Quote:
Originally Posted by BoLevi
I want to be sure I understand your position so please correct me if I am wrong.
You are upset at the GOP for flip-flopping on a rule that they made.
But you think it is acceptable that the Dems flip-flop on the concept of a nomination in an election year.
If I have that wrong, please clarify.
|
In 2012, the American people elected Barack Obama to a 2nd term, meaning he was to have all the powers that come with being US president, including the power to nominate Supreme Court nominees,
for the entire 4 years (meaning the entirety of 2013-2016).
In 2016, MM made up a rule out of thin air, claiming that the Senate should not be allowed to vote on a SC nominee if the nomination was made in the final year of a presidential term. He specifically used the justification that since the election was less than a year away, the American people should have a say in whether or not the nominee should be confirmed, by going to the ballot box and choosing the next president, and then that president would make the decision. The Democrats were appalled at MM's move to essentially undermine the final portion of Obama's 2nd term, while also denying the elected Senate the opportunity to vote on the nomination. Indeed, the Democrats strongly disagreed with MM's "reasoning", as they should have. However, they were mindful of the new precedent being set.
Now in 2020, RBG has passed away, and MM's decision to bring a Trump SC nomination to the Senate floor for a vote, in extremely close proximity to a presidential election, flies directly in the face of everything he said in 2016. As such, the Democrats are asking the Republicans to have some consistency, and to hold true to the precedent that they set 4 years ago. This is not a Democrat flip flop - it's the furthest thing from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoLevi
Seems the Democrats are mostly interested in "rules" when it benefits them. I don't blame them, of course - and clearly the GOP take the same position.
Which is my point.
|
Wrong. Democrats are interested in precedents and norms being respected. In 2016, the norm was for SC nominees to be voted on by the Senate, regardless of whether it was the final year of a president's term. MM then brazenly changed that norm by introducing a new precedent (clearly for the benefit of he and his party). Fast forward 4 years, the Democrats once again want the established norm to be respected.
Sorry BL, you're grasping at straws to try to paint Democrats as flip floppers. They aren't (at least not in regards to this topic).