The Biden/Harris Administration Accomplishments Thread

[luthervol]

Republican controlled Senate hasn't confirmed a D SC nominee since 1895.
That scenario hasnt happened since 1895.

Luther: See????

Check your sources next time!

 

[luthervol]

He’s a loser education “admin” type guy who wants to start a business “helping” young kids lol. He is full of feelz and not very full of intelligence and logic

???
Start a business helping kids?

 

[Ttucke11]

You have sex with 50% of your hires?

100% actually sir.

 

[McDad]

100% actually sir.

 

[NorthDallas40]

100% actually sir.

So you’re a pimp? Sweet.

 

[Ttucke11]

So you’re a pimp? Sweet.

This got out of hand real quick

 

[McDad]

This got out of hand real quick

 

[luthervol]

Quick recap for those who may have missed it...........

Goebbels would be proud of your often told lie. No lie told

Imo, luther just illuminated the idiocy of those worried about social media misinformation.
In about 5 minutes, I was able to provide the real truth to his shared, partisan lies. Didn't even need a fact checker to get involved. Again, no lie told

You’re right one is in order. You owe Ras, Breathe, and quite a few others an apology you racist hack. ND being ND

It's all here, liar. Again, no lie told.
List of presidents of the United States - Wikipedia


Woodrow Wilson Supreme Court candidates - Wikipedia.
Harry S. Truman Supreme Court candidates - Wikipedia
Bill Clinton Supreme Court candidates - Wikipedia

This is the usual dishonesty. Nothing in my post was dishonest

Clinton had no nominees when the Rs controlled the Senate.
Same for Truman.
Same for Wilson.

You myopic misfit. Your criteria of D president with R controlled Senate is what I searched and provided data for. I listed all pertinent info. It makes your posted source ridiculously clickbaitey.

Now you want to argue stuff I havent claimed. Finally backed off false claim of lie

May be the most dishonest poster on the site. lol

That's what the data says.
That's why I listed it all.
Your post didnt say D president and D senate. Makes no sense....cover for misreading own data?

You're are the absolute worst poster here. Good one - You remind how glad I am I've drastically reduced my interaction with you.

I never allow lesser people to make me feel dirty.Better one

He’s a loser education “admin” type guy who wants to start a business “helping” young kids lol. He is full of feelz and not very full of intelligence and logic Just thought it was insightful enough to include - but the starting a business stuff is inaccurate (misunderstanding on your end)

The "likes" are pouring in.

I get more likes off Luther than he does. That's a guarantee - no easier way to get likes

He's disingenuous. Troll, modify, parse. Lather, rinse, repeat.Probably worth at least 5 likes

 

[1vol8]

Post the accomplishments of the Biden/ Harris Administration here in this thread please.

Democrats and Moderates. Here is your chance to brag about what you elected into office.

This thread is long overdue.

This should be a very short thread

 

[Vol423]

100% actually sir.

So you’re self-employed with no employees.

 

[Vol Main]

I’m struggling to find 1.

You're lying. The reality is that you will think and say anything to avoid finding one.

 

[Vol423]

I’m struggling to find 1.

That’s because there hasn’t been a single one.

 

[volinbham]

Republican controlled Senate hasn't confirmed a D SC nominee since 1895.
That scenario hasnt happened since 1895.

Luther: See????

I honestly don't think he understands what you clearly pointed out

Using it as an example of insinuation was a nice touch.

tip o the hat

 

[volinbham]

This just in, when Rs are in control of the Senate they've never confirmed a Transgendered SCOTUS candidate nominated by a D POTUS.

NEVER!

Think about it and what that really says about Republican Senators.

 

[clarksvol00]

Twitter would ban you. There were only a few times when D presidents were coupled with R controlled Senates. The nominations and appointments are listed. Check your "source" next time.

