Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year
1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican
2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him
3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process
4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party
5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state
It's not up to ANY of them. It's up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to move any potential nominee to the Senate. Not gonna happen. Only Graham has a vote there and I don't even think Goober is stupid enough to do something like that. In any event, if a nominee does move to the Senate there is the "nuclear option" which will prevent any up or down vote. Dream on Libs... not gonna happen.
I'm afraid you're going to have to go into this election waving the "obstructionist" banner to get your base riled up to get out the vote and HOPE you can keep Hillary out of prison long enough to win the White House.
I have not questioned whether a Republican hissy fit can block a nomination
Let the Senate Judiciary Committee block an Obama nominee
Then the next
Then the next
While Democrats have blocked Republican nominees in the past, they have never prevented a Republican President from filling a Supreme Court seat
To do so sets a precedent for partisan blocking of nominees pending a Presidential election. If Republicans do it for one year, what prevents future Democratic Senates from doing it for two years?
Well we don't have that many SCOTUS justices die unexpectedly 9 months before an election. If the Democrat senate wants to try and drag their feet for two years on a republican nomination, they can do that... they almost DID do that with Reagan.
Look.... whether you like it or not, Obama is not going to get to pick some wackadoodle liberal to fill the seat of Antonin Scalia. Sorry... that ain't happening. Now, if he nominated Ted Cruz, I would be opposed to Republicans obstructing his pick.... but we both know there is zero possibility that will be the case.
Well yeah.. They thought ISIS was a branch of the CIA so umm.Most of Obozo's voters dont even know what the Supreme Court is.Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O
and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.
a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito
Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year
Nah. The average American isn't thinking they better fill the supreme court while Obozo is still in office. Most people don't give a rat's ass whether Obozo appoints another justice or not.
I bet it Crowder or somebody did one of those "man on the street" interviews... they'd think it was some kind of pizza place!
Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..
It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.
This is the end of the Republic.
^ another clueless drama queen
Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..
It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.
It will be over a year
A new President will not take office until Jan 20 2017. The new President will have to vet new candidates and come up with a nominee. A new Senate will have to form a new Senate Judiciary Committee, hold hearings and approve the nominee. Then the new Senate will have to vote on the nominee
That brings you to March 2017 even if you fast track the nomination
Agreed.
A stealth moderate that will sell out on Gun Control and Immigration will be passed by the internationalist moderates. This has been in the works for a long time.
This is the end of the Republic.
Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..
It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.
It will be over a year
A new President will not take office until Jan 20 2017. The new President will have to vet new candidates and come up with a nominee. A new Senate will have to form a new Senate Judiciary Committee, hold hearings and approve the nominee. Then the new Senate will have to vote on the nominee
That brings you to March 2017 even if you fast track the nomination
Not a problem since Obama will select someone absolutely unacceptable to the Republican party like Holder or Lynch.Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O
and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.
a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito
Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year
Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year
1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican
2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him
3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process
4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party
5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state
Not a problem since Obama will select someone absolutely unacceptable to the Republican party like Holder or Lynch.Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O
and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.
a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito
Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year
Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..
It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.
It will be over a year
A new President will not take office until Jan 20 2017. The new President will have to vet new candidates and come up with a nominee. A new Senate will have to form a new Senate Judiciary Committee, hold hearings and approve the nominee. Then the new Senate will have to vote on the nominee
That brings you to March 2017 even if you fast track the nomination
About the same 14 months it took Reagan to get a replacement for Lewis Powell.
Right?
Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..
It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.
It will be over a year
A new President will not take office until Jan 20 2017. The new President will have to vet new candidates and come up with a nominee. A new Senate will have to form a new Senate Judiciary Committee, hold hearings and approve the nominee. Then the new Senate will have to vote on the nominee
That brings you to March 2017 even if you fast track the nomination
About the same 14 months it took Reagan to get a replacement for Lewis Powell.
Right?
Total bullshit
Lewis Powell left his seat on June 26 1987
Bork was nominated July 1 1987
Anthony Kennedy was seated on Feb 18 1988
A total of seven and a half months to allow Reagan to seat a justice
Well within the 11 months left to fill Scalias seat
So you admit to lying about 14 monthsLeaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..
It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.
It will be over a year
A new President will not take office until Jan 20 2017. The new President will have to vet new candidates and come up with a nominee. A new Senate will have to form a new Senate Judiciary Committee, hold hearings and approve the nominee. Then the new Senate will have to vote on the nominee
That brings you to March 2017 even if you fast track the nomination
About the same 14 months it took Reagan to get a replacement for Lewis Powell.
Right?
Total bullshit
Lewis Powell left his seat on June 26 1987
Bork was nominated July 1 1987
Anthony Kennedy was seated on Feb 18 1988
A total of seven and a half months to allow Reagan to seat a justice
Well within the 11 months left to fill Scalias seat
and only because a moderate was nominated that the Senate approved of.
BTW, thanks for pointing out that SCOTUS survived for 7 1/2 months with only 8 Justices
Do you admit to lying about 14 monthsIt won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.
It will be over a year
A new President will not take office until Jan 20 2017. The new President will have to vet new candidates and come up with a nominee. A new Senate will have to form a new Senate Judiciary Committee, hold hearings and approve the nominee. Then the new Senate will have to vote on the nominee
That brings you to March 2017 even if you fast track the nomination
About the same 14 months it took Reagan to get a replacement for Lewis Powell.
Right?
Total bullshit
Lewis Powell left his seat on June 26 1987
Bork was nominated July 1 1987
Anthony Kennedy was seated on Feb 18 1988
A total of seven and a half months to allow Reagan to seat a justice
Well within the 11 months left to fill Scalias seat
and only because a moderate was nominated that the Senate approved of.
BTW, thanks for pointing out that SCOTUS survived for 7 1/2 months with only 8 Justices
Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year
1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican
2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him
3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process
4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party
5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state
