US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies at 87

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

Since you want to change the subject instead of defending your opinion, do you know the last time a US Supreme Court justice was confirmed during an election year when the Senate and White House were held by opposing parties?

Coincidence does not set precedent. But it can be used to concoct the koolaid repubs so desperately need in this hard times. In layman terms what moscow mitch has done is gone nuclear, there is no longer any gentlemen agreement that principles must be upheld, at least in the senate (the house has become a kindergarde long ago). If I lower more the bar so it can be easily understood, here mitch is lucy and charlie is the dems:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqzA1VOiC-M

but we all now that what goes around, comes around:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZkJAx8FycI

[James Rye]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

'Pack the courts' refers to increasing the number of judges, not replacing existing judges with left or right leaning justices.

McConnell did not deny Obama his constitutionally granted power to nominated justices, McConnell used his constitutionally granted power to choose whether to approve of Obama's nomination.

This is basic civics here people.

If that's the case why didn't he just put that forth as a reason instead of "A president should not nominate a SCJ in an election year, the people and the next president should be the ones to do so.". He never said "I don't like Obama nominating a SCJ so I will not accept said nomination to be voted on in the Senate.".

Real reason he didn't do that was that he knew he didn't had full control over his Rep Senators back then and that there was a good chance many of them would vote for a moderate judge in hopes for a boost in their votes for their next senator election thus he had avoid it getting to the Senate in the first place. Plenty of Republican Senators spoke out against that move back then, after all Mitch's move did cut down their own vote's power as a vote ain't worth anything if it cannot be used in the first place. Most of those Senators are gone by now, they either retired on their own or were pretty much purged out by Trump, his tweets and the goons supporting his every move.

[Guardian Enzo]

Those R Senators spoke out against the move purely because they knew it made absolutely no difference, as the nominee would never come before the Senate.

[ramlaen]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

That's why Mitch declared hours after Scalia's death any appointment by Obama null and void before a nominee had even been named.

Basic civics.

Since you seem to be aware of the timeline perhaps you could do mangamuscle a favor and tell him when the selection process for Scalia's replacement started.

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

Coincidence does not set precedent.

I hope you realize the logic you just argued means there is nothing wrong with McConnell confirming RBG's replacement before the election.

Originally Posted by James Rye

If that's the case why didn't he just put that forth as a reason instead of "A president should not nominate a SCJ in an election year, the people and the next president should be the ones to do so.". He never said "I don't like Obama nominating a SCJ so I will not accept said nomination to be voted on in the Senate.".

Real reason he didn't do that was that he knew he didn't had full control over his Rep Senators back then and that there was a good chance many of them would vote for a moderate judge in hopes for a boost in their votes for their next senator election thus he had avoid it getting to the Senate in the first place. Plenty of Republican Senators spoke out against that move back then, after all Mitch's move did cut down their own vote's power as a vote ain't worth anything if it cannot be used in the first place. Most of those Senators are gone by now, they either retired on their own or were pretty much purged out by Trump, his tweets and the goons supporting his every move.

Do you acknowledge Obama was not denied his US constitutionally granted authority to nominate a SCOTUS judge?

If you want to accuse McConnell of hypocrisy then include everyone whose position on selecting SCOTUS judges during an election year is the opposite of what it was in 2016.

[James Rye]

What kinda nomination is that when the GOP Senators don't even MEET the nominated to probe him because they know he won't get even to the vote in the first place?

McConnell was the one who started the hypocrisy so either he keeps it going or he admits that he did stole the SCJ back in 2016 because he couldn't live with the thought of a black guy nominating a judge for life.

Besides the whole Senate system is incredible unfair. 30% of the population make up 70 Senators in the Senate whereas the other 70% of the population only got 30 Senators representing them. That is beyond stupid.

Same as for how SCJs get nominated. All you need are 50 Senators and a VP and that's it, Judge for life. Stupid doesn't even describe this kinda system. Man, the founding fathers really lacked foresight about the stupidity of their descendants.

[Ithekro]

One can't count on the stupidity of one's descendants 200 or more years later. That's about seven generations ago.