R Controlled Senate. Presidential Party Affiliation
1895 -1913 R, R, R.
1919 - 1933 D, R, R, R
1947 - 1949 D
1953 - 1955 R
1981 - 1987 R, R
1995 - 2001 D, D
2003 - 2007 R
2015 - 2021 R
Woodrow Wilson nominated 3 associate justices.
All confirmed. 14, 14, 16
Truman nominated 4. All confirmed 45, 46, 49, 49
Clinton nominated 2. Both confirmed 93 and 94

U.S. Senate: Supreme Court Nominations (1789-Present)

I think rather than saying that Luther's statement is false because Republicans controlled the senate during a potlrtion the presidencies of some democrats we should see who controlled the senate when the justices were actually nominated. I only looked at Clinton, but based on the dates you provided, it looks like he nominated justices prior to the year the Republicans took the senate.

 

[T Clifton]

Biden starts Disinformation Board led by Russia 'expert' who called Hunter's laptop 'Trump product' | Daily Mail Online

 

[clarksvol00]

Republican controlled Senate hasn't confirmed a D SC nominee since 1895.
That scenario hasnt happened since 1895.

Luther: See????

Didn't Obama nominate Garland in '16 and the republican senate refused to vote on it?

 

[AM64]

lol.....So why all the hoopla over every SC nominee?
We all obviously know that there are massive differences between even the most "qualified" justices.

Because too many SC nominees are activists who can't simply apply what is written in the Constitution and legislation. If you judge according to existing rules, how can judges reach radically different opinions unless they reek of bias?

 

[AM64]

No sir , I’m honest and don’t try to cover up what are established facts . Stop trying to make excuses for one side being racist and the other side not when anyone can look up the definition of the word . Let me show you what I mean .. is affirmative action a racist program sponsored by our government ?

Absolutely. Discrimination is discrimination. You can't cure discrimination by applying mere discrimination; but you sure can buy votes with it.

 

[Jxn Vol]

Didn't Obama nominate Garland in '16 and the republican senate refused to vote on it?

Thank God. His performance as AG has proved that they made the correct decision.

 

[AM64]

I am not in disagreement with this. Either admit/accept we're going to be the world's policeman and charge everyone for the service or get out of the business. We have the moats and a lot of bad-ass submarines to keep any serious military threat away.

I'm not anti-military. I believe in having the best. But I question why we have 11 nuclear aircraft carriers (all at least 50% larger by tonnage than any other country's) and plans to build four more. Assuming the British would be on our side in any Atlantic or Mediterranean fracas, that actually boosts the number to 13 large fleet carriers.

Seems like big warships are a bit like Russian tanks - targets containing warm bodies. Carriers may be fine and dandy for limited wars where the enemy doesn't have real airpower or anti-ship missiles. But you aren't going to hide a carrier task force like navies did in WW2; they may have teeth, but carriers still look like sitting ducks.

 

[BreatheUT]

Biden Administration accomplishment:

The number of realistic items to be impeached over if Republicans have some stones. It should be swift and immediate come January.

 

[AM64]

My contention is this; market research (or parents saying it directly) has shown that many parents will only allow their young daughter to be trained by a female - then is having being a female a qualification for at least one of your trainers appropiate.

I'll simplify more for those still in need.
You run a medical facility - it is know that x% of females will only see a female gyno. - should you hire a female gyno.?

That is actually a free market decision. A choice the practice makes to suit its needs. If the practice opens up its market or clientele because of that decision, it's good business assuming all the doctors are fully qualified and aren't risks to the practice. Selecting judges or other political appointees is only good business if you are buying votes. As a patient, you can choose which medical practice or doctor you want. As a citizen, you are stuck with judges someone picks. That's a huge difference, and bias toward others has no place in government.

 

[T Clifton]

 

[AM64]

Does it matter what political leanings they have?

Yes, it matters. Political leanings are for the Legislative and Administrative Branches (assuming the president sees things as required by congressional dems) - political lean has no place in the Judicial Branch.