GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   If hilary wasnt even more rotten than trump, tonight supreme court would have gone democrat (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1243225)

Joshua G 01-31-2017 06:19 PM

If hilary wasnt even more rotten than trump, tonight supreme court would have gone democrat
 
must be quite a painful moment, watching the supreme court stay conservative.

but it didnt have to be, dumb libs. If hilary just spent a day in wisconson instead of dozens of days in hollywood, tonight the supreme court would have gone democrat.

too bad so sad, libs.

:1orglaugh

kane 01-31-2017 06:26 PM

Or if the Republican party hadn't been a bunch of whining little assholes it would have gone Democrat almost a year ago when Obama nominated Garland.

mineistaken 01-31-2017 06:32 PM

God forbid any country from libbies in charge. US was saved.

mineistaken 01-31-2017 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane (Post 21504481)
Or if the Republican party hadn't been a bunch of whining little assholes it would have gone Democrat almost a year ago when Obama nominated Garland.

As if majority democrat would have confirmed conservative choice.

Double standard much?

Joshua G 01-31-2017 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane (Post 21504481)
Or if the Republican party hadn't been a bunch of whining little assholes it would have gone Democrat almost a year ago when Obama nominated Garland.

in what world would the GOP senate have confirmed garland? who specifically on the GOP senate do you think woulda supported him.

:helpme

mineistaken 01-31-2017 06:37 PM

Most transparent judicial selection process in history :thumbsup



Full video of MAGA action:


kane 01-31-2017 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mineistaken (Post 21504493)
As if majority democrat would have confirmed conservative choice.

Double standard much?

We can "what if" until we are blue in the face. The fact is a vacancy came up on the Supreme Court, the President put forth a nominee and the opposition party refused to even hold hearings and discuss it.

As an aside, during G.W. Bush's presidency, he nominated two different Supreme Court justices. Roberts got 78 votes while the Republicans only held a 51-48 majority in the Senate. Alito got 58 votes while the Republicans held a 55-44 majority. So Democrats have voted to confirm Conservative nominees in the very recent past.

onwebcam 01-31-2017 06:48 PM

A man was murdered for nothing.

mineistaken 01-31-2017 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane (Post 21504526)
So Democrats have voted to confirm Conservative nominees in the very recent past.

In both cases republicans had the majority anyway.
Completely different thing.

kane 01-31-2017 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshua G (Post 21504499)
in what world would the GOP senate have confirmed garland? who specifically on the GOP senate do you think woulda supported him.

:helpme

I don't know that they would have confirmed him. Maybe they would have, maybe not. The fact is they refused to even hold hearings or have a vote.

kane 01-31-2017 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mineistaken (Post 21504532)
In both cases republicans had the majority anyway.
Completely different thing.

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.

Bladewire 01-31-2017 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mineistaken (Post 21504502)
Most transparent judicial selection process in history :thumbsup

Full video of MAGA action

What are you doing to make Slovakia great again? Just curious. We appreciate your effort in supporting America's #1 place as world superpower :thumbsup

Joshua G 01-31-2017 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane (Post 21504535)
I don't know that they would have confirmed him. Maybe they would have, maybe not. The fact is they refused to even hold hearings or have a vote.

yep. politics is very polarized today.

i didnt know this until he resigned, but obama installed a border patrol director that had no experience at the job. WTF was that?

nobody has any high roads in our politics today. the sides dont even attempt to meet. im simply happy we will have a working government again. one that makes hard leftists squirm in pain as their taker infrastructure gets torn down.

no more flooding illegal immigrants to turn red states blue. Libs whine about gerrymandering & say nothing about mexicanizing our southern states to tilt power to liberals. too bad there were no illegals in wisconsin. too cold for latinos.

:1orglaugh

mineistaken 01-31-2017 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane (Post 21504538)
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? :helpme:error

mineistaken 01-31-2017 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire (Post 21504544)
What are you doing to make Slovakia great again? Just curious. We appreciate your support in supporting America's #1 place as world superpower :thumbsup

I am starting with creating few jobs in my small business. And you are welcome.

kane 01-31-2017 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mineistaken (Post 21504559)
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? :helpme:error

None of this changes the fact that the Republicans didn't even give Garland the courtesy of having a hearing and a vote.

We can speculate all day what the Democrats may or may not have done if they were in power, but it doesn't change what happened.

Bladewire 01-31-2017 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mineistaken (Post 21504565)
I am starting with creating few jobs in my small business. And you are welcome.

I like this! We are both businessmen. What kind of business? (not political talk no attacks)

beerptrol 01-31-2017 07:15 PM

If the republicans weren't so corrupt and anti american they would have allowed Obama to select the judge like he was entitled to do

beerptrol 01-31-2017 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mineistaken (Post 21504565)
I am starting with creating few jobs in my small business. And you are welcome.

Swinging off of Trump's nuts and being a paid russian anti american troll classifies as a small business?

Bladewire 01-31-2017 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beerptrol (Post 21504589)
If the republicans weren't so corrupt and anti american they would have allowed Obama to select the judge like he was entitled to do

Obama did select a judge, a judge Republicans previously approved, but because it was a black man resubmitting a previously approved judge, they refused to hold confirmation hearings for a year, until the black man was out of office. Dirty Republicans :disgust

JohnnyClips - BANNED FOR LIFE 01-31-2017 07:43 PM

I wonder if Cuck Schumer will shed some fake tears tonight LOL


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc