(10-05-2018 04:46 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:27 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Going to eat crow presently. I did not think that both Collins and Flake would vote Yes. And, I thought for sure that Manchin would not vote Yes.

Color me wrong on those counts.

It is sad that the vote was as close as this. Sad enough that Gorsuch only got 54.

And, to be blunt, the damage to the process has been monumental. Absolutely monumental.

I do not believe that I will ever see a SCOTUS nominee in my lifetime that gets 60+ votes. Utterly sad to see that wasted and dead on the side of the road now.

Oh, you'll see it again. You'll see it when a Dim president nominates a very liberal judge with a long track record of making it up as he goes. You'll see it because the guy will technically be qualified for the job and won't have anything more the usual crap in his background that most of us have. You'll see it again because pubs won't do what dims just did. No, when it gets down to the nut-cuttin', pubs believe in the Constitution, believe in the separation of powers, and believe in the American people and they'll do their jobs of advise and consent.

You may see it prior to that when there are 60 Repub Senators. It would not surprise me at all if Manchin changes parties after his re-election.

(10-05-2018 04:57 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:46 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:27 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Going to eat crow presently. I did not think that both Collins and Flake would vote Yes. And, I thought for sure that Manchin would not vote Yes.

Color me wrong on those counts.

It is sad that the vote was as close as this. Sad enough that Gorsuch only got 54.

And, to be blunt, the damage to the process has been monumental. Absolutely monumental.

I do not believe that I will ever see a SCOTUS nominee in my lifetime that gets 60+ votes. Utterly sad to see that wasted and dead on the side of the road now.

Oh, you'll see it again. You'll see it when a Dim president nominates a very liberal judge with a long track record of making it up as he goes. You'll see it because the guy will technically be qualified for the job and won't have anything more the usual crap in his background that most of us have. You'll see it again because pubs won't do what dims just did. No, when it gets down to the nut-cuttin', pubs believe in the Constitution, believe in the separation of powers, and believe in the American people and they'll do their jobs of advise and consent.

You may see it prior to that when there are 60 Repub Senators. It would not surprise me at all if Manchin changes parties after his re-election.

That works for me.

(10-05-2018 04:46 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:27 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Going to eat crow presently. I did not think that both Collins and Flake would vote Yes. And, I thought for sure that Manchin would not vote Yes.

Color me wrong on those counts.

It is sad that the vote was as close as this. Sad enough that Gorsuch only got 54.

And, to be blunt, the damage to the process has been monumental. Absolutely monumental.

I do not believe that I will ever see a SCOTUS nominee in my lifetime that gets 60+ votes. Utterly sad to see that wasted and dead on the side of the road now.

Oh, you'll see it again. You'll see it when a Dim president nominates a very liberal judge with a long track record of making it up as he goes. You'll see it because the guy will technically be qualified for the job and won't have anything more the usual crap in his background that most of us have. You'll see it again because pubs won't do what dims just did. No, when it gets down to the nut-cuttin', pubs believe in the Constitution, believe in the separation of powers, and believe in the American people and they'll do their jobs of advise and consent.

The job of 'advise and consent' doesnt mean 'deferring'. That was the practice, the 'gentleman's agreement'. But not a requirement. Not anymore.

Republicans will do exactly what was tossed their way with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. But I think at this point the Republicans, especially with the Kavanaugh episode very fresh, will never go back to the old style.

Sorry, the SCOTUS nomination landscape is now permanently altered to resemble Verdun in 1916. I dont see the Republican's going back the 'gentleman's table' after this. And, to be blunt, I actually support that decision.

I mean, you know I am pretty much a borderline 'Never Trump'-er. But, seeing this process the way it has played out has pretty much altered my view. While I truly detest the guy, I probably will support him in 2020.

(10-05-2018 05:02 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:46 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:27 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Going to eat crow presently. I did not think that both Collins and Flake would vote Yes. And, I thought for sure that Manchin would not vote Yes.

Color me wrong on those counts.

It is sad that the vote was as close as this. Sad enough that Gorsuch only got 54.

And, to be blunt, the damage to the process has been monumental. Absolutely monumental.

I do not believe that I will ever see a SCOTUS nominee in my lifetime that gets 60+ votes. Utterly sad to see that wasted and dead on the side of the road now.

Oh, you'll see it again. You'll see it when a Dim president nominates a very liberal judge with a long track record of making it up as he goes. You'll see it because the guy will technically be qualified for the job and won't have anything more the usual crap in his background that most of us have. You'll see it again because pubs won't do what dims just did. No, when it gets down to the nut-cuttin', pubs believe in the Constitution, believe in the separation of powers, and believe in the American people and they'll do their jobs of advise and consent.

The job of 'advise and consent' doesnt mean 'deferring'. That was the practice, the 'gentleman's agreement'. But not a requirement. Not anymore.

Republicans will do exactly what was tossed their way with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. But I think at this point the Republicans, especially with the Kavanaugh episode very fresh, will never go back to the old style.

Sorry, the SCOTUS nomination landscape is now permanently altered to resemble Verdun in 1916. I dont see the Republican's going back the 'gentleman's table' after this. And, to be blunt, I actually support that decision.

I mean, you know I am pretty much a borderline 'Never Trump'-er. But, seeing this process the way it has played out has pretty much altered my view. While I truly detest the guy, I probably will support him in 2020.

I hope so Tanq. The man's a fighter. He believes in America, he believes its president should stand up for the country, stand up for its citizens, and look out for its best interests.

What more could one ask of a president? That he does apology tours so that the rest of the world will love us? I think we know where that gets us.

He's growing on you. A big ole orange spot.

(10-05-2018 05:02 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:46 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(10-05-2018 04:27 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Going to eat crow presently. I did not think that both Collins and Flake would vote Yes. And, I thought for sure that Manchin would not vote Yes.

Color me wrong on those counts.

It is sad that the vote was as close as this. Sad enough that Gorsuch only got 54.

And, to be blunt, the damage to the process has been monumental. Absolutely monumental.

I do not believe that I will ever see a SCOTUS nominee in my lifetime that gets 60+ votes. Utterly sad to see that wasted and dead on the side of the road now.

Oh, you'll see it again. You'll see it when a Dim president nominates a very liberal judge with a long track record of making it up as he goes. You'll see it because the guy will technically be qualified for the job and won't have anything more the usual crap in his background that most of us have. You'll see it again because pubs won't do what dims just did. No, when it gets down to the nut-cuttin', pubs believe in the Constitution, believe in the separation of powers, and believe in the American people and they'll do their jobs of advise and consent.

The job of 'advise and consent' doesnt mean 'deferring'. That was the practice, the 'gentleman's agreement'. But not a requirement. Not anymore.

Republicans will do exactly what was tossed their way with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. But I think at this point the Republicans, especially with the Kavanaugh episode very fresh, will never go back to the old style.

Sorry, the SCOTUS nomination landscape is now permanently altered to resemble Verdun in 1916. I dont see the Republican's going back the 'gentleman's table' after this. And, to be blunt, I actually support that decision.

I mean, you know I am pretty much a borderline 'Never Trump'-er. But, seeing this process the way it has played out has pretty much altered my view. While I truly detest the guy, I probably will support him in 2020.

Took you a while. I was a none of the above in August. But then they shut down a Trump rally, got people fired for simply supporting build a wall on private facebooks, firebombed Republican HQs, hired people to incite violence at Trump rallies...As a Jewish friend said, a bunch of brownshirt activities. Everything that has happened since then only makes me wonder why it took me so long.