US Politics: Ask Fox News

[TheKitttenGuard]

Not a single Democrat should vote to confirm Gorsuch. That is fully validating what the Republicans did.

They should not filibuster the nomination in the end.  That is showing respect for an election process where this was an issue.

The Filibuster battle should be saved for the next nominee especially if it replacing a more Liberal Justice.

[Seli]

2 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

He is about as good a candidate as they are going to get.

They  are not going to get a liberal candidate, and 'he's a conservative' is not a good enough reason to hold out.

There are conservatives, there are reactionaries, there are let the world burn and the rich rule idiots as well. It makes sense for the Democrats to get a conservative and not one of the other options.

Pushing hard at the hearings is the only way to be sure, and obstructing where needed.

[Swordfish]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It would be a mild olive branch if nothing else. I've been listening to a lot of podcasts with European leaders/diplomats and most of them are in full break glass in case of emergency mode. If Trump et al. were serious about maintaining our relationship with NATO it's the least they could do to send our top diplomat to the first major NATO meeting during Trump's term.  

I guess.  but it's not like he's blowing it off for no reason, and he's sending his right hand guy.

I just don't really think this is that big of a deal.

[Swordfish]

1 minute ago, Seli said:

There are conservatives, there are reactionaries, there are let the world burn and the rich rule idiots as well. It makes sense for the Democrats to get a conservative and not one of the other options.

Pushing hard at the hearings is the only way to be sure, and obstructing where needed.

Are you suggesting Gorsuch is 'one of the other options'?  I'd be curious of your reasoning there, because from everything I've seen he seems to be a fairly boilerplate conservative nominee.

Either way, we're getting a bit far afield of the point of the conversation.  What you are talking about is the democrats acting based on the merits of Gorsuch.  Which isn't really what this conversation is about.

[James Arryn]

15 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

I just think this is more or less a tempest in a teacup.  I doubt sending tillerson would alleviate much of that angst either, given all the other things Trump says and does.  It would be a token gesture, at most.

Thank God token gestures don't signify much in the language of diplomacy.

[Kalbear]

The idea that democrats vote against Gorsuch but don't filibuster is interesting. 

[Inigima]

I think it might be their only play. You can delay, you can argue -- correctly, in my view -- that this nomination should have been Obama's and Trump's pick is illegitimate, but you can't really stop it. So I would do all those things, but it's the only way forward, and they can vote no in protest.

Edit: Has anyone asked Gorsuch what he thinks about the Garland situation?

[DMC]

RE Gorsuch Confirmation:  The Dems seem to have two options here - allow an up or down vote or force McConnell to abolish the filibuster.  What should be emphasized about the latter, however, is this would in all likelihood not be the full on "nuclear option" as pundits prefer to call it.  Rather, the GOP Senate would likely simply extend Harry Reid's abolishment of the filibuster for executive and (other) judicial nominees to SCOTUS - I highly doubt certain institutionalist Republican Senators would back a full abolishment of the cloture requirement.

I'm of two minds on this - one, as others have rightly pointed out - is the Dems should probably save this fight for another day.  Unless significant dirt is dug up on Gorsuch (which may well make this whole discussion moot anyway), it's not a battle anybody cares about but their base, there are much more important battles to be fought right now, and the sting is lessened by Gorsuch "replacing" Scalia's seat rather than someone from the liberal bloc.

OTOH, the cynic in me would say the filibuster being abolished for SCOTUS nominees is an eventuality regardless of it happens this time or the next.  Might as well throw the base a bone and make the GOP do it while they're fielding difficulties on a number of fronts.

Lastly, the idea the Dems should not vote against cloture but uniformly vote against final confirmation is rather irrelevant.  It's still going to piss off the base for not employing the filibuster against Gorsuch when the GOP wouldn't even meet with Garland.  Moreover, most Dem Senators are probably going to have to vote against Gorsuch on the floor vote anyway.

[Inigima]

There's also the whole thing where a sitting president is under investigation as a possible agent of a hostile foreign lower. So, you know, maybe don't have a vote on those grounds.

The extent to which Republicans are prepared to betray their country to "win" is, somehow, still shocking.

[Swordfish]

1 hour ago, Inigima said:

I think it might be their only play. You can delay, you can argue -- correctly, in my view -- that this nomination should have been Obama's and Trump's pick is illegitimate, 

The problem with that is that 1 - There's no legal standing for illegitimacy and 2 - What's the redress even if there was?

It's not a good look for them to keep whining about the Garland situation at this point.  it's pretty much sour grapes at this point.

[LongRider]

Prez Orange Thingy made some promises about soooo many good jobs comin' 'round again.  So, Prez, perhaps you should take yur political rallies to Ohio and Indiana and have a bit of talkin' to these folks, to whom you promised so much;

Quote

 

It's official: Two Ohio DP&L coal plants to close

Dayton Power & Light Co. announced it is going ahead with the closure of two power plants in Adams County, a much-debated issue that has become national news.

The company made the announcement Monday to shutter both J.M. Stuart Station and Killen Station — two coal-fired power plants that have been part of the proposed settlement of its electric security plan, or ESP. ~~~snip~~~ DPL Inc. has about 860 employees in the Dayton region, according to the 2016-2017 DBJ Book of Lists. Owned by AES Corp., the company has 515,000 customers in west Ohio.

