US Gen. Election Thread V: The Hunt for Red October Surprise

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Then Schumer is a fucking idiot.

The reason you have a filibuster rule and the equally important cloture motion is because you can let a bill die without bringing it to vote.

It is an important part of our legislative process, albeit a hardly used one until recently. Eliminate the filibuster and you'll end up fucking yourself over if you don't have a "safe cloture" majority in congress.

To clarify he said he would for the Supreme Court. I say again if you want to filibuster you should have to actually talk on the floor.

And again, he is a fucking idiot.

He wouldn't be saying that if Trump was the one getting elected and they win the Senate.

This is partisan grand-posturing.

[Cymrea]

They are interfering with the justice system by refusing to confirm a nominee to Supreme Court and saying they won't conform any of Hillary Clinton's nominees should she win. That's interference. The job of the Senate is advise and consent not advise and obstruct. All nominees deserve a hearing and a up or down vote anything less is obstruction, there is no way to spin it.

Maybe for SCOTUS since that's a Constitutionally-mandated branch of the government, but the rest of the judiciary was created by Congress.

Just because the legislative branch enacted laws that created/defined the judicial branch doesn't mean they are permitted impede the due process of nomination and confirmation based in partisan politics.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Maybe for SCOTUS since that's a Constitutionally-mandated branch of the government, but the rest of the judiciary was created by Congress.

Just because the legislative branch enacted laws that created/defined the judicial branch doesn't mean they are permitted impede the due process of nomination and confirmation based in partisan politics.

The problem you're running against here is that there is no set number of justices on the SCOTUS.

We could go all the way down to Three, and still be ok.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Maybe for SCOTUS since that's a Constitutionally-mandated branch of the government, but the rest of the judiciary was created by Congress.

Just because the legislative branch enacted laws that created/defined the judicial branch doesn't mean they are permitted impede the due process of nomination and confirmation based in partisan politics.

The rules don't say they can't either, so they can get away with it.

[Eol Sha]

Maybe for SCOTUS since that's a Constitutionally-mandated branch of the government, but the rest of the judiciary was created by Congress.

Just because the legislative branch enacted laws that created/defined the judicial branch doesn't mean they are permitted impede the due process of nomination and confirmation based in partisan politics.

And who, exactly, is gonna force them to do otherwise?

[Eol Sha]

Like rand Paul did.

Yes and that's how it should have to be done any time you want to filibuster.

Why?

[San Lumen]

To clarify he said he would for the Supreme Court. I say again if you want to filibuster you should have to actually talk on the floor.

And again, he is a fucking idiot.

He wouldn't be saying that if Trump was the one getting elected and they win the Senate.

This is partisan grand-posturing.

No he isn't. There is no way Trump wins and Democrats get the Senate. The Republicans are threatening to not allow a vote on any Supreme Court nominees should Clinton win. That's just pure politics and it cannot be allowed.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Just because the legislative branch enacted laws that created/defined the judicial branch doesn't mean they are permitted impede the due process of nomination and confirmation based in partisan politics.

And who, exactly, is gonna force them to do otherwise?

Voters, by removing them from office-bwa hah hahahhahahahhahahahahahhhahaahahaaaa

Oh I do so love my fantasies.

[San Lumen]

Yes and that's how it should have to be done any time you want to filibuster.

Why?

Because what Rand Paul did is the definition of a filibuster. Not silently blocking judicial nominees or legislation.

[Hurdergaryp]

And who, exactly, is gonna force them to do otherwise?

Voters, by removing them from office-bwa hah hahahhahahahhahahahahahhhahaahahaaaa

Oh I do so love my fantasies.

As long as they bring you mirth and merriment, that is perfectly acceptable behaviour.

[Ifreann]

And again, he is a fucking idiot.

He wouldn't be saying that if Trump was the one getting elected and they win the Senate.

This is partisan grand-posturing.

No he isn't. There is no way Trump wins and Democrats get the Senate. The Republicans are threatening to not allow a vote on any Supreme Court nominees should Clinton win. That's just pure politics and it cannot be allowed.

Yes, politics cannot be allowed in government.

Um...

[Cymrea]

The problem you're running against here is that there is no set number of justices on the SCOTUS.

We could go all the way down to Three, and still be ok.

The rules don't say they can't either, so they can get away with it.

And who, exactly, is gonna force them to do otherwise?

Fair enough; though I did say this was my personal opinion.

[Washington Resistance Army]

And again, he is a fucking idiot.

He wouldn't be saying that if Trump was the one getting elected and they win the Senate.

This is partisan grand-posturing.

No he isn't. There is no way Trump wins and Democrats get the Senate. The Republicans are threatening to not allow a vote on any Supreme Court nominees should Clinton win. That's just pure politics and it cannot be allowed.

Fuckin politics is ruining our politics

[Eol Sha]

Why?

Because what Rand Paul did is the definition of a filibuster. Not silently blocking judicial nominees or legislation.

Not according to the Senate's website.

Informal term for any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter by debating it at length, by offering numerous procedural motions, or by any other delaying or obstructive actions.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And again, he is a fucking idiot.

He wouldn't be saying that if Trump was the one getting elected and they win the Senate.

This is partisan grand-posturing.

No he isn't. There is no way Trump wins and Democrats get the Senate. The Republicans are threatening to not allow a vote on any Supreme Court nominees should Clinton win. That's just pure politics and it cannot be allowed.

I am not saying "there is a way Trump can win the presidency and Dems the senate".

I am saying that Schumer wouldn't be singing the same tune were it be true that Trump was to win and Democrats win the senate.

And surely you haven't been living somewhere other than in the U.S. the last 8 years?

[Eol Sha]

The problem you're running against here is that there is no set number of justices on the SCOTUS.

We could go all the way down to Three, and still be ok.

The rules don't say they can't either, so they can get away with it.

And who, exactly, is gonna force them to do otherwise?

Fair enough; though I did say this was my personal opinion.

Opinions are verboten! Kneel and apologize for your grievous offense!

[Soldati Senza Confini]

No he isn't. There is no way Trump wins and Democrats get the Senate. The Republicans are threatening to not allow a vote on any Supreme Court nominees should Clinton win. That's just pure politics and it cannot be allowed.

Fuckin politics is ruining our politics

I know, right? How dare politicians ruin our nation's politics!

[Hurdergaryp]

Fuckin politics is ruining our politics

I know, right? How dare politicians ruin our nation's politics!

Since politicians are ruining politics with politics, I suggest that we let politicians propose politics in order to stop politics from ruining politics by means of politics. Also politics.

[Cymrea]

Fuckin politics is ruining our politics

I know, right? How dare politicians ruin our nation's politics!

I imagine I'm not alone in that one part of me thinks things like, "Aw, that's shitty and fucked up! That shouldn't happen, goddammit!" and the other part that thinks like, "If you can get away with it and advance your agenda, then so be it".

[Eol Sha]

I know, right? How dare politicians ruin our nation's politics!

I imagine I'm not alone in that one part of me thinks things like, "Aw, that's shitty and fucked up! That shouldn't happen, goddammit!" and the other part that thinks like, "If you can get away with it and advance your agenda, then so be it".

Politics or principles, basically.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I know, right? How dare politicians ruin our nation's politics!

I imagine I'm not alone in that one part of me thinks things like, "Aw, that's shitty and fucked up! That shouldn't happen, goddammit!" and the other part that thinks like, "If you can get away with it and advance your agenda, then so be it".

Nope, not alone.

I think it's fucked up, but they can get away with it so they will do it.

[Kravanica]

What does this mean? Congress has the sole ability to approve or disapprove federal judges and Justices. It can't be interference since they're the ones who created the current federal judge system (minus SCOTUS) and all the rules surrounding it.

Checks and balances, yes. The legislature approves the judiciary, yes. Refusing to do so based solely on partisan politics is interference in the process.

The Senate has the power to confirm or deny the nominee. Emphasis on the "or deny" part.

[Cymrea]

Checks and balances, yes. The legislature approves the judiciary, yes. Refusing to do so based solely on partisan politics is interference in the process.

The Senate has the power to confirm or deny the nominee. Emphasis on the "or deny" part.

I think in this case they're not denying; they're refusing to even hold hearings.

[San Lumen]

No he isn't. There is no way Trump wins and Democrats get the Senate. The Republicans are threatening to not allow a vote on any Supreme Court nominees should Clinton win. That's just pure politics and it cannot be allowed.

I am not saying "there is a way Trump can win the presidency and Dems the senate".

I am saying that Schumer wouldn't be singing the same tune were it be true that Trump was to win and Democrats win the senate.

And surely you haven't been living somewhere other than in the U.S. the last 8 years?

So your totally fine with Republicans grandstanding saying they won't confirm any Supreme Court nominees that Hillary Clinton might nominate? Your totally ok with playing politics with the judicial system? The President nominates the Supreme Court justices and the job of the Senate is to advise and consent not advise and obstruct. That means holding a up or down vote and not refusing to do their job which is what some Republican senators are saying.

[Kravanica]

The Senate has the power to confirm or deny the nominee. Emphasis on the "or deny" part.

I think in this case they're not denying; they're refusing to even hold hearings.

Which they can do. They're not obligated to. I never understand where people get this idea that the Senate must hold hearings on Obama's nominee.