Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 198
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Flowood, MS
    Posts
    4,507
    It has to be a female if Trump makes an appointment probably Amy Coney Barrett


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  2. #42
    TrueMaroonGrind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    2,005
    The 26th canít get here fast enough


    0 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by SirBarksalot View Post
    Chickens are coming home to roost.

    Tell me this...how in the hell, would Democratís ever confirm any nominee in the next 45 days? Iím listening to pundits on TV saying itís possible...I donít understand how. Explain like Iím 5.
    The democrats don't have any say, the filibuster is gone for judicial nominees. Now of course that's assuming the republicans will stay together, which I doubt.


    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by 11thEagleFan View Post
    Merrick Garland was a moderate, and wouldíve been a fine justice. Heís much more conservative than RBG. It would be a master stroke if Trump nominated him now. Iíd love to see everyoneís heads explode trying to figure out how to critique him for it.
    This is the smart move. Takes the heat somewhat off the struggling GOP senators and Increases the chance the nominee gets confirmed. Still a big win for the GOP replacing Ginsburg with a much more center leaning justice.

    venit, vidimus, amisimus


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by EngDawg View Post
    This is the smart move. Takes the heat somewhat off the struggling GOP senators and Increases the chance the nominee gets confirmed. Still a big win for the GOP replacing Ginsburg with a much more center leaning justice.
    Nominating a pro-choice judge would be a knife in the back to the evangelical base that has stood by Trump through everything solely on the basis that he might get to appoint another judge who would overturn Roe v. Wade.
    Last edited by QuaoarsKing; 09-18-2020 at 09:16 PM.


    4 out of 4 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  6. #46
    You're right he isn't a President.


    2 out of 5 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  7. #47

    MSNBC NEws

    Quote Originally Posted by SirBarksalot View Post
    Assuming zero chance of any confirmation before inauguration?
    MSNBC just had a guest on the air that claims she was raped by who ever Trump nominates.


    10 out of 16 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  8. #48
    BiscuitEater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg Virginia
    Posts
    3,975
    Quote Originally Posted by QuaoarsKing View Post
    Republicans claimed it was inappropriate to confirm a justice in an election year and refused to even vote on his nominee
    You omitted the 'critical' part .. "when the Senate is one party and the President is a different party." The McConnell rule.

    Obama said it best .. 'Elections have consequences!'

    None of this would matter if Harry Reid hadn't gone nuclear to vote on judges!


    1 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by BiscuitEater View Post
    You omitted the 'critical' part .. "when the Senate is one party and the President is a different party." The McConnell rule.

    Obama said it best .. 'Elections have consequences!'

    None of this would matter if Harry Reid hadn't gone nuclear to vote on judges!
    The main difference was it being a lame duck session.


    0 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  10. #50
    BiscuitEater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg Virginia
    Posts
    3,975
    I fully expected DJT to nominate Amy Coney Barrett within a couple of days! SCOTUS 'may' decide the upcoming election and leaving it in a possible 4-4 tie could leave it undecided.

    Barrett has already been through Senate confirmation to 7th Circuit. Republicans remember how Brett Kavanaugh was treated!


    2 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  11. #51

    I was at the party

    but, I don't remember anything.
    Jack may be gone, but he is "EVER PRESENT"


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by BiscuitEater View Post
    You omitted the 'critical' part .. "when the Senate is one party and the President is a different party." The McConnell rule.

    Obama said it best .. 'Elections have consequences!'

    None of this would matter if Harry Reid hadn't gone nuclear to vote on judges!
    McConnell never said that "critical part" at the time. He's shoehorned it in now, but he didn't say that it's OK if they're in the same party back in 2016. He's been exposed as a brazen hypocrite, in case anyone wasn't already aware.

    And Reid "going nuclear" on lower Court nominees wouldn't have prevented the Garland fiasco, nor Ginsburg's death, so I'm not sure what point you're making there. Supreme Court nominees weren't typically filibustered even before the possibility was nuked. Both Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito got fewer that 60 yes votes.


