The Absurd GOP

[Dio]

Of course politicians change opinions, it's called political convenience. 



2016 was not an election year. 

Yes it was.

Helios was the one saying 2016 was not an election year, or Helios just doesn't know when Garland was nominated (despite my link of Obama being dated for 2016).

[Dio]

Reid and Ginsburg. Nobody's perfect.

So when Republicans are in power, if they can secure the votes, it would be legitimate to further raise the number of SCTOUS justices so they can have the majority?

[Rev. Rye]

Or, after doing a closer look at what you and Helios were saying, he meant that he didn't say it in 2016. It was, in fact, dated May 19, 2005. 2005 wasn't an election year.

[Rev. Rye]

Reid and Ginsburg. Nobody's perfect.

So when Republicans are in power, if they can secure the votes, it would be legitimate to further raise the number of SCTOUS justices so they can have the majority?

You and I both know the GOP doesn't give a shit about whether anything they do is legitimate.

[Dio]

So when Republicans are in power, if they can secure the votes, it would be legitimate to further raise the number of SCTOUS justices so they can have the majority?

You and I both know the GOP doesn't give a shit about whether anything they do is legitimate.

If raising the number of SCOTUS judges is legitimate, it is legitimate for either party. You think RBG was wrong about the number of justices so you must think it's legitimate to raise the number. 

If you want to say it's legit for the Dems but not the GOP, just say so.

[Dio]

Next Dems will have to be remined that Schumer once supported the filibuster and the Senate was the "cooling plate of democracy" when it was politically convenient for him. 

Where is the "whole new level"?

Yeah because it's not like a politician can change their opinion on something 

oh wait 

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/centra...filibuster

If the President has a duty to submit a nominee no matter how close to an election (as was allegedly the case with Obama), then Trump did his duty. If Trump should have waited until after the election, so should have Obama.

If the Senate had a duty to vote, then Reid violated such duty. 

As I understand it it was not during an election YEAR.

Of course politicians change opinions, it's called political convenience. 



2016 was not an election year. 

I believe Helios was referring to the year Reid made that comment. It was 2005 - not an election year.

Boru

Perhaps, not that 2005 not being an election year is material.

[Rev. Rye]

This quote should explain what I think:

[Dio]

This quote should explain what I think:

True. Your side changes the rules (the Dems regarding regular justices not requiring filibuster, adding SCOTUS justices, and not holding confirmation votes) which you're okay with and your opponents follow suit and it's bad when they do. It's even worse when they beat you so you have to change the rules to win.

[The Grand Nudger]

IDK, it doesn't seem to me like the issue boils down to pure party politics or tribalism. I recognize filth when I see it. The gop is anti democratic, and anti american. It's a shame, because that does leave people who might agree with some broad set of conservative policies but who are still enamored with democracy and the us without actual or effective representation.

[Dio]

IDK, it doesn't seem to me like the issue boils down to pure party politics or tribalism.  I recognize filth when I see it.  The gop is anti democratic, and anti american.  It's a shame, because that does leave people who might agree with some broad set of conservative policies but who are still enamored with democracy and the us without actual or effective representation.

What specifically is meant by "anti democratic" and "anti american"?