Vice Presidential Debate 2020

#851
#851
LouderVol said:
Except they already have. 4 years ago it was the president should find someone. Now its they shouldnt. It's literally impossible to point at just the Rs here.
Click to expand...

Again, expecting what is largely the same senate to act consistently is not the same as hypocrisy.
 
#854
#854
Wafflestomper said:
Precedent is irrelevant to whether something is rational or not. However, I think republicans would normally be well within their right to replace RBG. But they refused to even hold a vote for a SCOTUS nominee four years ago, citing that a supreme court appointment shouldn't happen during an election year. What happened to letting the American people decide by electing the president?
Click to expand...
If the Court is non political, what difference does it make who nominates them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#858
#858
Wafflestomper said:
I assume he knows her replacement will be appointed by Trump? To my knowledge there isn't really anything the democrats can do to stop it at this point. If the vote is held sometime after the election then I assume you'll see his list if he wins.
Click to expand...

Don't the voters deserve to know what kind of judge Biden would nominate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#860
#860
Electric Orange said:
Click to expand...


Elections are a boon for gun and ammo manufacturers.

Every cycle the "they're comin' fer ur gunz" narrative gets trotted out and every cycle, we still have the gunz. The only winners seem to be the gun lobby and manufacturers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OHvol40
#865
#865
Septic said:
Elections are a boon for gun and ammo manufacturers.

Every cycle the "they're comin' fer ur gunz" narrative gets trotted out and every cycle, we still have the gunz. The only winners seem to be the gun lobby and manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Ammo sales are the real winner
 
#866
#866
Wafflestomper said:
Precedent is irrelevant to whether something is rational or not. However, I think republicans would normally be well within their right to replace RBG. But they refused to even hold a vote for a SCOTUS nominee four years ago, citing that a supreme court appointment shouldn't happen during an election year. What happened to letting the American people decide by electing the president?
Click to expand...
Garland should have been brought to the floor. However he probably would have been defeated. But I thought he was a fine nomination, just not compared to Scalia.

Your narrative simply doesn’t hold water. There won’t be a successful SCOTUS nomination in an election year without an aligned WH and Senate. I don’t believe that has happened since the early 1900’s. And in the current political environment it isn’t going to happen now.

Your narrative simply has no merit within the context of our political system. Don’t like it? Get the system changed then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Y9 Vol and davethevol
#869
#869
NorthDallas40 said:
Garland should have been brought to the floor. However he probably would have been defeated. But I thought he was a fine nomination, just not compared to Scalia.

Your narrative simply doesn’t hold water. There won’t be a successful SCOTUS nomination in an election year without an aligned WH and Senate. I don’t believe that has happened since the early 1900’s. And in the current political environment it isn’t going to happen now.

Your narrative simply has no merit within the context of our political system. Don’t like it? Get the system changed then.
Click to expand...

My narrative that the republican senate should be consistent with their stated policies doesn't hold water? If Biden is elected the system may well change and then I guess we'll have to throw our hands up and say "elections have consequences" rather than relying on our elected officials being reasonable, since that's clearly not what their constituents desire.
 
#870
#870
Wafflestomper said:
My narrative that the republican senate should be consistent with their stated policies doesn't hold water? If Biden is elected the system may well change and then I guess we'll have to throw our hands up and say "elections have consequences" rather than relying on our elected officials being reasonable, since that's clearly not what their constituents desire.
Click to expand...
Your narrative is wrong. The Republican Senate HAS been consistent and I’ve been pointing that out to you over and over and over...

You are screaming at their rationale. But their actions are consistent. Fact.
 
#874
#874
Septic said:
Elections are a boon for gun and ammo manufacturers.

Every cycle the "they're comin' fer ur gunz" narrative gets trotted out and every cycle, we still have the gunz. The only winners seem to be the gun lobby and manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Usually because there are checks in place (ex. Senate, Supreme Court, in some cases States) to prevent this and other extremist agendas from coming to fruition, thankfully.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top