Says the party that changed the rules so Obama would not have a pick. Perhaps it's time for the people to elect those to serve on the Supreme Court.
-
-
-
I agree completely with your first sentence but not the second. I think it is time to de-politicize the process. The President has the right to name a nominee -- that's the election -- and if the nominee is qualified and within the mainstream, should be confirmed by the Senate.
-
Perhaps we should then abolish the Electoral College and go by a simple majority. Why should your vote "count" less due to the population of your state. Each candidate on both sides should earn each vote, not "key/swing" states.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
We have a Constitution our system of Government is to follow. You don't just start making up rules and changing things because you don't like the outcomes.
-
No, you change them because the situation evolves and it’s a living document made for that purpose. We should be one person, one vote. Should have been for decades.
-
Then get an amendment to change it.
-
Hard to do when the current system benefits the majority party in Congress where the Amendment would need to pass.
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Let’s talk about your votes on the last several Democratic nominees, Orrin. Kagan? You voted no. Sotameyer? You voted no. Merrick Garland? Uh huh. Spare me your moral outrage.
-
Orrin "You're one heckuva leader, Mr. President" Hatch. Feckless Vichy toady boy.
-
Best insult of the day, you just won the internet!



-
Yes, but he's also a quisling.
-
There seem to be a whole lot of those in this badministration.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I've watched this guy his entire Senate career. He is the embodiment of Republican politics. Over the top hypocrite. Bitch to special interests. Pretends to be a moral man when he is a vicious creep. And claims to have been a friend of Ted Kennedy! He turns my stomach.
-
Try living in Utah and watch the hypocrite now him and Zinke wants to sell of ous National parks to the highest bidder!
-
We're going to see about that...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Honestly, a guy over the age of 80 shouldn’t be allowed to vote on a supreme court justice, or any policy for that matter, that will impact generations to come long after his death. That goes for both Repubs and Democrats.
-
Term limits and when they are done they go back to being average citizens with no lifetime government healthcare....
-
Maybe not term limits, but I would support mandatory retirement.
-
Yes, term limits.
-
technically we already have built in limits, because they can be voted out
-
I have noticed that the folks that support term limits seem to want them for other people's Congressmen and women, but think their guy is just fine.
-
Have you? I’m for all elected officials to have term limits regardless of what side of the aisle they are from. Eventually they all become corrupt.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.