denstorebog Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Well, that was fast. Ethics panel opens investigation into Nunes: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/327594-ethics-panel-announces-investigation-into-nunes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Awesome title. Just about perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 8 minutes ago, aceluby said: This will cost him his majority I'm confused, you think that the smart political move for McConnell would be to allow the Gorsuch filibuster to succeed? How do you figure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Just now, Maithanet said: I'm confused, you think that the smart political move for McConnell would be to allow the Gorsuch filibuster to succeed? How do you figure? The smart political move would have been to draw a similarity of Alito and Gorsuch and try to punish dems that way. Make them look extreme. Have Trump use the bully pulpit to do the same. Utilize the gridlock for your advantage. This is short sighted, but as a Dem I'm actually quite happy this happened. Now the GOP looks even more extreme and I think it will cost them their majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 6 minutes ago, aceluby said: The smart political move would have been to draw a similarity of Alito and Gorsuch and try to punish dems that way. Make them look extreme. Have Trump use the bully pulpit to do the same. Utilize the gridlock for your advantage. This is short sighted, but as a Dem I'm actually quite happy this happened. Now the GOP looks even more extreme and I think it will cost them their majority. I think the Republicans need a win. Trump's administration has been struggling with any kind of winning, and getting a guy like Gorsuch instead of Garland is a really big win for Republican voters. Sure, they could pound democrats for obstruction on the SC, but they can (and already are) pounding them for obstruction elsewhere, so I don't really see why that would be the magic bullet to improving their voter support. You think that Democrats are going to go to the voting booth over nuking the filibuster on SC nominations? Because I feel like this is waaay down the list from the mixture of crazy, corrupt and heartless policies coming out of the White House. If the Republicans are going to win in 2018, they need accomplishments. If they rely on just blame game, some Republicans will just stay home. Controlling the SC for another 10-20 years is a big accomplishment, and McConnell deserves the lion's share of credit for pulling it off these past thirteen months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempra Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 2 minutes ago, aceluby said: The smart political move would have been to draw a similarity of Alito and Gorsuch and try to punish dems that way. Make them look extreme. Have Trump use the bully pulpit to do the same. Utilize the gridlock for your advantage. This is short sighted, but as a Dem I'm actually quite happy this happened. Now the GOP looks even more extreme and I think it will cost them their majority. How does extending Reid's Rule to SCOTUS make the Republicans look extreme? Democrats have filibustered or attempted to filibuster the last two Republican SCOTUS nominees. Gorsuch is a vanilla SCOTUS nominees and, yet, the Democrats blocked him from the bench merely for political reasons. Democrats were thrown a bone with Gorsuch. The next Trump nominee will be considerably more conservative and the Democrats foolishly threw away the filibuster over Gorsuch. Almost as dumb an idea as when Biden suggested a lame duck president should not nominate anyone to SCOTUS in the waning months of his presidency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 4 minutes ago, Maithanet said: Controlling the SC for another 10-20 years is a big accomplishment, and McConnell deserves the lion's share of credit for pulling it off these past thirteen months. 10 to 20 years? Are you kidding? Try 35 to 40, he's only 49. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 4 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: 10 to 20 years? Are you kidding? Try 35 to 40, he's only 49. There are other SC spots. Kennedy and Thomas are not young men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Neither is Ginsburg, though. And Kennedy is relatively moderate, all things considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Just now, Maithanet said: There are other SC spots. Kennedy and Thomas are not young men. Exactly, and if they go in the next 4 years, they're not going to be replaced with liberal-leaning judges. Or even moderates - Garland ain't gonna be nominated. Hell, Ginsberg could drop dead at any moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 10 minutes ago, Tempra said: How does extending Reid's Rule to SCOTUS make the Republicans look extreme? Democrats have filibustered or attempted to filibuster the last two Republican SCOTUS nominees. Gorsuch is a vanilla SCOTUS nominees and, yet, the Democrats blocked him from the bench merely for political reasons. Democrats were thrown a bone with Gorsuch. The next Trump nominee will be considerably more conservative and the Democrats foolishly threw away the filibuster over Gorsuch. Almost as dumb an idea as when Biden suggested a lame duck president should not nominate anyone to SCOTUS in the waning months of his presidency. This post is completely void of objectivity and critical thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 10 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: Exactly, and if they go in the next 4 years, they're not going to be replaced with liberal-leaning judges. Or even moderates - Garland ain't gonna be nominated. Hell, Ginsberg could drop dead at any moment. And this is why I wanted a thread to debate the differences between rights and privileges. Because a lot of women in this country are about to learn the hard way that what they thought were their rights were never so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Btw, I'm embarrassed to admit it, but I don't understand the cultural reference in the thread title - is it a song? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 48 minutes ago, aceluby said: The smart political move would have been to draw a similarity of Alito and Gorsuch and try to punish dems that way. Make them look extreme. Have Trump use the bully pulpit to do the same. Utilize the gridlock for your advantage. This is short sighted, but as a Dem I'm actually quite happy this happened. Now the GOP looks even more extreme and I think it will cost them their majority. It won't. Very few voters care about process. Also, have you looked at the 2018 senate map? Its insane. To get a majority, Democrats need to: Keep seats in red states: Indiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia. Keep seats in swing states: Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Avoid any upsets in blue states. Win seats in: Arizona, Nevada, and Texas. If they lose a single seat, they also have to win a seat in either: Mississippi, Nebraska, Tennessee, Utah, or Wyoming. Its not gonna happen. Democrats would be extremely lucky to just break even; even if they win the House in a wave election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 5 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: Btw, I'm embarrassed to admit it, but I don't understand the cultural reference in the thread title - is it a song? Presidents of the United States of America tune... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 1 minute ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Presidents of the United States of America tune... Lol, thanks! I wouldn't have made the connection since I didn't know that song.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 42 minutes ago, Maithanet said: I think the Republicans need a win. Trump's administration has been struggling with any kind of winning, and getting a guy like Gorsuch instead of Garland is a really big win for Republican voters. Sure, they could pound democrats for obstruction on the SC, but they can (and already are) pounding them for obstruction elsewhere, so I don't really see why that would be the magic bullet to improving their voter support. You think that Democrats are going to go to the voting booth over nuking the filibuster on SC nominations? Because I feel like this is waaay down the list from the mixture of crazy, corrupt and heartless policies coming out of the White House. If the Republicans are going to win in 2018, they need accomplishments. If they rely on just blame game, some Republicans will just stay home. Controlling the SC for another 10-20 years is a big accomplishment, and McConnell deserves the lion's share of credit for pulling it off these past thirteen months. 2 things. 1) The 'obstruction' by democrats so far has been basically zero. This has been the only real test. 2) The GOP has played the blame game for the last 8 years with zero accomplishments and have been rewarded with majorities in all branches of govt and the states. I also believe they could have gotten Gorsuch through without this. They didn't even really try any other option, they just did it as fast as possible, by any means necessary. I think this is just gives another reason for Dems to show up at the polls in droves for 2018 and 2020. So yeah. While in the end they get to hang their hat on one accomplishment, they did so in the worst way politically and will be one of many things that will cost them their majorities across the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 5 minutes ago, Fez said: Its not gonna happen. Democrats would be extremely lucky to just break even; even if they win the House in a wave election. Pretty much. Like it or not you need to be ready for at least 4 years of unified government controlled by Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Just now, Tywin et al. said: Pretty much. Like it or not you need to be ready for at least 4 years of unified government controlled by Republicans. Not all that unified so far, thankfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Not all that unified so far, thankfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.