2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by Zedlaw

Oh, precedent during the lead up to the civil war. This is a great direction we’re heading

So your argument has shifted from it's never happened before to it's happened before, but at an earlier time and was a direct cause of the civil war?

Sign this man up for the debate team!

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

Trump's nominee is getting confirmed, it's really only a matter of when. The only thing up in the air is if Biden wins/Dems win the senate, will they pack the court. That largely depends on what their majority would be. Can't see a 50-50 senate doing it, but maybe a 52-48. Who knows, but the next 3.5 months will be interesting

The number of Justices on the Supreme Court is set by federal law. If Biden wins, he can't just show up on day 1 and start nominating people. He would have to get the law changed.

If I understand my civics correctly - and I gladly admit there is a big chance I don't - making and changing laws can still be filibustered. So the Democrats would need a 60 seat majority, which I just don't see happening.

(I am sure someone will correct me if any of the above is incorrect, but that's my understanding of things as they are)

[packman80]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

The number of Justices on the Supreme Court is set by federal law. If Biden wins, he can't just show up on day 1 and start nominating people. He would have to get the law changed.

If I understand my civics correctly - and I gladly admit there is a big chance I don't - making and changing laws can still be filibustered. So the Democrats would need a 60 seat majority, which I just don't see happening.

(I am sure someone will correct me if any of the above is incorrect, but that's my understanding of things as they are)

I believe to change how many seats are on the SC you would need to change the constiution and that won't happen.

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Not sure what that has to do with the Supreme Court but OK.

Honor the great words of Chuck Schumer!

Thanks for that.
If Schumer didn't get his way back then with 9 months before the election, there's no way he should get it with this election that is literally now underway as people have already cast votes in it.

You're an unlikely ally, Chapmans, but I'll second your salient point here as long as I can also offer this important caveat:

This guy is almost always wrong.

[IgnatiusJReilly]

Originally Posted by packman80

I believe to change how many seats are on the SC you would need to change the constiution and that won't happen.

I’m pretty sure the number of justices is not set by the constitution. It’s a law. I think FDR was the last to try and change the number of seats but failed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by IgnatiusJReilly

I’m pretty sure the number of justices is not set by the constitution. It’s a law. I think FDR was the last to try and change the number of seats but failed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with the above. The number of Justices has changed a couple times in our nation's history, but it was not a Constitutional amendment.

[packman80]

Originally Posted by IgnatiusJReilly

I’m pretty sure the number of justices is not set by the constitution. It’s a law. I think FDR was the last to try and change the number of seats but failed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah i read wrong thought that after FDR was changed so a priesdent could not try to load the court like he did.

[preakness]

Originally Posted by Zedlaw

In 2016 it was unprecedented to block a nomination. This year there is in fact precedent. Funny how that works.

Unprecedent means never ever happened

Therefore, you are wrong

[Zedlaw]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

So your argument has shifted from it's never happened before to it's happened before, but at an earlier time and was a direct cause of the civil war?

Sign this man up for the debate team!

I don’t know how you constructed direct cause from what I typed. Enormous political fractures were present during the build up to the civil war. To use that as precedent seems disingenuous and dangerous. No action taken by the senate was only used with Tyler/Fillmore whom neither were voted president and the last of their dying party. Last I checked the Democratic Party still exists. So yes, 2016 was unprecedented circumstances.

[packman80]

Though if we wait Joe Biden might nominate Joe Biden for the SC.

[preakness]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

I agree with the above. The number of Justices has changed a couple times in our nation's history, but it was not a Constitutional amendment.

More than a couple and yes, it's not an amendment thing.

[preakness]

Originally Posted by packman80

Though if we wait Joe Biden might nominate Joe Biden for the SC.

During the harris administration

[marl1220]

I'm "probably" voting Democrat this year, but I don't want another liberal SC judge.

[rcmb3220]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

The number of Justices on the Supreme Court is set by federal law. If Biden wins, he can't just show up on day 1 and start nominating people. He would have to get the law changed.

If I understand my civics correctly - and I gladly admit there is a big chance I don't - making and changing laws can still be filibustered. So the Democrats would need a 60 seat majority, which I just don't see happening.

(I am sure someone will correct me if any of the above is incorrect, but that's my understanding of things as they are)

I think the senate could change the rules to a simple majority for ending a filibuster. If they can, they will and we’ll get a 15 justice SC and two new states.

[packman80]

Originally Posted by rcmb3220

I think the senate could change the rules to a simple majority for ending a filibuster. If they can, they will and we’ll get a 15 justice SC and two new states.

Also that former presidents don't get a library unless approved by congress.

[lietuvalabas]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

LOL. I love the pretend tough guy routine. He's gonna sit there and take it just like the rest.

Hahaha like they haven't tried every trick in the book to get something on Trump and get him out, spying on his election and all that stuff even before he got in. The dems remind me of Wiley coyote. Try so hard to kill the road runner but he just meep meeps along.

Seriously, I'm still young yet where I haven't gotten into politics much or ever really cared. But the only time I remember anything where the right tried to get anything on anyone was the Obama birth certificate thing, which was that ever actually resolved? But that's really all I can think of.

[Jopeal]

Originally Posted by lietuvalabas

Hahaha like they haven't tried every trick in the book to get something on Trump and get him out, spying on his election and all that stuff even before he got in. The dems remind me of Wiley coyote. Try so hard to kill the road runner but he just meep meeps along.

Seriously, I'm still young yet where I haven't gotten into politics much or ever really cared. But the only time I remember anything where the right tried to get anything on anyone was the Obama birth certificate thing, which was that ever actually resolved? But that's really all I can think of.

It’s far more layered than just the presidency.

[oldgoldy97]

Originally Posted by lietuvalabas

Hahaha like they haven't tried every trick in the book to get something on Trump and get him out, spying on his election and all that stuff even before he got in. The dems remind me of Wiley coyote. Try so hard to kill the road runner but he just meep meeps along.

Seriously, I'm still young yet where I haven't gotten into politics much or ever really cared. But the only time I remember anything where the right tried to get anything on anyone was the Obama birth certificate thing, which was that ever actually resolved? But that's really all I can think of.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effo...h_Barack_Obama

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by lietuvalabas

Hahaha like they haven't tried every trick in the book to get something on Trump and get him out, spying on his election and all that stuff even before he got in. The dems remind me of Wiley coyote. Try so hard to kill the road runner but he just meep meeps along.

Seriously, I'm still young yet where I haven't gotten into politics much or ever really cared. But the only time I remember anything where the right tried to get anything on anyone was the Obama birth certificate thing, which was that ever actually resolved? But that's really all I can think of.

Trump was not spied on.
That is a continuing lie he tells.

Google these topics:

Whitewater
Benghazi
Tan suits

And yes, the "birther" claims were resolved.
They were B.S. from the start.

[rhigh2390]

Originally Posted by lietuvalabas

Hahaha like they haven't tried every trick in the book to get something on Trump and get him out, spying on his election and all that stuff even before he got in. The dems remind me of Wiley coyote. Try so hard to kill the road runner but he just meep meeps along.

Seriously, I'm still young yet where I haven't gotten into politics much or ever really cared. But the only time I remember anything where the right tried to get anything on anyone was the Obama birth certificate thing, which was that ever actually resolved? But that's really all I can think of.

Obama sent a plane full of cash to terrorists. Don't know how he wasn't impeached. He made racism and riots mainstream. First president that I know of to openly support terrorists and sided with criminals over law and order.

Yet somehow, he would probably get re-elected because he is a smooth talker.

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by packman80

Also that former presidents don't get a library unless approved by congress.

Since this President famously does not read, the future Trump Presidential Library will consist entirely of Russian-made videotapes.

[oldgoldy97]

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president," Mitch McConnel.

Not to move the country forward, not to work together, not to compromise.

[Lonewolf]

Originally Posted by lietuvalabas

Hahaha like they haven't tried every trick in the book to get something on Trump and get him out, spying on his election and all that stuff even before he got in. The dems remind me of Wiley coyote. Try so hard to kill the road runner but he just meep meeps along.

Seriously, I'm still young yet where I haven't gotten into politics much or ever really cared. But the only time I remember anything where the right tried to get anything on anyone was the Obama birth certificate thing, which was that ever actually resolved? But that's really all I can think of.

Give me grossly uninformed opinions for $300 please.

[oldgoldy97]

Originally Posted by rhigh2390

Obama sent a plane full of cash to terrorists. Don't know how he wasn't impeached. He made racism and riots mainstream. First president that I know of to openly support terrorists and sided with criminals over law and order.

Yet somehow, he would probably get re-elected because he is a smooth talker.

Let love into your heart. Hatred has blinded you to the Truth.

[rhigh2390]

Originally Posted by oldgoldy97

Let love into your heart. Hatred has blinded you to the Truth.

Lol I think I'll be ok. Just going off of what I saw from him. Crazy what some people deny.