Add AGEism To The List Of The Democrats' List of 'ISM's

[Auld Phart]

How many times did he get defeated 9-0 in the SC?

The last guy has a worse record in the supreme court than Obama.

Some commentators place the blame for early court losses on inexperienced agency heads. However, the data on court rulings suggest that the administration has not learned over time. The administration’s win rate, which was under 5 percent early in the presidential term, did climb to a high water mark just under 20 percent (still a historically low rate). But in the latter half of Trump’s term, the win rate has been dropping back down, leading to the current 17 percent.

Ouch, 17%.

and another deflection to Trump.

Who would have to buy a ticket, (and bring an interpreter) to see SCOTUS in action.

Just putting proper context about claiming that Obama lost a lot in court. His administration actually won over half (barely) of his cases and the last guy only won 17%. Wow, sorry you have no real comeback for that. I know how I would answer that kind of explains why the last guy lost more than Obama but I'm not feeling like donating my time to you morons.

Just putting proper context about claiming that Obama lost a lot in court.

Because Obama MAY be considered for a position on the Court.

Trump?

Ah, I see, you are jealous because nobody would ever seriously consider the last guy for the job.

No, I'm stating a fact.

trump doesn't have the background, the temperment, etc to be a judge.

WHY do you continue to bring him up?

Miss him?

 

[HappyJoy]

How many times did he get defeated 9-0 in the SC?

The last guy has a worse record in the supreme court than Obama.

Some commentators place the blame for early court losses on inexperienced agency heads. However, the data on court rulings suggest that the administration has not learned over time. The administration’s win rate, which was under 5 percent early in the presidential term, did climb to a high water mark just under 20 percent (still a historically low rate). But in the latter half of Trump’s term, the win rate has been dropping back down, leading to the current 17 percent.

Ouch, 17%.

and another deflection to Trump.

Who would have to buy a ticket, (and bring an interpreter) to see SCOTUS in action.

Just putting proper context about claiming that Obama lost a lot in court. His administration actually won over half (barely) of his cases and the last guy only won 17%. Wow, sorry you have no real comeback for that. I know how I would answer that kind of explains why the last guy lost more than Obama but I'm not feeling like donating my time to you morons.

Just putting proper context about claiming that Obama lost a lot in court.

Because Obama MAY be considered for a position on the Court.

Trump?

Ah, I see, you are jealous because nobody would ever seriously consider the last guy for the job.

No, I'm stating a fact.

trump doesn't have the background, the temperment, etc to be a judge.

WHY do you continue to bring him up?

Miss him?

I'm putting Obama's record in context. It's not too difficult.

 

[Auld Phart]

I'm putting Obama's record in context.

Only as a way to bash Trump.

Grow up, discuss the op, not your fantasies.

 

[HappyJoy]

I'm putting Obama's record in context.

Only as a way to bash Trump.

Grow up, discuss the op, not your fantasies.

The post I was responding to was bashing Obama who had a 50.5% winning percentage vs. the last guy's 17%. Yeah, I think it's relevant and I'm sorry you're so butt hurt over it you'd rather talk about me.

if I were you I'd focus on two things. Why is Obama's percentage higher and why by so much? I can answer the first that isn't insulting to the last guy, the second on the other hand not so much.

EDIT: Oh and now the mod I'm debating with took away my right to reply in this thread.

 

[JLW]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

Obama would be a good choice however he is too old. (60) Democrats for whatever reason tend to nominate Supreme court justices that are on the older side. RBG was in her 60s when she was appointed. Sontemeyor while not that old when nominated (54) she had health issues. All recent Republican appointees have been in their late 40s or early 50s.

The next Democratic nominee to SCOTUS should be in their early 40s.

 

[TNHarley]

How many times did he get defeated 9-0 in the SC?

The last guy has a worse record in the supreme court than Obama.

Some commentators place the blame for early court losses on inexperienced agency heads. However, the data on court rulings suggest that the administration has not learned over time. The administration’s win rate, which was under 5 percent early in the presidential term, did climb to a high water mark just under 20 percent (still a historically low rate). But in the latter half of Trump’s term, the win rate has been dropping back down, leading to the current 17 percent.

Ouch, 17%.

Your head is so full of trump, IDK how you can see or hear.

Really weird thing to say since I'm responding to your post about Obama.

Yes, it was about obama. So it was "weird" you bring up trump.
Do you understand now?

 

[easyt65]

I seem to remember hearing that Biden was too old to be president by many of you.

Either you are mistaken or lying - I will let others decide which. I have never said Biden is too old.