    4 out of 7 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  13. #53
    Trump will make a nomination before the election, but likely no hearings until after the election. It will bring out a bunch of conservatives to vote, especially Christians, who may not like Trump personally (like in 2016). Then if GOP happens to lose the WH or the Senate, they will probably confirm someone before this congressional term ends at the end of the year because why not and itís too important not to. Replacing Ginsburg with a constitutional conservative would flip the Court potentially for a generation.

    Supreme Court picks are about the most important thing a president will ever do, besides the military. Everything else can be undone by the next one.


    2 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  14. #54
    IBleedMaroonDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Leander, TX
    Posts
    11,870
    Twitter
    @stephenedavis
    Quote Originally Posted by SirBarksalot View Post
    God Bless that woman.. sounds like sheís been through physical hell for years now. Best multiple forms of cancer..the pancreatic was the first time Iíd heard that one.
    I throw politics out the window when it comes to cancer.

    The rhetoric has already started. "Protect your right for an abortion! Vote Biden!"

    There are going to be worse things said by both sides.
    All generalizations are false, including this one. - Mark Twain



    0 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by QuaoarsKing View Post
    McConnell never said that "critical part" at the time. He's shoehorned it in now, but he didn't say that it's OK if they're in the same party back in 2016. He's been exposed as a brazen hypocrite, in case anyone wasn't already aware.

    And Reid "going nuclear" on lower Court nominees wouldn't have prevented the Garland fiasco, nor Ginsburg's death, so I'm not sure what point you're making there. Supreme Court nominees weren't typically filibustered even before the possibility was nuked. Both Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito got fewer that 60 yes votes.

    - It was a lame duck election year. Big difference.

    - It won't matter if it is prior to the election or after the election, whoever Trump nominates will be subjected to the same Kav treatment.

    - The Dems have been talking for over a year about a new SCOTUS. The plan is that once they control the Senate, they will expand the SCOTUS to "X" amount to nullify KAV, Gorsuch, and whoever if he were to get another pick. So they will vote to expand the SCOTUS and then nominate and pass those they want to fill all of those seats.

    So don't worry.... there is a plan.


    0 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by BiscuitEater View Post
    You omitted the 'critical' part .. "when the Senate is one party and the President is a different party." The McConnell rule.

    Obama said it best .. 'Elections have consequences!'

    None of this would matter if Harry Reid hadn't gone nuclear to vote on judges!
    Also the sitting President was lame duck.


    2 out of 4 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  17. #57
    This is how it's going to play out. Trump is going to put up name as required by law. The senate will get that persons name to senate floor and the Senator from Maine is going to have a major decision to make.


    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  18. #58

    Lolz RINO. Trump is a RINO

    Quote Originally Posted by Opie View Post
    President Trump and Mitch McConnell would likely immediately press ahead but for a few (RINO) Republican senators who will stand in their way and undermine any possibilities of success. Susan Collins, Mitt Romney and Mulkowski in some ways are more closely aligned with the Dems than their own party. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see those three doing anything to help Trump get this pick in place before the election.

    The situation with Merrick Garland was different as it involved a president from one party and a senate majority from the other. I agree that this SC decision is probably as important as the presidential election inasmuch as it will impact our lives for many years to come.
    Hell, the republican platform right now is "do what trump says" - which is essentially populism or whatever he thinks benefits himself that day. GTFO with this RINO nonsense.


    6 out of 9 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  19. #59

    That is correct

    maybe she will have to decide whether to be an American, or get re-elected.
    Jack may be gone, but he is "EVER PRESENT"


    1 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  20. #60
    SixPack's Official Farmer DesotoCountyDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    13,432
    Murkowski said she will not vote for one before the election.








    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  21. #61

    Sounds like McConnell

    will put her on the spot.
    Jack may be gone, but he is "EVER PRESENT"


    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  22. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by DesotoCountyDawg View Post
    Murkowski said she will not vote for one before the election.
    Yeah, and she isn't up for re-election. So she won't have much to fear. So far she is the only one to come out. Romney's spox stated that the "rumors that he would not vote are false". That's shocking.


