General Discussion

pat_k

(12,827 posts) Sat Sep 19, 2020, 01:15 PM Sep 2020

This is bothering me [View all]

Merrick Garland's nomination should not have been blocked. And now we are calling for the principle they invoked to block him to be applied.

Does this bother anyone else?

What principle should Dems endorse/apply in the coming years? No confirmation of a SCOTUS nomination within 2 months of an election? 3? 6? Or as they claimed with Garland, any time in an election year?

What length of time is just/fair?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This is bothering me [View all] pat_k Sep 2020 OP

We are calling for them to accept the pinciple mzmolly Sep 2020 #1

And that would be great Hstch05 Sep 2020 #6

I mzmolly Sep 2020 #12

There's a better than average possibility that Trump WON'T be re-elected as well Proud Liberal Dem Sep 2020 #39

If we call on them to follow "their" principle, we are accepting that principle. pat_k Sep 2020 #8

Ok. mzmolly Sep 2020 #11

I guess my problem is that I believe they were wrong on Garland. . . pat_k Sep 2020 #14

I don't get your point. You tell me, what mzmolly Sep 2020 #18

For me. . . pat_k Sep 2020 #31

Gotcha. mzmolly Sep 2020 #32

Also other presidents who had a seat open Bev54 Sep 2020 #23

Good mzmolly Sep 2020 #26

Whatever the principle is, it has to be applied consistently. Jim__ Sep 2020 #2

not there is requirement to follow through AlexSFCA Sep 2020 #3

We should be better than that. I think we need to be clearer. . . pat_k Sep 2020 #5

we are better than them. But let's be prepared to lose because the playing field is not even AlexSFCA Sep 2020 #13

They did us dirty in 2016 by creating the "principle" in the first place and blocking Garland. Proud Liberal Dem Sep 2020 #40

And that's a principle we want to now follow? Even though clearly wrong with Garland? pat_k Sep 2020 #4

McConnell stated a principle when Obama nominated Garland. Jim__ Sep 2020 #7

If we say "apply that principle" we are saying. . . pat_k Sep 2020 #9

We are saying: apply the same principle you applied last time. Nothing has changed. Jim__ Sep 2020 #10

I think we can iron out future agreements after this mzmolly Sep 2020 #20

We will never fix this...as soon as the GOP has the Senate, they would block our judges. They Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #27

If we have the Senate, we approve no GOP judges at anytime. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #28

They have set mzmolly Sep 2020 #30

Exactly...what we give them judges and they give us nothing? NO. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #34

We're calling on them to stick to what they claimed about a thousand times... JHB Sep 2020 #15

Yes. "Pause" in "heated environment of campaign season" pat_k Sep 2020 #17

I will say this. No judges will be approved unless the party in the White House has the Senate. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #24

You can't make agreements with liars and Republicans are liars thus no Senate no judges at Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #25

As I said, there is no 'normal' now. JHB Sep 2020 #29

No, and Schumer says that nothing is off the table...code for end filibuster and Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #35

Thank goodness! mzmolly Sep 2020 #41

What principle? Leith Sep 2020 #16

If it's not OK to give a nominee a hearing in February of an election year malaise Sep 2020 #19

No, our nominee was stolen... And Mitch said it was because it was too close to an election. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #21

Wouldn't it be nice if they played by the same set of rules? lunatica Sep 2020 #22

To be blunt, it doesn't bother me whatsoever. I get your point, but.....nope. dameatball Sep 2020 #33

Principle... right..,.. OnDoutside Sep 2020 #36

ROFLMAO rufus dog Sep 2020 #37

So you want democrats to commit to play on a level playing field, not_the_one Sep 2020 #38

Good luck trying to play fair with Republicans as they destroy democracy. VOX Sep 2020 #42

We're drowning here. Your concern for those using long poles to shove us under is touching. Hekate Sep 2020 #43