Quote:
Originally Posted by kane
If the Senate had been controlled by Democrats they may or may not have confirmed him. In the end 22 of the 44 Democrats voted to confirm Roberts. To me, that shows they were willing to listen and vote for someone they felt was qualified. The Republicans didn't even give Garland the opportunity to speak for himself or face a vote.
|
Not the same situations at all!
They voted in the case where republicans already had it in the bag as they had the majority in any case!
In that case it would be even calculatedly smart decision for some democrats to vote YES, so that they could get some brownie points and claim they were supportive of republicans and maybe expect to get the favor back etc.
Or at least get people like you praising that and not seeing the COMPLETE different situation between voting opposition when they have majority ANYWAY and voting opposition when you are the majority.
I mean seriously, how is that I need to explain this obvious major major diference?
