HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » How liberal would Hillary...

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 06:44 PM

How liberal would Hillary's Supreme Court picks be?

One of the most important reasons to NOT sit out voting for Clinton if/when she is the Dem nominee is the Supreme Court. But how liberal would her picks for the court be? Honestly, I could see her choosing people who often straddle the line between the two parties. Has she spoken about this?

90 replies, 2163 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 90 replies Author Time Post
Reply How liberal would Hillary's Supreme Court picks be? (Original post)
wheniwasincongress Apr 2015 OP
PeaceNikki Apr 2015 #1
Agschmid Apr 2015 #2
beam me up scottie Apr 2015 #5
wheniwasincongress Apr 2015 #30
Cha Apr 2015 #64
Gothmog Apr 2015 #72
Cha Apr 2015 #83
workinclasszero Apr 2015 #89
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #3
NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #4
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #7
NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #8
Renew Deal Apr 2015 #11
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #12
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #18
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #26
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #31
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #36
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #38
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #43
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #46
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #50
Agschmid Apr 2015 #53
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #57
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #79
NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #76
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #54
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #62
greatauntoftriplets Apr 2015 #56
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #14
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #17
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #19
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #20
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #21
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #22
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #24
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #28
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #37
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #40
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #42
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #44
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #48
woolldog Apr 2015 #85
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #86
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #61
redstateblues Apr 2015 #80
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #87
Gothmog Apr 2015 #70
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #73
Gothmog Apr 2015 #74
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #75
Gothmog Apr 2015 #78
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #81
Gothmog Apr 2015 #82
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #84
Art_from_Ark Apr 2015 #90
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #10
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #13
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #15
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #16
FSogol Apr 2015 #23
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #27
FSogol Apr 2015 #29
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #6
Renew Deal Apr 2015 #9
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2015 #25
tularetom Apr 2015 #32
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #35
unblock Apr 2015 #33
Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #34
PeaceNikki Apr 2015 #41
Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #45
demtenjeep Apr 2015 #39
seabeyond Apr 2015 #47
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #49
seabeyond Apr 2015 #51
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #58
seabeyond Apr 2015 #59
leftofcool Apr 2015 #88
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2015 #52
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #55
seabeyond Apr 2015 #60
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #65
Gothmog Apr 2015 #71
Cha Apr 2015 #63
Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #66
SamKnause Apr 2015 #67
longship Apr 2015 #68
Gothmog Apr 2015 #69
Historic NY Apr 2015 #77

Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 06:45 PM

1. Light years more liberal than any fucking Republican's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 06:45 PM

2. Yup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 06:56 PM

5. Exactly.

I won't be staying home or playing games come election day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:48 PM

30. Yep

I want to hear the excuses of the people who say they will sit out the election if Hillary is the candidate. Do they not care about the Supreme Court and how their decisions effect fellow Americans?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:53 PM

64. And, they would be voting with SCJ Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsburg, and Breyer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #64)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:22 PM

72. Here are the ages of the current SCOTUS justices

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #72)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:51 PM

83. Thank you, Gothmog. There's no question we need a Dem President for so many reasons.. 'course

I remember so many on this board were whining about Pres Obama's choices of Sotomayor and Kagan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:50 PM

89. You got that right! /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 06:47 PM

3. Good question.

Probably very liberal on women's issues, but not so much on other economic issues and on unions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 06:51 PM

4. Not very liberal on economic issues. I'm not taking any chances to find out.

 

I will vote for the candidate left of Hillary, whomever they may be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #4)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:02 PM

7. I don't give a rat's derriere who anybody votes for

But I would literally bet my life against a bag of chips that if you vote for the "candidate left of Hillary" in the general election that candidate is surely going to lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #7)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:05 PM

8. When the winner of the primary loses the general, it's the fault of her supporters for choosing her.

 

Choose a loser at their peril.

I'm going with winners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #8)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:10 PM

11. Nader voters in Florida (and in general) deserve blame for what happened to Gore

The Gore voters voted for the correct person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:13 PM

12. oh, here we go with the same old insults. Do you really think these intimidation tactics

change peoples' votes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:24 PM

18. This thread...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:40 PM

26. You know, it won't be long before Hillary's Angry Army starts to...

 

"Bernie" threads.

We're 3 weeks away from Bernie declaring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #26)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:48 PM

31. Since you are throwing out insults

Since you are throwing out insults:


Hillary's Angry Army



I have a better chance of being the starting quarterback for the Bears than Bernie has of ever winning the Democratic nomination.


Now find another cute graphic to insult me like you insulted the other poster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:53 PM

36. The LOUDEST Hillary backers here are so nasty but have the thinnest skin

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #36)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:55 PM

38. Don't expect me to be your pinata.

I treat people with the same contempt or respect they threat me.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:05 PM

43. Here's my new graphic! Like it?

 




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #43)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:10 PM

46. It's okay...

I do prefer to tout my choice rather than the demean the choice of others unless the person demeans my choice.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #46)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:22 PM

50. I haven't gotten an answer to this. Will you try?

 

Why can't Hillary backers just relax because you and I know she's going to destroy everyone from the left. That fact won't make us stop supporting Bernie or Elizabeth (of course, she not running).

But the fact is, 86% of Democrats support Hillary.

You know that! All Hillary supporters know that (or am I giving them too much credit).

So why all the vitriol and mocking from her camp.

Hillary will be President. Why can't her supporters chill the bleep out?

Bernie and Elizabeth write ins won't amount to 0.00001% of the 100,000,000 votes cast. Don't you guys understand that?

It's remarkable you guys clearly don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #50)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:27 PM

53. Ask a purple state person.

In my state it doesn't matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #50)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:41 PM

57. People start threads touting Warren and Sanders...

I don't go in them and take a rhetorical dump...It just upsets people... I did point out that except for his IWR vote Lincoln Chafee isn't all that different than the other New England Republicans , Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, and imho, is a lot less progressive than Hillary Clinton. I also pointed out that Jim Webb isn't all that progressive either...


I took exception to two things in this thread

-the suggestion that HRC is going to appoint centrist justices when her record in that area suggests anything but.

-and a third party candidate can actually be elected president


I'm sorry we got off on the wrong track but I would be less than candid if I said I didn't see the thread as a thinly veiled call out...

Wouldn't a more honest premise be that a person who voted against Alito and Roberts and implicitly voted for Breyer and Ginsburg is going to appoint liberal justices as opposed to "those that straddle the difference between the two parties"?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #57)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:36 PM

79. good post!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #43)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:31 PM

76. I love you graphic!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:36 PM

54. Hey! I "found" (wink wink) one more graphic. Like it?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #54)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:50 PM

62. ...

https://

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:40 PM

56. You might actually win a game for the Bears!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:16 PM

14. Your interlocutor thinks a Nader can actually win...

I have a better chance of defeating Wlad Klitschko for the superheavyweight title which is no chance at all...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #14)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:20 PM

17. You are an angry person aren't you? You go ahead and insult me all you want. I have better things to

do than engage in ugly, nasty behavior with you. By the way weren't you the one who said in another thread that there was a concerted effort to cow Hillary supporters. It seems to me it is the other way around. There is a concerted effort to get us Hillary critics to cow and I'm sorry but it is not going to work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #17)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:24 PM

19. If you are going to insult somebody it's really nasty to use a passive aggressive approach to do so.

This thread was designed to demean and demonize Secretary Of State Clinton and I responded appropriately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #19)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:27 PM

20. The OP asked a very simple, straight forward question. How in God's name was this simple question

in any way demonizing? Boy we really aren't allowed to ask any questions or criticize in any way are we. We are just suppose to blindly follow in agreement. Geez.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #20)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:29 PM

21. Does this sound like a question or a premise?

"I could see her choosing people who often straddle the line between the two parties..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #21)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:30 PM

22. Hillary is a pretty central kind a Democrat. Some people like that about her. Personally I don't

like that about her but I'm not sure you can deny that she does chose the middle of the road most of the time. How is that demonizing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #22)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:37 PM

24. She voted against the nominations of Samuel Alito and John Roberts.

Her husband appointed Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

That certainly suggest she isn't going to choose people " who often straddle the line between the two parties".


Actually, the last Democratic president who appointed someone to the Supreme Court "who often straddled the line between the two parties" was John Kennedy when he appointed his buddy, Byron "Wheezer" White.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #24)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:44 PM

28. Just last year she was quoted as saying she thinks marriage equality issues should be left to the

states. Now she says it should be a federal constitutionally protected right. I'm not sure I trust her sudden change of heart, but it isn't even the social issues that worry me about her. I want Supreme Court picks that will protect people's economic equality and I don't trust her to pick judges that will do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #28)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:53 PM

37. Way to ignore everything I wrote

Someone who voted against Alito and Roberts and was instrumental in nominating Breyer and Ginsburg isn't going to appoint justices antithetical to progressive interests...