    I do expect a ton of pressure from those being re-elected. Not just those like Collins who faces an uphill battle, but look at it in the opposite direction.

    Graham... He's in a tight fight per the polls (if you believe them). It would help him.
    McSally... It would help her.

    ETC.... See what I mean. Look at some of the DEMs that are in more red-ish states. People like the Senator from WV. What about Doug Collins? He is done in Alabama unless he can use this. It could make people rethink.

    Lot's more to consider when looking at the whole picture.


    0 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  23. #63
    The Grand Compromise of 2020. This is what is probably needed. As a conservative, the temptation to ram it through, which Republicans have the power to do, sure is appealing. But the country can't handle what's about to happen. So here is what should happen. Republicans agree to let the winner of the Presidential election make the nomination. In exchange, Democrats agree that NO party will revoke the legislative filibuster during the next presidential term. They are threatening to do that, and WILL do that if they take the Senate and the Presidency. That will be JUST as damaging to the country as ramming through this SCOTUS pick days before the election or in a lame duck session. If Trump is the one to propose it, it might even WIN him re-election if enough people see it as statesman-like as it really would in fact be.

    -BFB, Chief Sixpack Political Strategist


    0 out of 4 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  24. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by GloryDawg View Post
    Also the sitting President was lame duck.
    And that matters because? Obama was elected in 2012 to appoint Supreme Court justices for the next 4 years regardless of whether he was also elected in 2008.

    Mitch McConnell didn't say in 2016 that it mattered whether the president was in his first or second term or whether the president and senate were part of the same party. He said that the American people should have a say and that was that. We all knew he was a grandstanding, lying, hypocrite anyway, and now we have first-hand proof. I'd respect him a lot more if he'd just said "All I care about is getting conservative justices onto the Supreme Court, and I will use whatever tool I can to accomplish that."

    And let's never forget that Democrats unanimously confirmed Reagan appointee Anthony Kennedy in 1988, an election year (lame duck year too), so the entire thing was never sincere from McConnell (who was in the Senate at the time and also voted for Kennedy).


    5 out of 10 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  25. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by QuaoarsKing View Post
    It will come down to whether the senators in tough reelection battles (Gardner in CO, Tillis in NC, Ernst in IA, maybe a few more) are willing to risk losing in November due to the backlash since all 3 of them insisted in 2016 that you can't confirm justices in an election year. They didn't make any qualification like "unless the president and senate are the same party" or anything, so going back on that now will make them look like hypocritical BSers severely turn off swing voters and independents.

    Now if they really believe in conservative principles, they should be more than happy to throw their careers away for the cause, but do they?

    There's a lot of really fascinating strategic games from both sides that are going to play out in the next few weeks. If it weren't going to affect so many lives it would be really fun to watch.
    The argument was not just it being in an election year. It was being an election year after the voters had flipped the senate, which implicitly repudiates the presidents agenda.

    But itís really irrelevant because the senate has the right to approve or not. McConnell was able to avoid a vote for garland because it wasnít politically costly. Republicans will be able to confirm a vote if itís not too politically costly (because unlike a lot of democrats who voted for Obamacare, Vulnerable republican senators arenít going to vote to conform if they think it will cost their reelection chances).

    My bet is republicans arenít able to confirmation justice before the elections.
    Last edited by johnson86-1; 09-19-2020 at 10:48 AM.


    1 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  26. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson86-1 View Post
    The argument was not just it being in an election year. It was being an election year after the voters had flipped the senate, which implicitly repudiates the presidents agenda.

    But it’s really irrelevant because the senate has the right to approve or not. McConnell was able to avoid a vote for garland because it wasn’t politically costly. Republicans will be able to confirm a vote of its. It too politically costly (because unlike a lot of democrats who voted for Obamacare, Vulnerable republican senators aren’t going to vote to conform if they think it will cost their reelection chances).