Like everyone else, whether they choose to admit it or not, my opposition to Biden - aside from his financial scams / crimes (influence peddling, Russian Money laundering, taking $1 Billion from the CCP), his being a blatant racist, having been wrong about EVERY foreign policy decision he has ever made, etc.... - has been that he is DEMENTIA-RAVAGED. President Trump just turned 75, and he, unlike Biden, is still alert and in control of his faculties.

 

[Couchpotato]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

Why would you say there's no one more qualified? He didnt spend any time a judge or really even a lawyer. He was a community organizer, law professor, state senator, US senator (not even a full term) and then President. Hes a crazy smart guy, super successful, but I would question his lawyer bonafides when compared to others with more judical and lawyer experience.

 

[JoeMoma]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

You mean the man that for years said doing DACA by executive order was unconstitutional but then he did it anyway.

 

[BULLDOG]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

 

[Auld Phart]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

 

[JLW]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

 

[Auld Phart]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

and still nothing to do with the OP.

Do you people read the OPs, or just bounce in with partisan rhetoric?

 

[JLW]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

and still nothing to do with the OP.

Do you people read the OPs, or just bounce in with partisan rhetoric?

I was responding to your inquiry about Trump.

 

[Auld Phart]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

and still nothing to do with the OP.

Do you people read the OPs, or just bounce in with partisan rhetoric?

I was responding to your inquiry about Trump.

 

[JLW]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

and still nothing to do with the OP.

Do you people read the OPs, or just bounce in with partisan rhetoric?

I was responding to your inquiry about Trump.

You wrote that you never heard of Trump being considered for the court. I merely responded that Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS because there are no Constitutional requirements to sit on SCOTUS. Hardly partisan rhetoric.

 

[easyt65]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

and still nothing to do with the OP.

Do you people read the OPs, or just bounce in with partisan rhetoric?

I was responding to your inquiry about Trump.

You wrote that you never heard of Trump being considered for the court. I merely responded that Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS because there are no Constitutional requirements to sit on SCOTUS. Hardly partisan rhetoric.

Democrats and snowflakes are so desperate to take back the majority of the USSC they are bullying, badgering, pressuring (& threatening) an elderly American...

That is what this thrrad is about....this is the topic snowflakes keep attempting to divert attention away from.

 

[BULLDOG]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

and still nothing to do with the OP.

Do you people read the OPs, or just bounce in with partisan rhetoric?

I was responding to your inquiry about Trump.

You wrote that you never heard of Trump being considered for the court. I merely responded that Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS because there are no Constitutional requirements to sit on SCOTUS. Hardly partisan rhetoric.

Doesn't matter. He's a partisan prick.

 

[Moonglow]

He is a scholar, for sure. He was well aware his DREAM ordeal was unconstitutional, yet, did it anyway.

The 'Dream' Act edict was a direct, intentional violation of the United States Constitution in order to advance his personal liberal agenda.

The demonstration of being willing to violate the Constitutional for personal / political gain shuld immediately disqualify the POS. His repeatedly proven violations of the Constitution, Americans Constitutional Rights, and the Rule of Law should prohibit even his ever being considered for a federal judgeship, let alone a position on the USSC.

What laws of the Constitution did he violate?

 

[Moonglow]

Highly doubtful that it would happen, but I can think of no one more qualified than Obama for the Supreme Court.

I MIGHT agree with Barry that he is a Constitutional SCHOLAR, just neither a believer in nor a defender of the Constitution. Barry spent more time as President violating both the Constitution and the Rule of Law than he did standing up for, upholding, and defending the US Constitution.

Barry violated and was held accountable by the USSC for violating the Constitution several times as President, and his administration LOST more than his fair share of Constitutional challenges as President.

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

How many SC cases did that fat orange fool lose?

is there any chance Trump will be considered for SCOTUS?


NO?

they why bring him up?

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC doesn't seem to be an attempt to derail the thread.

Odd, but bringing up Obama's record with the SC

Considering the discussion is about seating a justice, his 'judicial' record is pertinent.

I have never heard of Trump being considered for the court.

There is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer or have any legal experience whatsoever. So, Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS, but so could Pee-Wee Herman.

and still nothing to do with the OP.

Do you people read the OPs, or just bounce in with partisan rhetoric?

I was responding to your inquiry about Trump.

You wrote that you never heard of Trump being considered for the court. I merely responded that Trump could be appointed to SCOTUS because there are no Constitutional requirements to sit on SCOTUS. Hardly partisan rhetoric.

Democrats and snowflakes are so desperate to take back the majority of the USSC they are bullying, badgering, pressuring (& threatening) an elderly American...

That is what this thrrad is about....this is the topic snowflakes keep attempting to divert attention away from.

Now the Democrats sound like the Republicans, imagine that.