Amy Coney Barrett

[ComradesTrue]

Originally Posted by Benzgirl

I only see the Democrats losing one seat to Republicans (Alabama) but the Republicans losing numerous seats to Democrats. Some are still too close to call.

The seats that will definitely flip from Republican to Democrat will be:
- Arizona: Kelly over McSally
- Colorado: Hickenlooper over Gardner
- Special Election Georgia Seat: Warnock over Loeffler and Doug Collins

However, in the special election a candidate must receive 50% of the vote or there is a run-off on January 5th. Once Loeffler's and Collins' bases combine forces then it will be a harder road for Warnock.

I agree with the rest of your predictions.

[carnation]

Concur with ComradesTrue about Georgia.

[Benzgirl]

Originally Posted by ComradesTrue

However, in the special election a candidate must receive 50% of the vote or there is a run-off on January 5th. Once Loeffler's and Collins' bases combine forces then it will be a harder road for Warnock.

I agree with the rest of your predictions.

Yeah, that Georgia special election is kind of whackadoo.

[AnchorAlum]

Originally Posted by Benzgirl

Even though there are no Senate seats up for election in my state this year, I'm keeping a very close eye on the down-ballot races in other states.

Mitch McConnell is a &^*@)#&$^@*))$&)!><. There is nothing nice I have to say about that SOB and needs to be yanked out of his majority leader seat.

I've been registered here since 2002. I'm not a frequent poster and I always enjoy the updates during rush, etc.
I think I'm done. Personal insults, name calling, strident positions that seem like shouting...seriously?

(I can be meaner but it's not worth it...)

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by FSUZeta

The beauty of GreekChat is that there are multiple forums. If you don't like what is going on in one forum, you have the ability to two-step over to another. You are never forced to stay in any thread or forum. Freedom is liberal here. Mods(including me) are monitoring this thread, as we do any "hot-topics". Differing views do not warrant closure.

Originally Posted by honeychile

For heaven's sake, y'all, this is why I avoid the POLITICAL FORUM! I'm not naive, I just don't like the arguing.

If you don't like the political "discussion" in a Political Forum, don't go there!

Originally Posted by AnchorAlum

I've been registered here since 2002. I'm not a frequent poster and I always enjoy the updates during rush, etc.
I think I'm done. Personal insults, name calling, strident positions that seem like shouting...seriously?

(I can be meaner but it's not worth it...)

^^^^^^^As other GC members have mentioned...

Perhaps by 2021 we'll all be a little more calm with the election over, covid closer to control, and the daylight getting longer once again.

[Benzgirl]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlum

I've been registered here since 2002. I'm not a frequent poster and I always enjoy the updates during rush, etc.
I think I'm done. Personal insults, name calling, strident positions that seem like shouting...seriously?

(I can be meaner but it's not worth it...)

Honestly, the shade you tried to throw to me about Cotillion made me laugh hysterically. I don't live in the land of Stepford and no cotillion has existed here in over 60 years.

So if you can't like my non-name calling of Mitch McConnell, move along to the entertainment forum.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by HDL66

I am so over the histrionics of the progressive left. So, was it precedented when that paragon of virtue, Chappaquiddick Ted, led the charge to derail Robert Bork and coined a brand-new verb: Borking?

Taking your grievances one-by-one, I think you are correct in observing that the Bork nomination changed the character of Supreme Court appointments in that the Senate's advice and consent became consequential.

As far as attacking Ted Kennedy as a "paragon of virtue," the conservative support for the current President tells me that character doesn't actually matter to any conservative, so I'm not sure how you think that attack lands.

As far as Bork goes, he represented a danger to the entire concept of substantial due process which underlies many of the liberties we now consider today to be fundamental. He also expressed in earlier legal writings that the First Amendment protected political speech only and that academic speech or any other kind of speech was not protected.

His appointement, much like ACB's appointment was an attempt to shift the Court and unravel decades of law. It's just that back then, the GOP didn't have the votes. I don't think either side, especially today is going to lay down and allow the other side to rack up points.

And if the reason you raise this issue is to complain that "they started it," that's about as convincing as my 5-year-old justifying out-of-line playground behavior.

[quote]Was it precedented and respectable when the media and the left went bonkers on a totally unsubstantiated charge against Judge Kavanaugh?

"Totally unsubstantiated" isn't accurate. "Poorly substantiated" would do. And yes, both sides have demonstrated a lack of understanding at how they would be viewed historically. I don't really understand the Democrats' strategy in this one in that had Kavanaugh's confirmation failed, Trump would just appoint someone else with substantially the same views to fill the seat. There may be some allowance for 'fog of war' type of decisions, but in retrospect, the better play would have been to just get out of the way and do as little damage to themselves as they could.