    My bet is republicans aren’t able to confirmation justice before the elections.
    That was never the argument at the time. That's just how they're trying to recast it 4 years later to look less hypocritical.


    1 out of 4 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  27. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Bulldog from Birth View Post
    The Grand Compromise of 2020. This is what is probably needed. As a conservative, the temptation to ram it through, which Republicans have the power to do, sure is appealing. But the country can't handle what's about to happen. So here is what should happen. Republicans agree to let the winner of the Presidential election make the nomination. In exchange, Democrats agree that NO party will revoke the legislative filibuster during the next presidential term. They are threatening to do that, and WILL do that if they take the Senate and the Presidency. That will be JUST as damaging to the country as ramming through this SCOTUS pick days before the election or in a lame duck session. If Trump is the one to propose it, it might even WIN him re-election if enough people see it as statesman-like as it really would in fact be.

    -BFB, Chief Sixpack Political Strategist

    Trump is getting re-elected regardless. He's at 53% approval. 45% Hispanic approval, and 35% with Black Americans.

    It's his job to nominate.


    5 out of 10 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  28. #68
    If you're right, then it doesn't matter. He can wait. And it cools the temperature of the country.

    But you're dead wrong here. Trump certainly may get re-elected. It may even be leaning his way. But anyone who thinks this election is certain to go one specific way is wrong. This is probably going to be very very close, just like last time. Trump is going to have to win Pennsylvania or Michigan in all likelihood. He certainly may do it. But it is nowhere near certain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibdancin View Post
    Trump is getting re-elected regardless. He's at 53% approval. 45% Hispanic approval, and 35% with Black Americans.

    It's his job to nominate.


    2 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  29. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Bulldog from Birth View Post
    If you're right, then it doesn't matter. He can wait. And it cools the temperature of the country.

    But you're dead wrong here. Trump certainly may get re-elected. It may even be leaning his way. But anyone who thinks this election is certain to go one specific way is wrong. This is probably going to be very very close, just like last time. Trump is going to have to win Pennsylvania or Michigan in all likelihood. He certainly may do it. But it is nowhere near certain.
    Ok.


    0 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  30. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Ibdancin View Post
    Trump is getting re-elected regardless. He's at 53% approval. 45% Hispanic approval, and 35% with Black Americans.

    It's his job to nominate.
    If you say so...


    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  31. #71

    Polls

    I have been asked ...once, I told them to 17OFF.

    If you could trust polls Hillary would be Pres.

    Most people won't tell pollsters what they plan to do.

    That's just how it is.
    Jack may be gone, but he is "EVER PRESENT"


    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  32. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by QuaoarsKing View Post
    If you say so...
    No... I know so.


    2 out of 4 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  33. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by karlchilders View Post
    I have been asked ...once, I told them to 17OFF.

    If you could trust polls Hillary would be Pres.

    Most people won't tell pollsters what they plan to do.

    That's just how it is.

    Do you know what group of people are now #1 in not telling people who they are voting for? Guess.


    1 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  34. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson86-1 View Post
    The argument was not just it being in an election year. It was being an election year after the voters had flipped the senate, which implicitly repudiates the presidents agenda.

    But it’s really irrelevant because the senate has the right to approve or not. McConnell was able to avoid a vote for garland because it wasn’t politically costly. Republicans will be able to confirm a vote of its. It too politically costly (because unlike a lot of democrats who voted for Obamacare, Vulnerable republican senators aren’t going to vote to conform if they think it will cost their reelection chances).

    My bet is republicans aren’t able to confirmation justice before the elections.
    AKA the Biden Rule


    0 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  35. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by QuaoarsKing View Post
    It will come down to whether the senators in tough reelection battles (Gardner in CO, Tillis in NC, Ernst in IA, maybe a few more) are willing to risk losing in November due to the backlash since all 3 of them insisted in 2016 that you can't confirm justices in an election year. They didn't make any qualification like "unless the president and senate are the same party" or anything, so going back on that now will make them look like hypocritical BSers severely turn off swing voters and independents.