 

And our man Trumpy promised, promised coal would make a big comeback, a huge comeback, some might say a bigly comeback.     opps

 

 

Quote

 

Job Cuts Endure at Indiana Factories Despite Trump Pressure

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — About 1,500 workers at three Indiana factories are facing layoffs despite hopes that President Donald Trump would convince the companies to reverse plans for moving production to Mexico.

United Technologies confirmed Friday that the first wave of about 50 layoffs happened last week at its electronics plant that had about 700 workers in Huntington. The plant in the northeastern Indiana city is slated for closure.

Steps are also being taken toward about 550 job cuts anticipated at a Carrier Corp. factory in Indianapolis, where Trump's intervention last fall curbed job losses but didn't halt them altogether. Layoffs could start within a month at a 350-worker Rexnord industrial bearings factory in Indianapolis, according to United Steelworkers Local 1999 President Chuck Jones, who represents workers at the Carrier and Rexnord plants.

 

So, Prez Orange Thingy ain't jumping in to save more jobs in Indiana?  What a meanie.   The layoffs at the Carrier plant are about 2/3 of the number that Trump 'saved' last fall.  What a terrible, terrible bait and switch Trump and Carrier did to these people.  Carrier got lotsa nice tax breaks tho.  Who's winning now?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 Kind of dig this angle...

 

As a stalling tactic anyway.  

[all swedes are racist]

lol... trump or no, the republican machines gutting of EPA et al means we'll all be dead in 40 years anyway so who gives a fuck?

[Martell Spy]

Trump, GOP leaders lack votes to pass Obamacare repeal
With less than 48 hours to go before a vote, the president and senior House Republicans are scrambling to corral wayward members.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/obamacare-repeal-mark-meadows-freedom-caucus-236314

Why Trump Thinks Passing a Terrible Health-Care Bill Makes Sense

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/why-trump-thinks-passing-a-terrible-health-bill-makes-sense.html

[Ser Reptitious]

13 hours ago, Swordfish said:

 

if a child misbehaves and the parents attempt to fix the behavior by exhibiting the same (or slightly worse) behavior, for a longer period of time, as some sort of petty tit for tat, do you think the child will act the same way again in the future?

 

Except that the Democrats are siblings of the Republicans, not the parents (since they have no power over them). There are no parents (unfortunately) in U.S. politics. So if one sibling can continuously get away with mistreating the other one without consquences (i.e. the other sibling fighting back), why would the misbehaving one stop? A bully doesn't usually stop bullying until there are negative consequences for his/her behaviour. 

[Fez]

10 hours ago, Swordfish said:

The problem with that is that 1 - There's no legal standing for illegitimacy and 2 - What's the redress even if there was?

It's not a good look for them to keep whining about the Garland situation at this point.  it's pretty much sour grapes at this point.

I think the goal at this point is just to delay the vote to the point that he isn't seated until after the last oral arguments of the year, which is in April I think. That way he won't be part of this year's cases at all and conservatives won't have a majority for any of them.

Most aren't huge blockbusters, and the biggest IMO, the gerrymandering one, was already argued so he wouldn't be part of that ruling anyway; but every Supreme Court ruling is important and even a one-year reprieve is worth fighting for.

[OldGimletEye]

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/22/14990838/why-republican-elites-back-trump

Quote

A lot of weird stuff happened over the past seven days in American politics that might make President Trump’s party skeptical of him. The Trump administration provoked a minor international incident with the United Kingdom by accusing its surveillance agency of complicity in an illegal scheme to subject Trump’s campaign to surveillance. The directors of the FBI and the National Security Agency, plus the chairs of the congressional intelligence committees, rebuked the president for lying about these surveillance issues. Trump also provoked a minor international incident with Germany by accusing Angela Merkel’s government of being somehow in debt to NATO.

 

Quote

Trump is delivering, fundamentally, what the business community wants: a light regulatory touch, a business-friendly Supreme Court, and progress toward a big tax cut. Gun rights enthusiasts, abortion opponents, and other key Republican-aligned interest groups can say the same. Some of Trump’s antics may be counterproductive to their goals, others may be helpful — putting a populist gloss on a fundamentally business-oriented agenda — but it’s always the case that Trump in power is better than the alternative.

 

Quote

 But from the standpoint of the Republican establishment and the business community, it’s not a crazy calculation.

Perhaps not. But it's completely dishonest and unethical. Throw everything and everyone under the bus because "tax cuts!!!!".

What a fucked up party.

[Ormond]

11 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 Kind of dig this angle...

 

As a stalling tactic anyway.  

I don't get how this would fly with the general public because Trump's nomination of Gorsuch is just about the least likely one of his decisions to have been influenced by the Russians. Plus if Pence becomes President and Gorsuch's nomination has been delayed I just can't see him doing anything but nominating Gorsuch over again.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 hours ago, Swordfish said:

oh come on....  that is not the definition of blackmail.  A president using supreme court nominations as a campaign tool is hardly a new or villainous activity.  

It's absolutely political blackmail. I don't see how that can even be debated. And yes, others have used it as a campaign tool, but never like the way Trump did. 

15 hours ago, Swordfish said:

I guess.  but it's not like he's blowing it off for no reason, and he's sending his right hand guy.

I just don't really think this is that big of a deal.

You have to keep in mind how foreign diplomacy works, and even the most subtle slight can send shock waves. If you browse some foreign papers online you'll see that our NATO allies have taken note of this and they're not happy about it. 

[Fragile Bird]

Apropos of nothing being discussed, I see Mr. "I won't take a paycheck" has cashed his second one.

"Oh" said his supporters last year. "He's a rich man, can't be influenced, and he'll work for free!"