Author Topic: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?  (Read 4020 times)

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,772
Re: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?
« Reply #25 on: March 16, 2016, 05:20:59 PM »
I am not thinking Trump would appoint a leftie either.  If he did, he would be effectively telling everyone "Ha Ha, I am really a Democrat." 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Re: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?
« Reply #26 on: March 16, 2016, 06:57:35 PM »

That's why Congressional seats are only 2-6 years (and a lot of the Founders wanted the terms to be even shorter). When a representative/senator displeases the base, he may not be re-elected. Civics 101.

Instead of staying home at the election, get someone to challenge them in the primary. Hell ol' Chuck Grassley might have to win a primary in Iowa, well that is the scuttlebutt anyways. Steve King has a primary challenger.
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

bedlamite

  • Hold my beer and watch this!
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,790
  • Ack! PLBTTPHBT!
Re: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?
« Reply #27 on: March 16, 2016, 07:57:41 PM »
Garland was just nominated.
A plan is just a list of things that doesn't happen.
Is defenestration possible through the overton window?

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46,066
  • I'm an Extremist!
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

sumpnz

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,336
Re: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?
« Reply #29 on: March 16, 2016, 08:37:11 PM »
I think the R's will keep the Senate.  Might be with a smaller majority, but looking at the state by state races there's only a couple that are really vulnerable plus maybe one or two others that are somewhat vulnerable.  There's also a D or two that are at least somewhat vulnerable.  Probably unrealistic to think the Rs will come out with the same or more Senators, but keeping 51 seats is quite probable.

Garland is probably the best we could hope for from Obama.  If the R's retain the Senate I think we'd see a worse nominee by HRC if she won (shudder).  But not Sotomayor bad.  If Trump gets in Garland is probably still the best we can hope for.  Otherwise we'd get a Souter/Roberts turncoat type.  Cruz, with even a 50 R Senate (so he veep being a tiebreaker) would get us a much better Scalia replacement.  But getting a Thomas/Alito clone through with anything less than a 60 R Senate will be very hard thanks to the filibuster.  The media will try to let the D's get away with trying to run the clock for 4 years on Cruz.

Sergeant Bob

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,861
Re: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?
« Reply #30 on: March 16, 2016, 09:29:46 PM »
Quote
“There is no longer a majority of support among the justices for the fundamental, individual right to own a firearm for self-defense. Four justices believe law-abiding Americans have that right and four justices do not,” Cox also said.

Nuff said! Muck this futhermucker!
Personally, I do not understand how a bunch of people demanding a bigger govt can call themselves anarchist.
I meet lots of folks like this, claim to be anarchist but really they're just liberals with pierced genitals. - gunsmith

I already have canned butter, buying more. Canned blueberries, some pancake making dry goods and the end of the world is gonna be delicious.  -French G

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,277
Re: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?
« Reply #31 on: March 16, 2016, 09:56:33 PM »
That's why Congressional seats are only 2-6 years (and a lot of the Founders wanted the terms to be even shorter). When a representative/senator displeases the base, he may not be re-elected. Civics 101.

That sounds great as a theory, but in reality -- why are so many of those losers (especially senators) people who have been in the Congress for most of their adult lives?
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,428
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: Srinivasan or Garland for SCOTUS?
« Reply #32 on: March 16, 2016, 10:04:47 PM »
Instead of staying home at the election, get someone to challenge them in the primary. Hell ol' Chuck Grassley might have to win a primary in Iowa, well that is the scuttlebutt anyways. Steve King has a primary challenger.

Very good, charby. I award you one gold star, and move you to the head of the class.  =)


That sounds great as a theory, but in reality -- why are so many of those losers (especially senators) people who have been in the Congress for most of their adult lives?

Again, Civics 101 - the voters. We Them other people that don't vote good are the problem.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife