To be fair, the filibuster on SCOTUS nominees was still in place, so there is some blame to assign to Harry Reid, who could have removed it but didn't (or didn't announce that he would, anyway). But RBG could always make her retirement conditional on a replacement.
-
-
Because that is how the Democrats tend to act - "The important thing is preserving institutional norms!" - and it got us where we are today and I'm fucking sick of it
-
Something as fucking simple as asking RBG to retire when her team has the ball gets turned into some kind of cold heartless Machiavellian manipulation
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I mean, historically the argument has been "if we change the rules, then they'll change the rules when they're in power, and that will be bad." Which doesn't really apply anymore, since they already did that.
-
Yes I don't know how to get through to people who don't get it that the worst case scenario has already happened McConnell lifted all the guardrails so they could put the Boofer and the Handmaid on the court and keep them there for the next 40 years
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
What the fuck are you talking about McConnell held a *minority* in 2013, of 45 votes to 55, which is when people asked RBG to retire It's not that long ago, you can look it up
End of conversation
-
-
-
If that Feinstein character can thank/hug Lindsey for his upstandedness, I’m not convinced that many of these Democratic politicians believe “they” have anything to lose even if we do. They are keeping “their” bread buttered & calling it “working together/reaching x the aisle.”
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.