Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAnyone Shitler tries to put on the Supreme Court needs to get the Garland treatment
Period. Republicans cannot be allowed anyone on the court.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
9 replies, 1356 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
9 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Anyone Shitler tries to put on the Supreme Court needs to get the Garland treatment (Original Post)
onecaliberal
Dec 2016
OP
Republicans DONT have 60 votes. Senators can put a hold on candidates also.
onecaliberal
Dec 2016
#3
And just like Harry Reid did when Republicans were obstructing Obama's judicial nominees...
PoliticAverse
Dec 2016
#4
Because Republicans have a majority in the Senate now and Republicans make the rules.
PoliticAverse
Dec 2016
#6
Garland was nominated when Republicans had their current Senate majority. n/t
PoliticAverse
Dec 2016
#8
MFM008
(19,808 posts)1. None
Especially now.
None.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)2. Democrats don't have a majority in the Senate. n/t
onecaliberal
(32,852 posts)3. Republicans DONT have 60 votes. Senators can put a hold on candidates also.
Democrats need to learn the term Obstruction.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)4. And just like Harry Reid did when Republicans were obstructing Obama's judicial nominees...
when the Democrats had a majority but not 60 votes, Mitch McConnell can just eliminate the 60 vote requirement
for ending Supreme Court nominee filibusters..
onecaliberal
(32,852 posts)5. Then why the fuck isn't Garland confirmed?
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)6. Because Republicans have a majority in the Senate now and Republicans make the rules.
If Democrats had gotten their majority back in the election they could have confirmed
Garland with 50 votes.
onecaliberal
(32,852 posts)7. My point is they could have done it. BEFORE
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)8. Garland was nominated when Republicans had their current Senate majority. n/t
ck4829
(35,069 posts)9. Ideas are better than surrender