Discussion for article #246347
Let’s assume a hypothetical: During the last year of W.'s presidency, Justice Ginsberg announces his retirement. Does anyone think that Republicans wouldn’t have insisted on the nomination and voting process going forward? More to the point, does anyone think the Democrats would have announced that they would not even consider any Bush nominee? Let’s stop the “he said, he said” nonsense.
6 Likes
Biden could have pointed out that, unlike President Obama, President Bush was then engaged in an active campaign for re-election.
But he should also have said, “I was wrong,” even though, had a vacancy occurred in June 1992 or later, as a practical matter it would have been doubtful that a nominee could have been selected and confirmed by Election Day.
1 Like
The GOP is just stalling and will get a judge they like even less in 2017. The irish betting site PaddyPower is nails predicting this stuff. They have HRC ahead by a very large margin right now.
2 Likes
Let’s see the context for the quote. Seems pertinent.
There was no need in 1992 for Biden to hypothesize about this. Hillary can be infuriatingly cagey, but this is precisely why: you never know what will happen and when an apparently inconsequential bit of thinking out loud will come back to bite you.
7 Likes
And member Moody’s early on predicted a democratic win.
https://www.economy.com/dismal/topics/election-model
2 Likes
Especially with Biden. I can only imagine his past tasty tidbits we would be dealing with if he ran for president
3 Likes
The old saying, “loose lips sink ships.”
1 Like
Doesn’t matter what Joe Biden thought or said 24 years ago. All politicians are hypocritical and self serving to a greater or lesser extent. Even ones we like. But, ultimately, it’s what the constitution says that counts and that document is clear and unambiguous on the matter.
7 Likes
the clip begins with “as a result” … what?
Anyway, the broadest view of his comments – not just “after June” or something – referred to “the political season.” That started at least last fall. What is the dividing line? I think we should basically say he was wrong, at least in part, but at least “the political season” should be limited to after the convention.
It should not be expanded in a presidential election year into early and mid-February. Iowa came even earlier in the past. What if Iowa was now in late December? Would no nominees to the Supreme Court be allowed even then?
If we cite what some person said, we can be all over the place. Gotchas were used to suggest McConnell is being hypocritical too. Actual practice, to the degree it is relevant, is more useful there.
Biden seems to specifically be talking about the possibility of an outgoing Justice retiring just before an election, and even more specifically, an election in which the WH changes parties. Such an act would include a Justice making a conscious decision of purely political nature with regard to who sits on the USSC. Biden said this in June of 92, when Bush41 was projected to lose. There was speculation that O’Connor may retire, and probably others. Democrats were concerned that Republicans were stacking the Court with right wing zealots–because they were stacking the Court with right wing zealots. So the Senator was cautious of perhaps a continuation of those plans.
Scalia died. He didn’t plan on leaving. This opening is not the same thing, and it’s not the same timing within the year.
3 Likes
Pedantic point. Ginsberg is a she.
4 Likes
So does predictwise.com. HRC over the R by 61% to 39%, and they predict the R to be Trump by 52% and Rubio by 44%
1 Like
Oh, so now Joe’s opinions suddenly carry weight with republicans. Could their hypocrisy be any more blatant?
2 Likes
When democrats obstruct its because they are on the side of truth, justice, and the american way. When Senators Biden, Clinton, Obama, and Kerry sought to deny Alito a floor vote for his nomination they were acting on the behalf of civic goodness. That is a reason that democratic voters reward them with presidential and vice presidential nominations When republicans obstruct it is because they are meanie racists who want to impose their fascistic ideology on the american people.
The notion that that the party hacks are more similar than different needs to be dismissed with prejudice. You cannot compare people acting on the side of good with those on the side of evil.
The context was a speech on the Senate floor, June 1992 and on ghw bush delaying filling a SCOTUS vacancy. :
There should be no different standard for a vacancy “that would occur in the full throes of an election year.” The president should follow the example of “a majority of his predecessors” and delay naming a replacement, Mr. Biden said. If he goes forward before then, the Senate should wait to consider the nomination.
“Some will criticize such a decision and say that it was nothing more than an attempt to save a seat on the court in hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it, but that would not be our intention,” Mr. Biden said at the time. “It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.
“That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process. Otherwise, it seems to me we will be in deep trouble as an institution.”
4 Likes
I sure hope they are both correct. I am so over this election season
@Brian97 “The notion that that the party hacks are more similar than different needs to be dismissed with prejudice. You cannot compare people acting on the side of good with those on the side of evil.”
Well said
She. Ruth Bader-Ginsberg is most definitely a she. And was quite the looker in her day.
5 Likes