• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Politico:Trump White House urging allies to prepare for possible RBG departure

AegonSnake

AegonSnake

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,566
At this point, we need to stop worrying about losing the supreme court. we have already lost it. it's 5-4 conservative already. what difference does it make if its 6-3.

We just need to wish her a full recovery and hope she gets some rest. Stress does not help with healing, and if shes stressed about coming back, it will not help her recovery.

Let's just let it go. We lost the biggest election of our lifetime. lets learn from it and move on.
 
skullmuffins

skullmuffins

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,418
Biske said:
Suddenly that wont be a rule anymore. Will likely justify it with how Democrats said it shouldn't apply and they are just doing what Democrats wanted/believe in
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
iirc mcconnell already walked the "rule" back to say it only applied when the senate was held by a different party than the president.
 
danm999

danm999

Member
Oct 29, 2017
17,085
Sydney
Wait she got pancreatic cancer in 2009 and had to have a heart stent put in in 2014?!

Why on earth didn't she retire under Obama that's madness.
 
samoyed

samoyed

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
15,191
AegonSnake said:
At this point, we need to stop worrying about losing the supreme court. we have already lost it. it's 5-4 conservative already. what difference does it make if its 6-3.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Harder to take back if it's 6-3. Even harder if it's 7-2.

The more polarized it is the higher a chance of court stacking as much as liberals hate to talk about it.

And yeah it is a good lesson, a lesson to voters to not underestimate the importance of the judiciary when voting for presidents, and maybe a signal that we need judiciary reform.
 
wisdom0wl

wisdom0wl

Avenger
Oct 26, 2017
7,856
danm999 said:
Wait she got pancreatic cancer in 2009 and had to have a heart stent put in in 2014?!

Why on earth didn't she retire under Obama that's madness.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The decision is selfish as fuck. People are right to be bitter and angry about this. What the fuck was she thinking. Obama could've put someone through, no problem from 2008-2010. God damnit.
 
Garlador

Garlador

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
14,131
samoyed said:
Harder to take back if it's 6-3. Even harder if it's 7-2.

The more polarized it is the higher a chance of court stacking as much as liberals hate to talk about it.

And yeah it is a good lesson, a lesson to voters to not underestimate the importance of the judiciary when voting for presidents, and maybe a signal that we need judiciary reform.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Very much this, though I'd put down a STRONG wager that 99% of voters aren't even aware that the president is the person who picks Supreme Court Justices.
 

Deleted member 32374

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 10, 2017
8,460
VectorPrime said:
This has nothing to do with it. Literally any Republican in his position can nominate some conservative hack.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sure. Its a critical time for Republicans, as Demographics are shifting and they got a electoral college assist into the Presidency. You don't undercut the person who can deliver what you really want (taxes, supreme court) even as the optics turn ugly, because the ends justify the means. To those who believe that being a historically poor president would give repubs pause on this "ends justify the means" strategy, it hasn't.
 
BMW

BMW

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,703
I am not a fan of a stacked court in either direction, and it is unfortunate that these justices didn't retire when they had the chance to be properly replaced.
 
skullmuffins

skullmuffins

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,418
AegonSnake said:
At this point, we need to stop worrying about losing the supreme court. we have already lost it. it's 5-4 conservative already. what difference does it make if its 6-3.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A fuck ton. let's see: A 5-4 court is infinitely easier to flip back; all we need is one justice to side with the liberals to get a decent ruling (and this sometimes happens!); and the nature of the rulings coming out of a 5-4 court are likely to be more moderate than what you'd see come out of a 6-3 or god forbid a 7-2 court where the conservatives have a lot more breathing room. Thomas is not the same judge as Roberts. Imagine the difference between striking down Roe v. Wade in a ruling that says states can choose to ban it, and ruling that fetuses are protected by the 14th amendment, making abortion unconstitutional.
 
Last edited:
TheMango55

TheMango55

Banned
Nov 1, 2017
5,788
What's Bernie Sanders doing

She might need to spend the weekend at his place... if you know what I'm saying.
 
Kill3r7

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,384
Garlador said:
Very much this, though I'd put down a STRONG wager that 99% of voters aren't even aware that the president is the person who picks Supreme Court Justices.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I would take that bet in a heartbeat. Considering that Gallup polls in the early 00s had 70+% of likely voters deeming SCOTUS picks as extremely/very important issue during a presidential election and that figured has not really changed much (65% during the 2016 election). Now if you were to ask the public to name a sitting SCOTUS then less than half would be able to do so.
 
Teh_Lurv

Teh_Lurv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,094
Tamanon said:
It's just wishful thinking on the White House's part. RBG isn't going anywhere.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Pretty much this. White House must be privately feeling the heat from the conservative side over the shutdown, so they're dangling the possibility of another Supreme Court vacancy to keep their ideological base in-line.
 
M.Bluth

M.Bluth

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,240
If Kavanaugh doesn't get impeached and Trump gets to pick RBG's replacement, then anyone who's still against stacking the court doesn't understand what damage this insane Trump court will wreak on America.
 
borghe

borghe

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,112
If RBG leaves during this presidency....... I really really really want to be vehemently opposed to stacking the SCOTUS when Dems regain control... but I literally don't see any other way.
 
Soliloquy of a Dogge

Soliloquy of a Dogge

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,972
RBG needs one of these.

latest
 
NewDonkStrong

NewDonkStrong

Banned
Nov 7, 2017
1,990
Hey, at least she can say she got a movie made about her while she was still an active justice. That matters more than the fact that she's going to die and be replaced by a fucking monster that will do untold damage for decades to come.
 
GameShrink

GameShrink

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
2,680
If Trump is impeached, or convicted of criminal offenses after leaving office, could his SC picks be retroactively invalidated because they were nominated by a crook?
 

Deleted member 32374

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 10, 2017
8,460
GameShrink said:
If Trump is impeached, or convicted of criminal offenses after leaving office, could his SC picks be retroactively invalidated because they were nominated by a crook?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Lol No. The Supreme Court pick was confirmed by the Senate, they hold the final say.

Even if he cheated to win the election. Isn't. Going. To. Happen.
 
blinky

blinky

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,329
danm999 said:
Wait she got pancreatic cancer in 2009 and had to have a heart stent put in in 2014?!

Why on earth didn't she retire under Obama that's madness.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is speculation on my part, but she probably assumed that Hillary would win and she liked the optics of having her replacement selected by the first woman president.

Oops.
 
GameAddict411

GameAddict411

Member
Oct 26, 2017
8,510
What if the GOP offer to nominate a liberal judge for the wall? I would take it. A sexual predator taking over her seat will be several decade long disaster.
 
Trup1aya

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,319
This is the worst timeline... The Shittiest president in history might get to seat 3 justices.

Dems will have to grow the court in order to restore sanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.