• Happy Earth Week! TBT is hosting a series of nature-based mini-events through April 28th. Breed flower hybrids by organizing your collectible lineup, enter our nature photography contest, purchase historically dated scenery collectibles, and earn bells around the site! Read more in the Earth Week and photography contest threads.

Gorsuch got confirmed as Supreme Court justice

Alolan_Apples

“Assorted” Collector
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Posts
25,381
Bells
3,147
Switch
1624-3778-0694
Green Balloon
Ghostly Kitty Plush
Hot Cocoa
Snowflake Glow Wand
Yellow Tulip
Disco Ball Easter Egg
Orange Candy
Chocolate Cake
Pumpkin Cupcake
Apple (Fruit)
The vacancy in the court after Scalia died is over. Trump's pick, Neil Gorsuch, has been confirmed.

What are your thoughts on this? There are now nine justices.
 
Hopefully Gorsuch won't be a blatant Republican Party operative the way Scalia was and the way Alito aka Scalito (Scalia-lite) has been...
 
Republicans are ****ing evil lmao Mitch McConnell's obstruction last year was such bull****. I wouldn't even care that much if it wasn't for the fact that Obama was meant to appoint that seat.

Fortunately, this seat change doesn't matter and theres still an ideological balance.
 
I don't have a very strong opinion on this. What I do have a strong opinion on is term limits though. I think any political position should have a limit. So much can change in a lifetime, I think it's important to have the people who create and enforce our laws to change too.
 
I don't think we'd rather have Pence as president.

I wouldn't rather have Pence, but even during Trumps terrifying campaigning, Pence knew when to almost back out. I feel like we're more or less on par for security with Pence, but he'd be a little more poised in certain situations. Because he's at least a politician.
 
Pence would be so much worse, honestly. Trump is like the dumb version of Pence. Pence knows what not to say, whereas Trump is more open about it. Trump is open and honest about how much of a bigot he is.
 
A triumph for democracy! /sarcasm.

Reading the developments for this appointment has been educational - how disfunctional can a nominally democratic process be? Very. At least one Democrat publicly stated that they had no issue with Gorsuch as a candidate, but the way his nomination was rammed through was not okay.

"Going nuclear" is a bad thing. Once you resort to that for a reasonably ordinary process like this, it's rather tough to go back to following due process.

About Gorsuch himself, he seems like a man who is dedicated, highly educated, and strong in his convictions. It's a shame his nomination will be remembered by many more for the fact that Trump chose him rather than the merits or lack thereof of his suitability for the role.
 
A triumph for democracy! /sarcasm.

Reading the developments for this appointment has been educational - how disfunctional can a nominally democratic process be? Very. At least one Democrat publicly stated that they had no issue with Gorsuch as a candidate, but the way his nomination was rammed through was not okay.

"Going nuclear" is a bad thing. Once you resort to that for a reasonably ordinary process like this, it's rather tough to go back to following due process.

About Gorsuch himself, he seems like a man who is dedicated, highly educated, and strong in his convictions. It's a shame his nomination will be remembered by many more for the fact that Trump chose him rather than the merits or lack thereof of his suitability for the role.

I do want to tell you (and other members) this. It wasn't the first time the Senate made it simple majority. They made it simple majority like a long, long time ago. Then it bumped up to 67 senators required to confirm a justice some time later. Then it went down to 60 senators.

And yes, such move will backfire on the Republicans. I'm not saying that they will lose seats for doing it, but by doing this, it's gonna allow the Democrats to confirm a radical leftist as a justice if the Democrats take back the Senate and the Presidency. But sadly, we got to a point where we cannot agree on anything anymore, so we have to rely on simple majority on stuff like this until we can finally get along with each other on the issues.

I understand that the liberals are upset that Gorsuch got confirmed as a justice, especially since Garland was filibustered in attempt to keep his seat conservative, but this was a conservative replacing a conservative. If it were Anthony Kennedy or Ruth Bader Ginsburg that left the Supreme Court and Trump picks a conservative or at least a pro-life liberal to replace them, that's when they should be more informed and ready to fight. This was how the conservatives were when Obama wanted to replace Scalia with a liberal (or at least a moderate) justice, which is part of the reason why Trump won.
 
