An incredibly contested election does that.bmw wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 5:44 pmThe difference today compared to not that long ago is that the Senate now makes its advise and consent decisions based purely on politics rather than on qualifications.
Remember these votes?
98-0 John Paul Stevens
99-0 Sandra Day O'Connor
98-0 Antonin Scalia
97-0 Anthony Kennedy
90-9 David Souter
96-3 RBG
87-9 Stephen Bryer
Sure, there were exceptions (Bork and Thomas), but most judges were confirmed with flying colors.
Then when GW Bush took office it all went downhill from there. Every nomination this century has received at least 22 "no" votes.
Acceptable registrations in the queue through June 3 at 5:00p ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
Except Bush's nominees came in the second term after he clearly won re-election.Rate This wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 6:30 pmAn incredibly contested election does that.bmw wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 5:44 pmThe difference today compared to not that long ago is that the Senate now makes its advise and consent decisions based purely on politics rather than on qualifications.
Remember these votes?
98-0 John Paul Stevens
99-0 Sandra Day O'Connor
98-0 Antonin Scalia
97-0 Anthony Kennedy
90-9 David Souter
96-3 RBG
87-9 Stephen Bryer
Sure, there were exceptions (Bork and Thomas), but most judges were confirmed with flying colors.
Then when GW Bush took office it all went downhill from there. Every nomination this century has received at least 22 "no" votes.
Voting for Trump is dumber than playing Russian Roulette with fully loaded chambers.
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
And the hyperpartisanship was well underway by then as a result of the 2000 election. W made for a divisive figure.Matt wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:42 pmExcept Bush's nominees came in the second term after he clearly won re-election.Rate This wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 6:30 pmAn incredibly contested election does that.bmw wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 5:44 pmThe difference today compared to not that long ago is that the Senate now makes its advise and consent decisions based purely on politics rather than on qualifications.
Remember these votes?
98-0 John Paul Stevens
99-0 Sandra Day O'Connor
98-0 Antonin Scalia
97-0 Anthony Kennedy
90-9 David Souter
96-3 RBG
87-9 Stephen Bryer
Sure, there were exceptions (Bork and Thomas), but most judges were confirmed with flying colors.
Then when GW Bush took office it all went downhill from there. Every nomination this century has received at least 22 "no" votes.
- audiophile
- Posts: 8660
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
- Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
I don't think GWB was a particularly divisive candidate, especially prior to the first term.
Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
No but the 2000 election was so bitter that it did damage as did 9/11 and the Iraq war...audiophile wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 10:22 pmI don't think GWB was a particularly divisive candidate, especially prior to the first term.
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
Oh stop. How old were you when 9/11 happened?Rate This wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 10:59 pmNo but the 2000 election was so bitter that it did damage as did 9/11 and the Iraq war...audiophile wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 10:22 pmI don't think GWB was a particularly divisive candidate, especially prior to the first term.
If you knew anything about it, you'd know that Dubya's handling of 9/11 afforded him some of the highest approval rates seen by ANY President EVER.
Stop pulling things out of your ass, you look stupid.
Thread Killer
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
Thread Killer
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
Do you have any pitching videos of the "athletic" failure that followed W? We all know he sucks at basketball.UP906 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:07 amDubya was a rock star back then, and he could throw a baseball.
https://youtu.be/NjGcCI9ByWw
In terms of 9/11, for RT's benefit, Bush was at 89% approval. There is no way you can call that divisive.
Voting for Trump is dumber than playing Russian Roulette with fully loaded chambers.
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
Let's also not forget that Clinton and Biden both voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq.
But hey... they are stellar Americans, right?
But hey... they are stellar Americans, right?
Thread Killer
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
The announcement of the nominee will be made Friday or Saturday.
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
It would be nice if Congress (both House and Senate) did their jobs independent of election cycle timing. Isn't that why the founders staggered the replacements?
- audiophile
- Posts: 8660
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
- Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
That's his job.
Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
In the beginning this was true, and the war in Afghanistan was broadly popular. Then we expanded the “war on terror” to include Iraq and those approval ratings began to fall. Slowly but surely a divisive debate over civil liberties vs. national security emerged. Absent 9/11 none of these things would have happened. That one attack altered history essentially.Matt wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:29 amDo you have any pitching videos of the "athletic" failure that followed W? We all know he sucks at basketball.UP906 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:07 amDubya was a rock star back then, and he could throw a baseball.
https://youtu.be/NjGcCI9ByWw
In terms of 9/11, for RT's benefit, Bush was at 89% approval. There is no way you can call that divisive.
To deny that 9/11 hurt the country severely is to have a rectal-cranial inversion in full effect.
Re: Trump to name next Supreme Court Justice soon
We were talking specifically about GW as a divisive character, but you go ahead and move the goalposts all you want kid... it's all you've got.
Thread Killer