Trump runs for POTUS/ Trumped Up! Part VI

[Dave Rogers]

I'm not opposed to the president nominating one similar to his philosophy, if that person can pass the senate. It's the situation in which the senate is in the other party's hand when conciliation is in order.

Given that John McCain promised today that the Republican party would be united against any Supreme Court nominee put forward by Clinton, how exactly is that supposed to work?

Dave

 

[ddt]

She should appoint a 35 year old, black, atheist, lesbian, ACLU lawyer.

She should appoint someone reasonably qualified to do the job, and given that, any features that are congenial to Clinton's desires and likely to be appointed are good enough.

Supreme Court appointees are not a matter of revenge, for ****'s sake. Indeed, they can be an opportunity for conciliation.

Of course, if you think that everyone in the opposing camp is "scumbags", looking to harm the underclass, then you might not really understand how democracy ought to work. You might be better off playing World of Warcraft.

While Tony Stark's posts often can be over the top, I don't agree with you in this case. The Republicans have obstructed Obama's current nomination, and have already vowed to obstruct any nomination Hillary will do - on top of all the other obstruction they've done in the last eight years. I really don't see a reason why Hillary should play nice if the Democrats have a majority in the Senate.

SCOTUS appointments are the perfect opportunity to leave a legacy of your political philosophy long after you've retired as president, so why not take it, and appoint someone who's expected to last 40 years on the bench.

As to the topic of qualification: there are no formal qualifications for SCOTUS, not even to have a law degree; in principle, you could appoint any hick you'd like. I note, though, that Tony specifically included "ACLU lawyer", so someone who has experience with constitutional law (though primarily with First Amendment issues). And though it's usual to appoint someone who has experience on the bench, there is precedent: FDR appointed Robert Jackson, whose primary experience was as a "county-seat lawyer", and gained fame as US prosecutor at Nuremberg.

 

[Trebuchet]

BTW, there is a story that Trump's Son in Law is in London, seeking out investors for a possible Trump Television Network. American Banks have,for over 20 years, been reluctant to loan Donald money, given his record. He is seen as a Riverboat Gambler...and Banks do not like to loan money to those. That might be the reason Trump hates banks so much......

He'd probably do better in Moscow. Or maybe that's who he's talking to in London.

 

[CapelDodger]

Called this on 3rd of October. Not that it takes a genius to predict a petulant outburst from Trump.

If you don't make the claim you don't get the prize. Take one ToldYouSo point.

 

[Belz...]

Nah, I'm pretty sure she hates Republicans and sees them as the enemy.

Given that she has a reputation for level-headed politics and compromise, I doubt it.

 

[Mumbles]

I don't think they could get away with blocking for 4 years..... could they?

I think they will.

 

[dudalb]

McCain is already backtracking on his "We Won't Even Consider a Clinton Nominee" statement. It' is now"We will consider noninees on their merit".
Not that it matters;I think that was GOP strategy all along, where McCain blundered was in stating it publically.

 

[phiwum]

**** you McCain. **** you with a cold steel dildo that's been packed in ice since the last time you made a decision based upon your moral code instead of fellating the GOP party line.

I'm really sorry to see McCain say that. He didn't used to be such an unreasonable person.

I liked him prior to his 2008 run.

 

[jimbob]

The GOP is going off the deep end:

http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/17/new-mexico-republicans-send-ominous-flyer-to-state-voters/

Snopes carrying news stories rather than fact checking?I wasn't aware that they did that.

 

[Cleon]

Snopes carrying news stories rather than fact checking?I wasn't aware that they did that.

I think they put things like this in there as placeholders since they know damn well they're going to get hits about it.

 

[Stacko]

Who thought it was a good idea to send Melania out to deliver this message, "My husband is highly suggestible and can easily be induced to make terrible decisions," about how Billy Bush got him into this latest scandal.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I'm pretty sure "universally blocking" and "advise and consent" are not the same thing.

They are the same thing. The advice is extremely clear.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

E) He's so far down the rabbit hole that he thinks he's winning by a landslide, so he doesn't need to spend any more money.

Dave

I vote 'E'.

 

[phiwum]

Given that John McCain promised today that the Republican party would be united against any Supreme Court nominee put forward by Clinton, how exactly is that supposed to work?

Dave

Not too bloody well, I'm afraid. I'm very disappointed by McCain's quote, which may have been walked back a bit.

But given that quote, there's very little compromise (short of capitulation) to be had. It bothers me a lot, partly because McCain is not one of the most rabid partisans in the GOP.

Fair enough assessment?

 

[phiwum]

While Tony Stark's posts often can be over the top, I don't agree with you in this case. The Republicans have obstructed Obama's current nomination, and have already vowed to obstruct any nomination Hillary will do - on top of all the other obstruction they've done in the last eight years. I really don't see a reason why Hillary should play nice if the Democrats have a majority in the Senate.

If they haven't a supermajority, then they have to play nice or accept the effects of the nuclear option years hence, right?

It's not about whether the Republicans deserve respect, but whether good things can be done.

SCOTUS appointments are the perfect opportunity to leave a legacy of your political philosophy long after you've retired as president, so why not take it, and appoint someone who's expected to last 40 years on the bench.

As to the topic of qualification: there are no formal qualifications for SCOTUS, not even to have a law degree; in principle, you could appoint any hick you'd like. I note, though, that Tony specifically included "ACLU lawyer", so someone who has experience with constitutional law (though primarily with First Amendment issues). And though it's usual to appoint someone who has experience on the bench, there is precedent: FDR appointed Robert Jackson, whose primary experience was as a "county-seat lawyer", and gained fame as US prosecutor at Nuremberg.

I'm not interested in using SCOTUS for a tit-for-tat game. Someone reasonably left-of-center is okay by me, if the Dems want to exploit the empty seat. Someone center is okay, too, far as I'm concerned. The more centrists, the more carefully argued the result.

 

[Stacko]

New CBS poll of likely voters nationally:

Clinton 47
Donald 38
Johnson 8
Stein 3

In head-to-head, Clinton leads by 51-40. We could see something that hasn't happened in 32 years with these new margins.

 

[acbytesla]

If they haven't a supermajority, then they have to play nice or accept the effects of the nuclear option years hence, right?

It's not about whether the Republicans deserve respect, but whether good things can be done.


I'm not interested in using SCOTUS for a tit-for-tat game. Someone reasonably left-of-center is okay by me, if the Dems want to exploit the empty seat. Someone center is okay, too, far as I'm concerned. The more centrists, the more carefully argued the result.

The last thing a SCOTUS nominee is a "tit for tat" game. It's an integral part creating a direction for the country.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What is with all the Trump talking heads claiming they've "always had poll watchers?" I'm listening to the second GOP legislator in as many days make this statement.

 

[Stacko]

Was David Clarke cryogenically frozen in the 50's and thawed out to be a surrogate? He only refers to Hillary Clinton as "Mrs. Bill Clinton". That's sure to sway those white college educated women that the Orange Menace needs to win over.

 

[BobTheCoward]

What is with all the Trump talking heads claiming they've "always had poll watchers?" I'm listening to the second GOP legislator in as many days make this statement.

Both parties use extensive poll watchers and have for decades.