>democrat
>radical left

lmao

the dems are more left than the gop by association, but both are terrified of any actual left
 
Last edited:
>democrat
>radical left

lmao

the dems are more left than the gop by association, but both are terrified of any actual left

I'm not saying that they will pick someone on the far left if they get control again, but if a seat goes vacant with this new rule in effect, the rule will allow them to do it, even if it were to replace a conservative justice.
 
I'm saying that america has no actual left

the parties are far right and moderate right basically

the left is a boogieman for america
 
Last edited:
I'm saying that america has no actual left

the parties are far right and moderate right basically

the left is a boogieman for america

Indeed. Things are not much better in my own country as both major parties are centre-right and right-to-far-right respectively. We do have an increasingly popular Greens (left-to-far-left) party though.
 
I'm saying that america has no actual left

the parties are far right and moderate right basically

the left is a boogieman for america

I don't know about that. Stuff like political correctness and socialized medicine aren't very "moderate", and they are popular by the Democrats. How could you support all these left-wing beliefs (like gun control) at once and be called center-right? Standards are pretty different here.
 
Last edited:
I do want to tell you (and other members) this. It wasn't the first time the Senate made it simple majority. They made it simple majority like a long, long time ago. Then it bumped up to 67 senators required to confirm a justice some time later. Then it went down to 60 senators.

Indeed. The problem with this action at this time is what it means in context :

In recent years, as partisanship has escalated, the Senate has required a 60-vote majority for almost any controversial legislation to overcome a filibuster. Gone, for the most part, are bipartisan quorums that used to pass large and complex laws with simple majorities.

But as both parties have moved to do what was once unthinkable ? eliminating the filibuster for judicial and cabinet nominees, known as the nuclear option ? senators are now forced to consider if the final step could be in the offing, one that would fundamentally alter the character of the Senate and make it indistinguishable from the House in a crucial way.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/filibuster-gorsuch-nomination-republicans.html?

In such volatile times when building bipartisan support and cooperation *should* be the goal, this action does the polar opposite.

Disclaimer : my interest in this situation is focused on the flow-on effects that may directly affect me (as US law and political machinations can lead to consequences within my own country) and/or have specific global repercussions. A US that remains divided like this poses a real risk internationally, with or without Trump.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I don't know about that. Stuff like political correctness and socialized medicine aren't very "moderate", and they are popular by the Democrats. How could you support all these left-wing beliefs (like gun control) at once and be called center-right? Standards are pretty different here.

Strict gun control laws are supported by the right in my country (and others) - in fact, the current gun laws were introduced by a previous coalition government of the Liberal (conservative party) and National Parties (conservative farmers and rural party)!!
 
Indeed. The problem with this action at this time is what it means in context :


https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/filibuster-gorsuch-nomination-republicans.html?

In such volatile times when building bipartisan support and cooperation *should* be the goal, this action does the polar opposite.

Disclaimer : my interest in this situation is focused on the flow-on effects that may directly affect me (as US law and political machinations can lead to consequences within my own country) and/or have specific global repercussions. A US that remains divided like this poses a real risk internationally, with or without Trump.

How does our domestic issues have a negative impact on foreign affairs? Is there any reasoning to it?

- - - Post Merge - - -

Strict gun control laws are supported by the right in my country (and others) - in fact, the current gun laws were introduced by a previous coalition government of the Liberal (conservative party) and National Parties (conservative farmers and rural party)!!

Still, I don't judge by global standards. I only judge by US standards on what's left and what's right. I don't care what the other countries do to themselves. I care what Americans do to American policies.

What's one issue in your home country going on that we Americans haven't even got to yet? Like left-and-right wing issues? I know we were fighting over abortion for a long time (and still doing it), and we couldn't agree on guns, LGBT rights, and public healthcare. But what are some issues you guys went to that we Americans have not heard of yet?
 
Back
Top