Politics Thread

[GoMuskies]

Helpful as always, 87. If someone disagrees with you or says something you don't like, they're delusional. Nice!

And if you misread a thread, they're projecting.

[bigdiggins]

My point is more along the lines of the revenge factor. Gorsuch filled the court but really replaced a conservative in Scalia. Garland should have done that but he would have been a centrist with a slight left lean. Kavanaugh is a hard right justice. He isn't a Kennedy replacement he is an outright attempt to toss the court right for a few decades.

The revenge factor would be getting Kavanaugh's nomination tabled in a response to Garland. Both parties get the black eye and it's next judge up. If the House/Senate doesn't flip, there is no way another Trump nomination gets rolled unless they are so partisan that neither party approves. If it does flip, he has to learn to play fair.

Next judge up except that if he is not fit to be on the Supreme Court he is not fit to be on the second highest court in the land. So his career is ruined by unprovable allegations from 35 years ago because in sexual assault cases ( well those that fit the Democrat narrative anyway see Keith Ellison) tried in the media it is guilty until proven innocent.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Next judge up except that if he is not fit to be on the Supreme Court he is not fit to be on the second highest court in the land. So his career is ruined by unprovable allegations from 35 years ago because in sexual assault cases ( well those that fit the Democrat narrative anyway see Keith Ellison) tried in the media it is guilty until proven innocent.

I am fine with Ellison being removed, wow see how that works?

[X-man]

And if you misread a thread, they're projecting.

Did you not say what the Dem's would have done? How did I misread your comment?

[GoMuskies]

Did you not say what the Dem's would have done? How did I misread your comment?

Did you assume I was talking about what Dems would have done if Garland had similar accusations against him?

[X-man]

Did you assume I was talking about what Dems would have done if Garland had similar accusations against him?

Uh, yeah. That is precisely what your statement says.

[GoMuskies]

Uh, yeah. That is precisely what your statement says.

Read it again big dog. Maybe put on your glasses and only read the words it says this time.

[X-man]

Read it again big dog. Maybe put on your glasses and only read the words it says this time.

See post 3014 in this thread. Please tell me how I misinterpreted your comment by reading it as saying what the Democrats would have done had they "owned the Senate at Garland time". Seems pretty clear that the word "they" following that phrase referred to Democrats.

[GoMuskies]

See post 3014 in this thread. Please tell me how I misinterpreted your comment by reading it as saying what the Democrats would have done had they "owned the Senate at Garland time". Seems pretty clear that the word "they" following that phrase referred to Democrats.

And where is there anything about sexual harassment/abuse allegations against Garland?

I simply said Democrats would have called for a vote and confirmed Garland if they controlled the Senate back in 2016. I don't find anything controversial about that statement. Sorry you read your own stuff into that.

[X-man]

And where is there anything about sexual harassment/abuse allegations against Garland?

I simply said Democrats would have called for a vote and confirmed Garland if they controlled the Senate back in 2016. I don't find anything controversial about that statement. Sorry you read your own stuff into that.

And you also said they would "tell the Republicans to go fuck themselves" in that post. But I digress. Try and read up on what the words "would have" connote. Sounds like a hypothetical to me, and hence my post.