Democrats keep saying "no scotus until the people decide"

[BasicHumanUnit]

or....DERP STATE

 

[rightwinger]

Obama was not provided his presidential right to nominate.

He had a right to nominate.
He nominated.

The Senate has a right to "advice and consent", or in this case, to not consent.

Exactly.

To quote B. Hussein O himself, "Elections have Consequences".

When the Democrats got schlonged in 2014, they had to know that it would infringe on their ability to get hard to get their preferred choice onto the court. That election had consequences

We the people elected Obama to make Supreme Court selections

 

[rightwinger]

So what was done to Obama was never done before to an elected president.

not true at all.

There have been other SCOTUS nominees that have been rejected, including the Tremendous Robert Bork.

At least they were given a hearing and a vote. Garland was not.

Yeah Obama didn't get a Supreme Court pick in while he was on the way out. Too bad, so sad.

He has a year to go in a four year term

 

[Auld Phart]

Obama was not provided his presidential right to nominate.

He had a right to nominate.
He nominated.

The Senate has a right to "advice and consent", or in this case, to not consent.

Exactly.

To quote B. Hussein O himself, "Elections have Consequences".

When the Democrats got schlonged in 2014, they had to know that it would infringe on their ability to get hard to get their preferred choice onto the court. That election had consequences

We the people elected Obama to make Supreme Court selections

and he made his selection.

 

[skews13]

Thing is the people already decided when the GOP hijacked the process under Obama. Like that act or not it put the direction of the court FIRMLY in the hands of the voter.
Voters chose and the left lost so why hold up more nominees when the people have already spoken?

And spare me the popular vote or Russia Russia Russia bullshit.

Actually, the people decided when they elected Obama.

Twice.

With over 50% of the vote.

Twice.

With an overwhelming majority in both the popular vote by the people, and the electoral college.

Twice.

Which will be irrelevant over the next 30 years anyway, as white conservatives become a total minority in America, and a multicultural majority of Liberals erases the current 242 years of conservatism permanently from the landscape.

Just imagine your legacy in the history books gramps.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

hmmm

didn't they have the opposite opinion in 2016?

They always have an opposite opinion when it doesn't benefit them

 

[Slyhunter]

Thing is the people already decided when the GOP hijacked the process under Obama. Like that act or not it put the direction of the court FIRMLY in the hands of the voter.
Voters chose and the left lost so why hold up more nominees when the people have already spoken?

And spare me the popular vote or Russia Russia Russia bullshit.

Actually, the people decided when they elected Obama.

Twice.

With over 50% of the vote.

Twice.

With an overwhelming majority in both the popular vote by the people, and the electoral college.

Twice.

Which will be irrelevant over the next 30 years anyway, as white conservatives become a total minority in America, and a multicultural majority of Liberals erases the current 242 years of conservatism permanently from the landscape.

Just imagine your legacy in the history books gramps.

Obama has no legacy, he was a tiny blip in history, nothing to see here.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thing is the people already decided when the GOP hijacked the process under Obama. Like that act or not it put the direction of the court FIRMLY in the hands of the voter.
Voters chose and the left lost so why hold up more nominees when the people have already spoken?

And spare me the popular vote or Russia Russia Russia bullshit.

Actually, the people decided when they elected Obama.

Twice.

With over 50% of the vote.

Twice.

With an overwhelming majority in both the popular vote by the people, and the electoral college.

Twice.

Which will be irrelevant over the next 30 years anyway, as white conservatives become a total minority in America, and a multicultural majority of Liberals erases the current 242 years of conservatism permanently from the landscape.

Just imagine your legacy in the history books gramps.

You're on the right side of history, eh comrade?

 

[rightwinger]

Obama was not provided his presidential right to nominate.

He had a right to nominate.
He nominated.

The Senate has a right to "advice and consent", or in this case, to not consent.

Exactly.

To quote B. Hussein O himself, "Elections have Consequences".

When the Democrats got schlonged in 2014, they had to know that it would infringe on their ability to get hard to get their preferred choice onto the court. That election had consequences

We the people elected Obama to make Supreme Court selections

and he made his selection.

Which used to be good enough in filling a Supreme Court vacancy

Now it is whole new ballgame ....it is now about who gets to make the pick

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Thing is the people already decided when the GOP hijacked the process under Obama. Like that act or not it put the direction of the court FIRMLY in the hands of the voter.
Voters chose and the left lost so why hold up more nominees when the people have already spoken?

And spare me the popular vote or Russia Russia Russia bullshit.

Actually, the people decided when they elected Obama.

Twice.

With over 50% of the vote.

Twice.

With an overwhelming majority in both the popular vote by the people, and the electoral college.

Twice.