Was it precedented when Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option to approve judicial nominations? (Oh I know, it didn’t apply to SCOTUS, since they didn’t need it at that time. Don’t kid yourself, they would have included that in a New York minute if it had suited their ends.)

Now you're definitely guilty of only complaining about one side of the equation. Harry Reid had the votes and McConnell had blocked every single Obama nominee including a Republican Secretary of Defens nominee. McConnell's abuse of the filibuster in this case was what was historically out-of-line. Never before had it been used to such an extent. If Obama was to have a presidency, which is something McConnell didnt' hide that it was his objective to deprive Obama of that, Reid did what he had to do.

This is the same Harry Reid who blatantly lied about Mitt Romney’s taxes on the floor of the Senate, and when asked about it after the election said with a smirk, “I don’t regret that at all. Romney didn’t win, did he?”

Again, since I assume you support Donald Trump's candidacy and Trump has repeatedly lied and obfuscated about his own taxes, I don't think this punch lands.

Spare me the self-righteous preaching. The left has historically been full of political power plays. It’s just that they are taken by surprise when the right decides to fight back in kind.

And as I've said, the GOP shouldn't be surprised when the Dems to the next logical thing and, assuming tomorrow goes their way, go ahead and reform the Court.

I'm hopeful that if they do so, they leave us with a balanced Court, and hopefully a bipartisan framework to put a halt to these political power plays. I definitely won't hold my breath though.

[Benzgirl]

Crazy member with 34 posts comes back here after a 10 year absence to pull a "Ronaldo".

Originally Posted by HDL66

I am so over the histrionics of the progressive left.

And some of us are over the militant MAGA tactics that are scaring the life out of people for their safety.

[Kevin]

Post count isn't indicative of anything and calling her crazy is baseless.

[AnchorAlum]

Originally Posted by Benzgirl

Honestly, the shade you tried to throw to me about Cotillion made me laugh hysterically. I don't live in the land of Stepford and no cotillion has existed here in over 60 years.

So if you can't like my non-name calling of Mitch McConnell, move along to the entertainment forum.

Cotillion references were an obvious attempt at humor, with a bit of self-deprecation thrown in.
I'm sorry if you think I was "throwing shade", truly. I'm of an age where I really don't know how that's done, actually.
It's not that I "can't like" your #*!%*?:& of McConnell. It's what I termed strident verbiage. It's usually seen and expected on other message boards, but I've enjoyed the different tone most of us have employed here on GC because I believe it has resulted in an enjoyable atmosphere and exchange of ideas.

My degree is in political science. Defend your position, respect the other person's viewpoint, and THINK.

By the way, I am on other message boards. I'm not as genial there but neither are the other participants. You know upfront what the arena looks like, and you put on your big girl pants and go in by choice.
We don't do that so much over here. Most of us still don't.

[TLLK]

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/obam...challenge.html

The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 on Thursday against Texas and other Republican-led states seeking to strike down Obamacare in the law’s latest test before the nation’s highest court.
The court reversed an appeals court ruling that had struck down the law’s individual mandate provision. Chief Justice John Roberts and fellow conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett joined Justice Stephen Breyer’s opinion, as did Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
Breyer said Texas and the other states that challenged the law failed to show they were harmed by it.
“Neither the individual nor the state plaintiffs have shown that the injury they will suffer or have suffered is ‘fairly traceable’ to the ‘allegedly unlawful conduct’ of which they complain,” Breyer wrote.
The decision marks the third time that Obamacare, officially known as the Affordable Care Act, has survived a challenge before the Supreme Court since former President Barack Obama signed the landmark legislation into law in 2010.

[JonInKC]

Good for Justice Barrett and good for KD.

[NYCMS]

Originally Posted by JonInKC

Good for Justice Barrett and good for KD.

These latest posts remind me of when KD posted (FB and Instagram) congrats to Judge Barrett for achieving the highest court in the land. Then just as quickly they removed the congrats (and said something that seemed lame, to me anyway, for why they removed it) after many members protested the congratulatory post because they thought her views were seen as so anti-women, etc. The congrats had nothing to do with her viewpoint, but everything to do with achieving the highest position she can achieve in her field. But seems like some folks couldn't see that.

So now that she's siding with the liberals on the Court (this is not the first time either) I wonder if KD and those members would be willing to congratulate her or even be proud that she's a KD.

[ladybug12]

Not the first time I wish we had a "like" button on Greek Chat.

[PhilTau]

Originally Posted by Benzgirl

* * *
Mitch McConnell is a &^*@)#&$^@*))$&)!><. There is nothing nice I have to say about that SOB and needs to be yanked out of his majority leader seat.

Hey! That's my #&@# frat brother your talking about.