:
The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice, therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.
If you don't see the hypocrisy of saying that in 2016 and turning around and doing the complete opposite 4 years later, then I honestly can't help you. If this is the response who, compared to many in your country, is reasonably intelligent, it's no wonder your country is literally on fire and dying.
$1:
What is up with the insults and why are you taking this so personal? LOL! I do not recommend a political career for you if you get this worked up about politics in another country.
1) Because the USA stupidity affects everyone on the planet.
2) Because there are people in your government who want a theocracy.
3) Because I actually give a shit about my fellow man, and I have concerns of the USA regressing and women, PoC, and the LGBT community losing rights because of a stacked supreme court. It should ALWAYS be balanced. Otherwise you lose a major check in the system of government. And considering we've seen another major one fail spectacularly in the last year, suddenly you're allowing corruption and the ability for major abuses of power to be wielded. Having 6 liberal or 6 conservative judges is not a good thing.
Its good that you care. I tried to rep but got the old spread the rep point message. I personally think thats its way to early in the game to reverse any calls on the LGBTQ crowd. The Supreme Court typically does not like to reverse their own decisions that soon. Besides I do not see any major push in the U.S. to reverse any gains made by the LGBTQ community other than wedding cakes. Roe vs. Wade on the other hand could be in serious jeopardy. It has been a long time since its decision and has been under constant attack from day one. Roe vs. Wade would be my greatest fear of a conservative ruled Supreme Court.
Scape @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:38 pm
Sunnyways @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:40 pm
rickc rickc:
LOL! I do not recommend a political career for you if you get this worked up about politics in another country.
I’m not sure you understand our plight up here. We are the kinder, gentler, OK, weaker Siamese twin attached to you along a 5,000 mile border. Thus events in your country aren’t really in just ‘another country’. For good or ill, they affect us profoundly. Hence the interest.
rickc @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:40 pm
Tricks Tricks:
rickc rickc:
Isn't it? I thought that the border was closed. 
At this point, hopefully permanently.
Oh come on now, you are better than that.
rickc @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:50 pm
Sunnyways Sunnyways:
rickc rickc:
LOL! I do not recommend a political career for you if you get this worked up about politics in another country.
I’m not sure you understand our plight up here. We are the kinder, gentler Siamese twin attached to you along a 5,000 mile border. Thus events in your country aren’t really in just ‘another country’. For good or ill, they affect us profoundly. Hence the interest.
Sure I get that, but I do not see YOU hurling personal insults over the process of nominating Supreme Court Justices in the United States. You have a concern but are acting like a total gentleman about it. That is how it should be. It speaks volumes about how you were raised, wherever you were raised. The world needs more people like you these days. You are a dying breed unfortunately.
Sunnyways @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:54 pm
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the matter, the question remains as to whether nominating a rigorous originalist before the election is going to help Trump and his party win. Not too many people are that jazzed up about Joe Biden but if it is felt that rights to abortion, health care and voting could be further restricted that could get a lot more of the potential Dem vote out which is usually a bigger problem for them than Republicans. I’m seeing a lot of women in those early voting lines.
Sunnyways @ Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:59 pm
rickc rickc:
Sure I get that, but I do not see YOU hurling personal insults over the process of nominating Supreme Court Justices in the United States. You have a concern but are acting like a total gentleman about it. That is how it should be. It speaks volumes about how you were raised, wherever you were raised. The world needs more people like you these days. You are a dying breed unfortunately.
The format encourages us to be far more adversarial than we would be over a round of golf or even pints. In addition, I’m an immigrant so I’m ruder about other subjects far away. My heart’s not really in this fight. Sorry about that.
Tricks @ Sun Sep 20, 2020 9:40 am
rickc rickc:
Tricks Tricks:
rickc rickc:
Isn't it? I thought that the border was closed.
At this point, hopefully permanently.
Oh come on now, you are better than that.
I'm sorry, but until your country stops being making every wrong decision it can, you need to be kept at arms length.
Thanos @ Sun Sep 20, 2020 3:47 pm
Like Ray said around here not too long ago, the worst thing about the Age Of Trump isn't that it's now effectively impossible to have any faith not just in America or the American system. It's not possible to have faith in a massive segment of the American people themselves anymore when they choose to have someone like that as their leader. And that faith won't come back any time soon, if ever, because when he's finally gone that segment of belligerent ignorant *simpletons will most likely choose someone even worse than Trump to be their next leader. Even greater is the despair in knowing they aren't selecting someone like that because they're actually stupid enough to believe they'll make their country better - people that rotten on the inside are incapable of doing anything that's actually real & genuinely good. They're going to choose them to lead just because they know their choice will continue with the hardcore right-wing agenda of hurting and harming in any way they can all the other Americans that they hate so much. That isn't patriotism. That isn't even nationalism. That's just a social and civic nihilism at it's most hideous.
* "simpletons" doesn't mean stupid either, it's being used here to describe those who can only see all of life as an eternal war between good (them) and evil (everyone else), where those in opposition to the righteous deserve nothing but total annihilation; even smart people can choose to believe completely stupid things and the idea that they and only they ever get to win, and that those whom they've opted to hate deserve complete destruction, is pretty much one of the stupidest ways any person can look at the world
Scape @ Sun Sep 20, 2020 6:03 pm
Tricks @ Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:49 pm
Honestly, if they get their pick on there, which it seems like they will. If they sweep the house, senate, and white house, just add judges. Balance it back out and laugh.
DrCaleb @ Wed Sep 23, 2020 6:49 am
Tricks Tricks:
Honestly, if they get their pick on there, which it seems like they will. If they sweep the house, senate, and white house, just add judges. Balance it back out and laugh.
Balance it back out and laugh.The problem will be that the SCOTUS will be stacked 6 - 3 with very right leaning judges, and what happens if another Bush/Gore situation occurs in November?
Not to mention what happens over the next decade or two?
xerxes @ Wed Sep 23, 2020 6:58 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Tricks Tricks:
Honestly, if they get their pick on there, which it seems like they will. If they sweep the house, senate, and white house, just add judges. Balance it back out and laugh.
Balance it back out and laugh.The problem will be that the SCOTUS will be stacked 6 - 3 with very right leaning judges, and what happens if another Bush/Gore situation occurs in November?
Not to mention what happens over the next decade or two?
I think Tricks meant to say, if the Dems take control after the election, they could add judges to the Supreme Court. There’s no set in stone rule about how many judges are supposed to be there. Originally it was six. FDR got in hack for trying add three to make it twelve.
The only thing that’s stopped the numbers from changing is an unwritten rule. But since the GOP have shown they have no honour and want to turn the US into a minority rule, single party dictatorship, this is one way to circumvent their fuckery.
DrCaleb @ Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:11 am
True, that. Make it 6 - 6.