Which will be irrelevant over the next 30 years anyway, as white conservatives become a total minority in America, and a multicultural majority of Liberals erases the current 242 years of conservatism permanently from the landscape.

Just imagine your legacy in the history books gramps.

Which is what I've been saying for over a year now: the Democrat party has become the anti-white party. No lib will actually admit that, but your comment is as close as any lib has come.

 

[Auld Phart]

Obama was not provided his presidential right to nominate.

He had a right to nominate.
He nominated.

The Senate has a right to "advice and consent", or in this case, to not consent.

Exactly.

To quote B. Hussein O himself, "Elections have Consequences".

When the Democrats got schlonged in 2014, they had to know that it would infringe on their ability to get hard to get their preferred choice onto the court. That election had consequences

We the people elected Obama to make Supreme Court selections

and he made his selection.

Which used to be good enough in filling a Supreme Court vacancy

Now it is whole new ballgame ....it is now about who gets to make the pick

Which used to be good enough in filling a Supreme Court vacancy

nope

always had to go thru the Senate.

 

[BluesLegend]

Dems: Ha ha we will filibuster any SCOTUS nominee we don't like ha ha.

Reps: Fine suck on the nuclear option, now you can't filibuster jack.

Dems: what we can't believe you did that

 

[Slyhunter]

Democratic party, the do nothing party.

 

[WEATHER53]

Liberals calling for an election
When they lose that, whose fault will it be this time? Martians?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Republicans are the hypocrites. They refused to act on Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland by saying that voters should decide in the election. This is a good example of how Republicans have abused their majorities.

Merrick Garland was unqualified. As unqualified as Robert Bork.

Garland deserved a up or down vote. If you say he was unqualified then he as probably qualified.

Okay, so if they voted they would have voted him down. Do you think that would have changed anything today given what's on the line for the Democrats? Either way they would have never got the justice of their choice.

 

[rightwinger]

Obama was not provided his presidential right to nominate.

He had a right to nominate.
He nominated.

The Senate has a right to "advice and consent", or in this case, to not consent.

Exactly.

To quote B. Hussein O himself, "Elections have Consequences".

When the Democrats got schlonged in 2014, they had to know that it would infringe on their ability to get hard to get their preferred choice onto the court. That election had consequences

We the people elected Obama to make Supreme Court selections

and he made his selection.

Which used to be good enough in filling a Supreme Court vacancy

Now it is whole new ballgame ....it is now about who gets to make the pick

Which used to be good enough in filling a Supreme Court vacancy

nope

always had to go thru the Senate.

Republicans have decided to take the selection of Supreme Court justices away from the president

Let them live with it

 

[ptbw forever]

Thing is the people already decided when the GOP hijacked the process under Obama. Like that act or not it put the direction of the court FIRMLY in the hands of the voter.
Voters chose and the left lost so why hold up more nominees when the people have already spoken?

And spare me the popular vote or Russia Russia Russia bullshit.

Actually, the people decided when they elected Obama.

Twice.

With over 50% of the vote.

Twice.

With an overwhelming majority in both the popular vote by the people, and the electoral college.

Twice.

Which will be irrelevant over the next 30 years anyway, as white conservatives become a total minority in America, and a multicultural majority of Liberals erases the current 242 years of conservatism permanently from the landscape.

Just imagine your legacy in the history books gramps.

Millennials are going to put your party in the graveyard, and we won’t even bother to put you in the history books.

The same people who overwhelmingly voted for Obama are going to be more conservative than the greatest generation when all is said and done. You and your party already know this deep down, and that is the real reason for the “dreamers”.

#walkaway is NEVER going to stop until there aren’t any Democrats left. This isn’t just some temporary political campaign that goes away after the elections, the testimonials and the hashtag spreading will be around and growing still long after Trump wipes the floor with you all in 2020.

 

[Polishprince]

We the people elected Obama to make Supreme Court selections

And Obama made his selection, and the US Senate rejected it. The fact that they rejected it without formal hearings or a formal vote doesn't change that fact.

 

[rightwinger]

Republicans are the hypocrites. They refused to act on Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland by saying that voters should decide in the election. This is a good example of how Republicans have abused their majorities.

Merrick Garland was unqualified. As unqualified as Robert Bork.

Garland deserved a up or down vote. If you say he was unqualified then he as probably qualified.

Okay, so if they voted they would have voted him down. Do you think that would have changed anything today given what's on the line for the Democrats? Either way they would have never got the justice of their choice.

What about the next candidate and the one after that?

Garland was moderate, Republicans would vote down anyone nominated by oBama

Democrats will return the favor

 

[rightwinger]

We the people elected Obama to make Supreme Court selections

And Obama made his selection, and the US Senate rejected it. The fact that they rejected it without formal hearings or a formal vote doesn't change that fact.

They did not reject it

They never even gave him a review