Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
Is it democratic that the party that has only won the popular vote once in the last seven elections will have a 6-3 edge on the Supreme Court (lifetime appointments)? The large majority of Americans being polled now say the appointment should wait until after the election. (citation needed).
The Republicans may be arguably within the rules to attempt this. The undemocratic part relates to larger problems with the Electoral College, and small states having equal representation in the Senate.
|
I don't disagree at all with your comments about the shortcomings of the electoral college and that entire model. I also appreciate your insight into how those short-comings have impacted that 6-3 edge on the supreme court.
Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
The controversy is more that the Republicans will confirm a nomination they dont even know yet. There is no room for hearing or debate even. It's a sham.
|
Yeah....I do get what you're saying. If the president right now was Hillary Clinton, and she was at risk of losing the upcoming election, and the democrats controlled the senate, would there be any difference in how this was playing out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
... No? What SCOTUS nominee did they reject in 1992? All that happened was Joe Biden made a speech in which he said that, as a general rule, no one should be nominated the summer before an election so that the nominee didn't become a political football. It wasn't said in the context of an actual vacancy on the Court. There was no actual action taken.
I agree that it's clearly within their legal right to do, in fact, it's actually their obligation. But having ignored that obligation four years ago based on a rationale that is even more applicable today given the relative proximity to the election, the response, "sure, you can do this, but given what you did last time, you absolutely shouldn't" is completely fair.
The Republicans are, and I think it's perfectly fair to say this without partisanship, brazen cheaters. They'll do whatever they can do to rig the game to get the outcomes they want. They'll push things as far as they possibly can. The Democrats are sometimes also cheaters, but usually, they're simply not willing to go nearly as far as the Republicans, and in other cases they just aren't as competent at cheating. If, as a result, they continue to get the rug pulled out from under them, those realities will no doubt change.
If it gets to a point where the side that holds power is just the side that's better at breaking the rules and circumventing the system, then the rules and the system become meaningless, and you might as well just be shooting at each other. I was exaggerating to make a point when I said someone should simply assassinate Mitch McConnell because the rules don't matter, but it's really not that far from the path things are heading down right now.
|
Thanks for setting me straight on the 1992 part......I had obviously mis-understood that.
I also agree with you about the path politics is heading down in general, and it's extremely unfortunate. And while I don't disagree that the republicans are pushing wherever they can to their advantage, I would have a difficult time accepting that the democrats wouldn't be doing the exact same thing in this situation.