Will Democrats shut down the Government to stall SCOTUS nomination? - Auto-Trend Repairs and Service Information Forums

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Will Democrats shut down the Government to stall SCOTUS nomination?

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

Shutting down the government doesn't shut down Congress. They can still vote on judges if the government is shut down, so I don't see this as an arrow to achieve anything in that regard. Which is not to say it won't be shut down for budget disagreement reasons though.

I hope it doesn't happen, there are enough problems without a shutdown.

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

You'd think it would be a poison pill for either side...

But it could really shake things up, although many would view it as a hail Mary pass by Democrats...

Right now Democrats are pretty pissed off, seeing some of them suggesting they should be "Ruth-less", an aparent nod to the late RBG.

There is still lots of time before the end of the month, and it's more or less a game of hot-potato since they will toss it back and fourth to see who gets stuck holding it.

I don't like the way it looks, Pelosi talking about arrows in her quiver make me wonder... are they that crazy?

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

It would no doubt send stocks plummeting.

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

They might shut it down to stall the investigations / subpoenas.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-homeland-security-committee-authorizes-subpoenas-for-testimony-from-obama-officials-as-part-of-russia-probe

And to crash the market.

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

I just have to ask, what policy issue are you hoping to accomplish once the Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority?

You guys seem awfully excited, so I'm curious what golden issue you are hoping to get resolved once and for all in your favor?

-- Edited by PowerStroker on Tuesday 22nd of September 2020 11:00:44 PM

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

The first and most obvious/pressing issue would be any future election disputes.

The second I guess would be Roe vs Wade, but I can't understand how having more babies by people who can't afford them will serve to do anything but increase welfare. The most obvious reason being late term abortions are pretty sick.

Last but not least, and probably the most important would be keeping any future crazy idiot Democrats and stacked liberal courts from going off the rails and taking the country with it.

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Looks like the House passed another Government spending bill tonight.

So we can revist the issue on December 11th right before Christmas when the lame duck House is good and pissed off after losing the election, and perhaps the house. Good news is it would only last thru until the middle of January.

I think we already went thru one Christmas with the Government shut down before, perhaps we will once again.

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

SELLC wrote:
The first and most obvious/pressing issue would be any future election disputes.
The second I guess would be Roe vs Wade, but I can't understand how having more babies by people who can't afford them will serve to do anything but increase welfare. The most obvious reason being late term abortions are pretty sick.
Last but not least, and probably the most important would be keeping any future crazy idiot Democrats and stacked liberal courts from going off the rails and taking the country with it.

Well at least you're honest. Do you really think it's fair to have a 6 to 3 hard right majority ruling on election disputes? Isn't that a recipe to have Republicans in power permanently even if the people don't wish it?

You do realize that overturning Roe doesn't end abortions right... It becomes a state's rights issue, and you can expect all blue states to still allow it (including your state of Michigan). Then in the red states it will go back in to back alleys with coat hangers and result in a very high fatality rate for women, not to mention a significant increase in women suicides. Which by the way, is EXACTLY what we had in this country prior to Roe. And for the few babies that are saved by it, they will be born to people who didn't want or can't afford them, and they rely far more heavily on the social safety net, which you can expect will result in your taxes being raise to support.

There is another unrelated issue to worry about... A very common trait among judges that believe roe was incorrectly decided, is that the rights of corporations are not only guaranteed by the Constitution just as they are for people (despite lacking any mention of corporate rights) but that corporate rights are superior to the rights of individuals. This is a recipe to absolutely destroy the working class - which includes you. So if you enjoy the idea of feuadalism and being on the very, very bad end of it, then by all means allow abortion to be used as a wedge issue against your own economic interests by getting these types of pro-corporation judges on the bench. Because that's exactly what will happen. Any short term satisfaction you get from overturning Roe, will be followed by an enormous hit to your other freedoms and economic well-being.

And if by liberal courts "going off the rails" by increasing your individual liberties and choices, you would be right. Essentially you have a desire to put the government in everyone's bedroom, which seems a bit counterproductive to traditional Republican values, just sayin.

-- Edited by PowerStroker on Wednesday 23rd of September 2020 09:47:32 AM

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Should Democrats ever win back the Presidency and a super majority they will just stack the Supreme Court. Democrats are far more crooked than Republicans in that way.

With regards to Roe vs Wade, my only concern is with late term abortions. If a woman can't be bothered to quickly rectify an unwanted pregnancy then they should be the ones to suffer, not the baby.

Here in Democrat Michigan, Corporation rights are already superior to the rights of individuals... and that was brought to us by Democrats as you have already pointed out since Michigan has traditionally been a blue state... although I might argue that is changing.

If we look at the California high court it's clear to see it's nothing more than a place liberals dump their partisan issues.

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

So the judges Trump is appointing also only have a problem with late term abortions right? They're totally cool early term abortions?

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

I'm not sure 100% PowerStroker, but I'd be more comfortable with ones that didn't than ones that felt ok with late term abortions.

