Reply to SCOTUS

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "SCOTUS"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]BTW, if Obama's nominee did not deserve a vote because it was three years since Obama had won his last election, shouldn't we wait for a president with a clear mandate, rather than one who lost the popular vote by millions and only got in because of about 100,000 votes in MI, PA, and WI?[/quote]Makes sense to me. [/quote]Obama lost the popular vote against Clinton in the 2008 Dem party. I guess we need to retroactively vacate all his judiciary appointments.[/quote]Primaries are not the equivalent of a general election.  Primaries are about parties and those are private.  Parties can do what they want, and if members don't like it they can leave and start another party or organize and put new leadership in.[/quote]
Aside from primaries not being at all parallel, the primaries are a mixed bag, some being caucuses and some being popular vote, some being only Dems and some being open.  Added to all that, it is apparently not at all clear who won the popular vote; it depends how you count: [url]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html[/url]

In any case, I don't really expect the Dems to block votes on all Trump's nominees.  Some may be so far-fetched that a few Republicans will join Dems in voting them down.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics