JohnboyND7

You haven't given the small states any reason to accept your demands and I dont think there really is anything you could offer. All you have is some threat that essentially states "let us win or we'll make you let us win."

It's not supposed to be balanced lol. You are listing features, not bugs.

let's play a game where we assume the electoral college exists because of slavery. In this world we agree that it was formed in order to get slave states to agree to enter the union. Now tell me why we shouldn't have it. Slavery is gone, so its not like it is upholding America's original sin anymore. As far as I can tell, all it does now is requires politicians to craft a message that can appeal to voters throughout nearly every part of the country. Most of the swing states have substantial urban and rural populations so you get a nice cross section of the country in those places too of you afe into that sorta thing. Complaining about the E.C though isn't going to get you anywhere. Learn to play the game. It has some basic rules and they aren't hard to learn. You are probably the same type or dude who changed the rules to board games when you were younger because you didn't like losing...many kids do that...most grow out of it eventually though.

Lol its definitely true of both sides. I'm perfectly fine admitting it because at this point, when I see where it looks like the Democrat Party is going, it is not a United States but a European socialist state. I imagine that more moderate Democrats are less afraid of that, because they either A.) Believe that doesn't sound so bad, or B.) Believe they will adequately extinguish that wing of the party and maybe they are right. Meanwhile, many Dems probably look at the GOP and see some nonsense from the Handmaid's Tale or something and think "well I'd rather take just about anything else" even if it means voting for some absolute loons. Meanwhile the typical Republican laughs at that thought because its absurd.

Crazy how we couldn't win in Afghanistan

Barack Obama talked about doing the Lord's work. Was this a problematic statement? Latching onto the "Kingdom of God" statement implies you dont believe religious folks should be allowed to serve as judges or government officials.

Lol and just like that...anti-Catholic bigotry is back! I for one will welcome the Swiss Guard as liberators and am eager to see the American Vatican built. Interestingly enough, libs have been defending Joe Biden as a devout practicing Catholic for weeks on one hand while simultaneously holding out some goofy conspiracy theory bigotry that Amy Barrett is unfit for SCOTUS because she is a practicing Catholic. Pretty tight needle you are trying to thread here. "The only Catholics fit for office or the bench are the ones who don't actually believe the teachings of the Church but also if you imply Biden and Pelosi aren't real Catholics you are slandering decent people!"

I'd look more at the way libs turned Ginsberg into some sort of secular deity. T-shirts...Halloween costumes...figurines...for a lawyer. My classmates are in legit mourning right now...Videos of women crying on TV...social media tributes...etc. I'm surprised school is not cancelled tomorrow. I fully expect that they'll make resources available for those who need to talk about what happened. I totally get the goofy cult of personality that Trump has, I get it for Obama in many ways too. But for an unelected lawyer? I would be very surprised if these people could name more than one of her opinions.

Man...you really are heartbroken right now, aren't you?

The American people voted in 2018 to give an expanded Senate majority to the GOP. They have a mandate. Should also be noted that several of them mention "a new President." We knew in 2016 we'd have a new President. Here, we do not know that. At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter though. Donald Trump will nominate someone this week, and the Senate will vote yes or vote no. We have a GOP president and a GOP Senate, lets roll!

Yep. They have been talking about it for years. They shot the hostage before the FBI negotiator even arrived. "We'll add to the court if you do this!" - chuck "You already said you were going to do that. Anything else?" - mitch

Nothing in the constitution about the size of the Supreme Court. FDR got rebuked by his own party who had a super majority. Pretty fun legislation to read about, his own people were rather blunt about how they felt about it.

You see, idk which would have problems. Thats why we need to impeach them...so we can properly scrutinize them. Sotomayor after all has made statements consistent with some sort of Latino Supremacy. Following your logic, we need to have an ongoing investigation of all federal judges pasts. Or...we could be reasonable and sane people and not threaten judges for impeachment merely because we don't like how they feel about abortion or the death penalty or whatever hot button issue is in vogue.

Libs can't impeach a justice for some nonsensical reason without opening up all of their judges to the same behavior. Democrats aren't known for thinking things through but this particular thing would be exceptionally dumb on their part.

Lol why are you just making crap up now? They can't remove him without their own people being removed. But I suppose Dems do love destroying norms and then getting mad when it comes back to bite them lol

lol Mitch warned Reid and the Democrats in 2013 that they would regret doing what they did. It's on camera. So yeah UNDlaw is either uninformed or he is a liar.

Can't be a hypocrite if it's a genuinely different situation

This is the Senate's job. They only have 2 jobs. One, pass legislation, and two, confirm judges. There is literally zero reasons these people should not confirm the judge. Libs made it very clear in 2016 how they felt on the topic EVEN WHEN THEY DIDNT CONTROL THE SENATE. Anyone who tries implying the GOP is not fully entitled and genuinely in a defensible position here is not a serious person and I am think you might fall under that camp lol. Always breaks my heart to realize we have stupid people with ties to my home state.

So you are suggesting senators can't do their jobs and campaign at the same time? For what its worth, she doesn't want to do it this fall.

Kamala has a well-earned reputation. Acknowledging that isn't a lie or sexist lol. Besides, she's a bigot anyway. No reason to show her respect she doesn't show others.

Why would they wait?

What's short sighted about a President nominating a judge and the Senate confirming a judge? Libs are threatening violence. The only sensible thing to do is move forward and get it done when the other side is threatening violence. No need to be held captive by a noisy bunch of babies lol

it is different. In 2016, we had a Republican Senate with a Democrat President. --> President is operating at the mercy of the opposite party. In 2020, we have a GOP Senate and President. Control of the relevant government apparatuses has its perks. These aren't half-baked justifications, its a fundamentally different situation from 2016. One doesn't need to go to law school to distinguish one from the other. Only an intellectually lazy person would suggest they are the same. Rule: if the Senate and Presidency are controlled by the same party, they will consider a SCOTUS pick in an election year. For hyper-partisan reasons I would ask the Senate to confirm someone as well if only to give all the lib media a middle finger. Before the lady's body was even cold journos were threatening and encouraging riots, destruction, etc. Don't threaten me with a good time lol. Let's get it done guys! Amy Coney Barrett would be ideal.

What are you talking about

You mean like Biden saying Trump had the authority and ability to save literally everyone who died lol.