Does this make sense to use as a defense? Correct the POTUS has the constitution in his favor to nominate someone. Obama did just that and his pick didn't even get a hearing.
I don't want to hear what party is currently in power, I'm talking just the "constitution argument".
(no message)
(no message)
Not quite as interesting as medicine isn't science, but interesting none the less. Great job!
.......and it is quite possible that the senate will not approve a Trump nomination right now.
But you Dems keep whining like the senate didn’t have every right to do what it did. The constitution outlined the role of the senate to balance the presidents power in this case. That happened with Garland.
As Obama once said to John McCain,”It’s time to stop complaining John. You lost. Elections have consequences”.
The difference between Obama and Trump is that Trump has a chance to get this through the senate thanks to the elections as determined by the voters of this great country.
(no message)
If you deem it productive and healthy for the US Senate to go forward as scorched earth gang warfare, then march forward.
Collegiality. Fair Play. Nation’s best interests over party power. 60 + votes. Public confidence in the members of our highest Court being fully vetted, yet blessed by the lion’s share of the Senate.
(no message)
Let us know when your party lives up to the ideals in your second paragraph.
Reid’s use of the nuclear option (for executive and judicial nominees) occurred 4 years after Mitch proudly announced the GOP would obstruct, obstruct, obstruct the a Obama Administration. And they did.
And Reid made clear that the nuclear option would not be used for Supreme Court nominees.
Mitch is the toxic poison in the Senate.
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-poised-to-limit-filibusters-in-party-line-vote-that-would-alter-centuries-of-precedent/2013/11/21/d065cfe8-52b6-11e3-9fe0-fd2ca728e67c_story.html?no_nav=true&tid=a_classic-iphone&p9w22b2p=b2p22p9w00098
I was thinking that your reply would be some stupid variation of that pathos.
(no message)
(no message)
Give me a break. You have yet to condemn any of the violence and looting going across the streets. Spare us your bullshit.
(no message)
The Senate has this power. The people elected a Senate which may be likely to use this power. But, the Dems want to stop it. They have certainly changed their position since Reid partially did away with the filibuster and Obama proclaimed that elections have consequences.
(no message)
(no message)
Link: https://twitter.com/trumpstudents/status/1307695681885425665?s=21
But it is foolish to ask our "regressive" friends to listen to Cruz. Their minds are always closed to intelligent arguments against their opinions.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
That's what Donald said, right? Donald wouldn't tell a lie, now would he?
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1ND2VS8q08
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
that lying POS Trump. You own that Bitch, right? You own all of his 20,000 + lies. LMAO. Good Times.
(no message)
(no message)
Stick up for that unpatriotic draft dodging cowardly POS.
(no message)
If the GOP does this, the Dems will seek to pack more justices on the court.
Once things become zero-sum, it is hard to turn back.
Sucks to set a precedent
(no message)
Link: https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1307787438602022917?s=19
I don't know if this is tradition or not. I'll let you make that case. I'm just clarifying your point.
The constitution does not keep the republic together.
Norms do. Cooperation and responsible opposition.
We are in big trouble.
I was warning about this long before you have been warning about it. Welcome to the party.
How much longer do you think the country has?...assuming Trump nominates and the GOP confirms, and the DNC destroys SCOTUS in response?
The Dems lost elections and won’t except the consequences. It is that simple. You expect R’s to reward D’s for their threats?! Appeasement does not work. Also, you don’t get to pick when you lose. Deal with it. We will if we have to as well.
We elected Trump to put someone up in this exact setting. He will be letting us down if he does not though I am not worried. He keeps his promises.
I will oppose it vociferously.
But the Democrats will do it.
Or the Republicans can cooperate and save the republic.
One or the other.
I’m serious. This is a very dangerous moment.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Is he as sharp as he was 20 years ago? No.
Does he have dementia? No.
Two facts.
It is you who are not credible when you ignore the very obvious.
I get why Democrats would still vote for a ticket led by a guy who is not mentally fit. They will count on his handlers to handle him, and they trust his handlers (whomever they are) to be less offensive on the tweets than Trump. But, let's not pretend he is a mastermind.
Not sure what you mean about "using the constitution as an excuse." By that, do you mean "executing powers as specifically enumerated in the Constitution?" How is that an "excuse" or a "defense"? Interested in your theory.
Regarding Obama: he used his power. McConnell also used his. That was a different situation from now, but the constitution is the same.