    Now if they really believe in conservative principles, they should be more than happy to throw their careers away for the cause, but do they?

    There's a lot of really fascinating strategic games from both sides that are going to play out in the next few weeks. If it weren't going to affect so many lives it would be really fun to watch.
    You keep beating this drum about senators in tough re election battles and how they are sweating right now about this. If you believe that, you clearly don't know how elections work. Nothing, and I mean nothing gets out the evangelical vote like an opportunity to fill seats on the supreme court. When Trump released his list of candidates in 2016, that's probably the biggest reason he got elected. This issue is going to nationalize these senate races and it's going to help every one of these senators. McSally in Arizona is struggling because older voters aren't enamored with Trump. Well, the calculus just changed on that. Tillis in NC is struggling because evangelicals aren't energized. The calculus just changed on that. The American public, at about a 65% clip, prefer republicans to democrats when it comes to nominating judges for SCOTUS.

    As far as affecting lives, it's only going to do that if democrats take to the street in riots, which is going to happen no matter what.


    2 out of 7 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  36. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Drebin View Post
    You keep beating this drum about senators in tough re election battles and how they are sweating right now about this. If you believe that, you clearly don't know how elections work. Nothing, and I mean nothing gets out the evangelical vote like an opportunity to fill seats on the supreme court. When Trump released his list of candidates in 2016, that's probably the biggest reason he got elected. This issue is going to nationalize these senate races and it's going to help every one of these senators. McSally in Arizona is struggling because older voters aren't enamored with Trump. Well, the calculus just changed on that. Tillis in NC is struggling because evangelicals aren't energized. The calculus just changed on that. The American public, at about a 65% clip, prefer republicans to democrats when it comes to nominating judges for SCOTUS.

    As far as affecting lives, it's only going to do that if democrats take to the street in riots, which is going to happen no matter what.
    We'll see on November 3.


    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  37. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by GloryDawg View Post
    This is how it's going to play out. Trump is going to put up name as required by law. The senate will get that persons name to senate floor and the Senator from Maine is going to have a major decision to make.
    Here's how it SHOULD play out:

    Trump should nominate someone, just like Obama did in 2016. At the nomination, he announces he will not put pressure on the senate, and they can choose to confirm immediately or wait until the election.

    That's a win/win for Trump. It puts his nominee on the ballot. If he loses the election, he could push his nominee through via recess appointment.

    By the way, if Republicans decide to go HAM and push through the nominee before the election, democrats can thank Harry Reid for invoking the nuclear option for confirming judges. Chickens coming home to roost, indeed.


    4 out of 7 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  38. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Ibdancin View Post
    No... I know so.
    Who knew ibdancin could see the future.

    Didnít work out to well when you were saying we wouldnít fire moorehead**


    3 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  39. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by QuaoarsKing View Post
    We'll see on November 3.
    No you won't. Not unless courts bring back normal rules.


    2 swing states will have 14 day afterward and THEN the court battles begin.


    1 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

  40. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by QuaoarsKing View Post
    We'll see on November 3.
    You'll wait to see on November 3. I already know.


    1 out of 3 sixpackers like this post
    Cooking Thread | Game Thread Yes | No

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
SixPack Sponsors








Disclaimer: Neither this message board nor its rules and regulations are associated with Mississippi State University or any other Mississippi State sports website. Neither this message board nor its rules and regulations are associated with Scottish & Newcastle PLC d/b/a Bulldog Strong Ale. The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author. The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by SixPackSpeak.com. The interactive nature of the SixPackSpeak.com Discussion Forums makes it impossible for SixPackSpeak.com to assume responsibility for any of the content, including photographs and/or images, posted by participants. The ideas, suggestions, thoughts, recommendations, opinions, comments, advice, and observations made by participants of the interactive Discussion Forums are not endorsed by SixPackSpeak.com.