I'm also pretty sure that the morning after pill will still be available. It's not that hard to see spooge in your panties the next morning after sex and it's not that hard to pee on a stick, I'm pretty conservative and I am okay with women kicking their periods on early to prevent an unwanted baby. But something about late term abortion to me seems like murder of the most weak, innocent and helpless.

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

Let's just hope those ultra conservative / religious judges don't outlaw all birth control including the pill, condoms, and vasectomies. You could well be a grandpa much sooner than your kids would prefer. I sure hope grandpa has deep pockets.

-- Edited by PowerStroker on Wednesday 23rd of September 2020 04:35:06 PM

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

You make a good point... however the way I see it, if in two years America is not happy, we vote in a Democrat majority House and Senate then sit back with a bag of popcorn.

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Because I'll be honest, I'd vote for Hillary before I'd vote for Biden... not that I'd vote for Hillary, but just so you know where Biden sits on my vote-o-meter.

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

SELLC wrote:
You make a good point... however the way I see it, if in two years America is not happy, we vote in a Democrat majority House and Senate then sit back with a bag of popcorn.

There are a few problems with this ^^^ argument. 1 - voting in a Democratic majority for a while might not actually result in the winning Democrats actually being seated in Congress, at least not if such a court decides election disputes. 2 - If Roe is suddenly declared unconstitutional, even a Democratic super majority can't re-implement it, the damage done would be permanent. 3 - Since these judges are appointed for life, a couple terms of Democratic control in Congress or even the White House won't be able to swing the pendulum back anyway. We would be stuck in an ever increasing right wing trend, which history shows will eventually lead to a holocaust. Not exactly a "pro-life" situation if you ask me. But before it gets to that point, you will be financially supporting 9 grandchildren, and I will have endured a court ordered vasectomy reversal procedure under threat of imprisonment if I refuse.

Is this really the kind of world you want to create?

-- Edited by PowerStroker on Wednesday 23rd of September 2020 06:00:56 PM

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

I think you are missing the point... Democrats have really just WASTED four years with all the fake Russia probes and putting politics over country.

Trump should be given two years with a super-majority and lets see what he can get done!

THEN we can see what is what and who is full of shit! Obama got his super majority handed to him in the first term before he did a damn thing, much like his Nobel prize.

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

How am I missing the point when I'm actually thinking about the long term outcomes of a hard right Supreme Court, in a thread about the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile you're over there whining about corruption probes, that one Mitt Romney agrees were legit.

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

How do you feel about ole' Mitt Romney now?

Says he plans to go along with President Trumps nomination for the new SCOTUS.

See a lot of Democrats trashing him on social media right now, I am shocked you would even bring him up! But, let's remember that Romney's spiteful vote against Trump didn't win him any friends and it sure as hell didn't stop his acquittal.

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

My view on Romney is that in his business life he was a parasite. But now that he has made his fortune he seems to be shopping for a legacy. To this end, he represents his state, and does so in accordance with his personal values, which usually but not always align with the values of the Republican party. He isn't afraid to tell truth to power, or to stand up to bullies. But his voting record is that of someone who thinks corporations are somehow endowed with more rights than natural persons.

It was a long shot to think he would join Murkowski and Collins and stop a Supreme Court seat from being filled 6 weeks away from a national election.

Regardless of politics, the American people deserve a chance to weigh in on this. If Trump had respect for the American people, he would want to hear from them at the polls before making a decision this consequential. And if he had any balls at all, he would be so confident in his reelection that he wouldn't even nominate someone until afterward. And then he would have earned a mandate to do so and been able to hold the moral high ground. But Trump doesn't care about morality. At this point he has no mandate whatsoever, and never did since the popular vote was lost to Hillary.

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

Um, consitution says he has an obligation to fill that seat in the 11th hour (RBG's own words).

FILL THAT SEAT!

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

Fill it AFTER the American people weigh in on the issue.

Why are you guys so afraid of democracy?

SELLC · CERTIFIED POST WHORE

We know biden is going to lose to 45, there is no point in wasting time. You guys been stalling and sand-bagging for almost four years now!

The seat is open and it needs to be filled - NOW!

You will get confermation of who we are nominating tomorrow.

And then of course, you guys will give her the usual Kavanaugh style drive-by character assasination treatment. I wonder if she will need to bring her college calender?

Stan_147 · Veteran User

Oh, look! Congress is fixing to leave town until after the election!

amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/09/23/politics/stimulus-negotiations-latest-congress-leaving-town/index.html

PowerStroker · UNSTOPPABLE!

I don't understand why the court seat needs to be filled right now. They aren't even in session yet, and once they are it will take months to rule on whatever issues they take on.

Rex, if you're so sure Trump is going to win, why not wait until after he does. Then he will have a mandate to fill the seat with a person of his choosing. But if he does it before the election it's a sign of contempt toward democracy itself.