• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Scalia dead

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
senseamp said:
It's their call. If they do obstruct, it's going to be an election on:
-Women's rights
-Citizens' United
-Voting Rights Act
etc etc
It could alienate young people and women from the GOP for a generation. Obama is going to nominate a sympathetic person, maybe an Asian woman.
GOP wants to be obstructing the first Asian nominee to SCOTUS? When they are trying to make inroads into this fast growing affluent community that could otherwise be aligned with the GOP on economic issues? It's going to be game over for them in the long run.
Also, now Ted Cruz and Rubio are going to try to outdo each other as to who is more obstructionist in the Senate. It won't bode well for them in the general election.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, because before Scalia died the Dems weren't running on women's rights, citizens united, and such. Him dying and allowing them to raise those issues for the first time will surely change the election now.
 
senseamp said:
One issue is that appointing him would leave a vacancy on the DC circuit for Obama to worry about, and for Republicans to obstruct.
Click to expand...

They have been obstructing Obama's Federal Judicial nominations for his entire term even when they didn't hold a majority. Since they have held the majority they have ONLY approved 12 of Obama's judicial nominees. There are currently, as of Scalia's death, 82 vacancies on the bench. 39 nominations are pending. One was confirmed last month. The GOP controlled Senate more or less last month said the 4 scheduled for votes this month are the last Obama judicial appointments they will send to vote.
 
Last edited:
Jhhnn said:
98/0. He lied magnificently before Congress at the time.

I may have lost track of the conversation. If so, I apologize. I was referring to Scalia.
Click to expand...

Voting down Bork on purely political reasons ensures no judicial nominee will ever give honest and straightforward answers ever again. I'm actually surprised *any* SCOTUS nomination has ever been confirmed again after that.
 
 
Wait until HRC wins the election, she can appoint Obama, and then the lunatics can scream and howl and rub even more shit in their hair.
 
glenn1 said:
Voting down Bork on purely political reasons ensures no judicial nominee will ever give honest and straightforward answers ever again. I'm actually surprised *any* SCOTUS nomination has ever been confirmed again after that.
Click to expand...

Please. Bork was an ideologue of the far right persuasion. Obama will not nominate anybody nearly so controversial.

When Reagan nominated Kennedy thereafter he was approved 97-0.
 
It's interesting to see republicans say that the President shouldn't carry out one of his primary constitutional duties for 25% of his term.
 
eskimospy said:
It's interesting to see republicans say that the President shouldn't carry out one of his primary constitutional duties for 25% of his term.
Click to expand...

Which is obviously not obstructionist. Couldn't be!

McConnell invites schism in the ranks from vulnerable Repub Senators with blatant base pandering.
 
Jhhnn said:
Which is obviously not obstructionist. Couldn't be!

McConnell invites schism in the ranks from vulnerable Repub Senators with blatant base pandering.
Click to expand...

Obviously obstructionist if you have the mental capacity of a toddler.

If this kind of stuff can even happen then any reasonable person would see the system as in need of some adjustment - people like you just point fingers and prove your ignorance.
 
Virge_ said:
Obviously obstructionist if you have the mental capacity of a toddler.

If this kind of stuff can even happen then any reasonable person would see the system as in need of some adjustment - people like you just point fingers and prove your ignorance.
Click to expand...

That was sarcasm.

Apparently I'm the only one who uses the actual sarcasm tag. /s
 
Jhhnn said:
Grasping at straws I see. McConnell knows how to pick his battles. Obama will very likely offer up a well qualified fairly non-controversial nominee. Senate Repubs will put up some obligatory hurf-burf & then quietly choke it down. This isn't a good place to get all stupid.
Click to expand...

r u kidding?!
have u not noticed how bat shit crazy repubs are lately?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top