Politics And Current Events

[Troy Loney]

Yes, the republicans have been far right since Reagan.

[grunthy]

Yes, the republicans have been far right since Reagan.

You are just as delusional as Alex Jones followers if you believe that.

[willeyeam]

They're all hypocrites

[willeyeam]

He waited a whole twelve hours at least

[nocera]

They're all hypocrites

[MWB]

There’s no good answer for an arbitrary cutoff point of when a president should be able to nominate a justice. If you put it to the extreme (a day before leaving office or a day before losing an election), it seems a little silly for an exiting president to nominate. Right now we’re on the edge of that, as the process averages 2-3 months to complete from nomination to appointment. The fly in the ointment is obviously 2016, where refusing to appoint for eight months seems quite unreasonable. So what’s the “right” thing to do?

[nocera]

The obvious solution is to increase the court size to 101 judges and rearrange the courtroom to look like this:

[Troy Loney]

Yes, the republicans have been far right since Reagan.

You are just as delusional as Alex Jones followers if you believe that.

I imagine that on this imaginary spectrum, you consider yourself “center-right”.

[faftorial]

Look for the end of the filibuster if the Dems take over in November and McConnell gets this confirmation through.

[Gaucho]

[Dickie Dunn]

I’ll echo the sentiment that this was the last thing this country needed before the election and the absolute vast majority of our elected officials are too immature, hypocritical, and self-serving to handle this situation properly.

[Kaiser]

I feel like the entire country could have simulated the last 24 hours in our minds and skipped everyone's scripted reactions.

[count2infinity]

“Are we sticking to what we did last time? Or no?”

“F*cking hypocrite...”

[Freddy Rumsen]

100% could post the same pic with the parties reversed.

The idea Nancy or Chuck were (or whoever was Senate leader) meeting "halfway" with GWB is laughable.

[Nuge]

There’s no good answer for an arbitrary cutoff point of when a president should be able to nominate a justice. If you put it to the extreme (a day before leaving office or a day before losing an election), it seems a little silly for an exiting president to nominate. Right now we’re on the edge of that, as the process averages 2-3 months to complete from nomination to appointment. The fly in the ointment is obviously 2016, where refusing to appoint for eight months seems quite unreasonable. So what’s the “right” thing to do?

I feel like the obvious answer is their last day in office. It seems equally silly to say "well he's almost gone, so why listen to him?". It's that position's job to nominate so why limit it? If it doesn't get through, then so be it. I thought it was a dumb argument to wait the last time. You're right, any date is arbitrary. The absolute end makes as much sense to me then any other date.

[count2infinity]

There’s no good answer for an arbitrary cutoff point of when a president should be able to nominate a justice. If you put it to the extreme (a day before leaving office or a day before losing an election), it seems a little silly for an exiting president to nominate. Right now we’re on the edge of that, as the process averages 2-3 months to complete from nomination to appointment. The fly in the ointment is obviously 2016, where refusing to appoint for eight months seems quite unreasonable. So what’s the “right” thing to do?

I feel like the obvious answer is their last day in office. It seems equally silly to say "well he's almost gone, so why listen to him?". It's that position's job to nominate so why limit it? If it doesn't get through, then so be it. I thought it was a dumb argument to wait the last time. You're right, any date is arbitrary. The absolute end makes as much sense to me then any other date.

Agreed. If it weren’t for 2016, I’d have zero issue with trump nominating and it going through right now. None.

[Freddy Rumsen]

This was a good read on how looney the current set up is in our military.

[shafnutz05]

This was a good read on how looney the current set up is in our military.

Yeah, the military has become yet another bloated bureaucracy.

[Beveridge]

GOP should call Dems bluff and nominate they guy Obama did. Then again, he should be in already.

[shafnutz05]

This balanced Op-Ed from a couple years ago came to mind yesterday.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/l ... story.html

As her public persona has grown, Ginsburg has embraced the “Notorious R.B.G.” label. She’s encouraged a cult of worship to grow up around her. There’s hagiography like the “Notorious RBG” book and the “The RBG Workout,” an illustrated book by her personal trainer. There’s a Ginsburg tumblr and Ginsburg T-shirts.

Just this week, despite swearing off political statements, she said sexism played a prominent role in Hillary Clinton’s election defeat. That may be true, but a sitting Supreme Court justice should not be weighing in on such questions.

This was my biggest beef with her and the hero worship surrounding her. She was an overtly political justice (like Scalia oftentimes), but because she played for the right team she was treated like a goddess in the media.

[Freddy Rumsen]

Also this makes no sense to me.

Why would Biden take the day off? Seems like the perfect time to give a speech attacking Trump and/or saying a few words and promoting something.

[tifosi77]

There’s no good answer for an arbitrary cutoff point of when a president should be able to nominate a justice. If you put it to the extreme (a day before leaving office or a day before losing an election), it seems a little silly for an exiting president to nominate. Right now we’re on the edge of that, as the process averages 2-3 months to complete from nomination to appointment. The fly in the ointment is obviously 2016, where refusing to appoint for eight months seems quite unreasonable. So what’s the “right” thing to do?

I feel like the obvious answer is their last day in office. It seems equally silly to say "well he's almost gone, so why listen to him?". It's that position's job to nominate so why limit it? If it doesn't get through, then so be it. I thought it was a dumb argument to wait the last time. You're right, any date is arbitrary. The absolute end makes as much sense to me then any other date.

Agreed. If it weren’t for 2016, I’d have zero issue with trump nominating and it going through right now. None.

Yeah, I'm in the same spot. 11:59 am Jan 20th on the last day of a President's term is the cutoff for when they can make a nomination; that's what they're elected for, and those are the rules. It was McConnell's despicable conduct in 2016 that made this an issue and why it is controversial now.

The fastest a SCOTUS nomination has ever been confirmed was something like 47 days, and we're already within that timeframe to the election.

[shafnutz05]

On a completely different note, I was thinking about the Administration's foreign policy successes, and wondering how much they are actually going to tout them between now and November or focus more on domestic issues.

When Trump pulled out of the Iran deal, how many countless foreign policy experts warned that war was imminent? The way that the Administration has started to achieve the dual goal of isolating Iran while normalizing Israeli relations with their neighbors has been nothing short of a major foreign policy achievement.

I know people are loathe to give his Administration credit for anything, but they have accomplished more in that region than their predecessors did in eight years. Still a long way to go of course, but major steps in the right direction. For all the bluster about Trump's finger being on the nuclear button, he has proven to be a peacemaker over there.

[tifosi77]

Look for the end of the filibuster if the Dems take over in November and McConnell gets this confirmation through.

Do you mean the filibuster in general? Or specific to judicial nominations? Because if you're talking the latter, that was done away with a couple years ago.

[shafnutz05]

Agree with most of this.

https://spectator.org/amy-barrett-immed ... ot-sooner/

She is the best choice, no doubt.