As to glbtq rights her record is impeccable and if she did come to supporting marriage equality late which I dispute it's one whole election cycle later than President Obama and Vice President Biden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #37)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:56 PM

40. This is where we simply disagree which I'm okay with. I'm not sure you can be okay with just

disagreeing. You want to hammer it in until I agree with you and I'm sorry but it's just not going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #40)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:04 PM

42. I demonstrated there is nothing in her record that suggests she would appoint "centrist" justices

I demonstrated there is nothing in her record that suggests she would appoint "centrist" justices. That demonstration should and would convince anybody who entered this conversation with an open mind.

I regret I was unable to convince you and some others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #42)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:08 PM

44. Wow. That was almost not insulting. Good try though.

We may disagree but I truly hope you have a good weekend. Namaste.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #44)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:12 PM

48. TY. You as well./NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #37)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 10:30 PM

85. Good point about Ginsburg

 

I can't believe anyone is seriously considering Bernie Sanders. What a joke. If he is the nominee might as well hand the Republicans the keys to the white house at the convention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woolldog (Reply #85)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 10:35 PM

86. I really have no interest in trashing Bernie. I appreciate his sincerity and passion.



But the suggestion that HRC can't be trusted to appoint liberal justices is not supported by the facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:49 PM

61. So let's be sure here.

 

1) Gore ran a terrible campaign and picked someone to the right of Bush to be his running mate.

2) Florida had been steadily disenfranchising as many voters as it possibly could right up to election day.

3) On election day, over two hundred thousand Florida democrats voted for George W. Bush

4) Following the election, we know damn well the machines were tampered with, hacked, and manipulated.

5) We know that a very large number of votes were simply thrown out for having stray pencil marks in the margins, someone checkign "Al Gore" and writing in "Al Gore" etc.

5) we also know that the Florida Republicans and their hired goons conspired to freeze the vote counting.

6) A partisan court finally appointed Bush the winner.

7) We now know from counts after that SCOTUS decision, that Gore actually won by several thousand votes in Florida. Despite all that stuff above, there were still more votes for Gore at the end.

But it's Nader's fault.

Ah huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #61)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:40 PM

80. Not Nader's fault. It's partly the fault of those

That voted for him. It's amazing that the Naderites still feel the need to pretend that voting for Nader didn't help put Bush/Cheney into office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redstateblues (Reply #80)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 10:36 PM

87. I'd be more worried about the two hundred thousand Democrats who went for Bush

 

But you know... that's me, I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:15 PM

70. Alito and Roberts gave us Citizens United and the gutting of the Voting Rights Act

Two more GOP appointed justices will guarantee the demise of Roe v. Wade

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #73)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:26 PM

74. I know

These two justices were bad but any attempt to filibuster them would have triggered a nuclear option by the GOP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #74)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:29 PM

75. It's hard to derail a SCOTUS pick or Cabinet choice because of the presumption ...

It's hard to derail a SCOTUS pick or Cabinet choice because of the presumption it is the president's prerogative because he or she won.

I have absolute confidence she will appoint forward thinking justices should she win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #75)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:35 PM

78. You are correct-it is hard to kill a SCOTUS nominee

Abe Fortas was stopped but that was due to LBJ's unpopularity and timing. Nixon had two really unqualified justices who were blocked but Nixon found acceptable replacements. Bork was blocked but that was due to his extreme ideology. Harriet Miers were killed by the GOP. Normally, it is very difficult to stop a SCOTUS nominee

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #78)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:42 PM

81. John Tower's DOD nomination was killed...

The Republicants are sure being dilatory with Loretta Lynch's nomination...


But the presumption that a president gets to pick his Cabinet and SCOTUS has validity. That's why winning is important. (DUH)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #81)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:46 PM

82. There are some stories about John Tower that explains why his nomination was killed

Tower was a complete drunk and an ass. Women could not ride in the same elevator with him without drawing his "attention"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #82)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:54 PM

84. Yes./NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #78)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:32 AM

90. Abe Fortas was actually on the Court when he was nominated by LBJ for Chief Justice in 1968

He ended up resigning a few months into Nixon's first term due to questions about his ethics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #7)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:08 PM

10. It sure sounds like you give a rat's derriere who anybody votes for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:14 PM

13. why don't you and pal please tell the rest of us

Why don't you and pal please tell the rest of us of how a third party candidate is going to beat the Republican and Democratic candidate to secure enough to votes to earn a plurality or majority of votes in enough states to get 270 electoral votes in 2016?


And, again, I couldn't care less how some random internet poster is going to vote than his or her prediction of who is going to win the NBA Finals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #13)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:18 PM

15. My candidate may not win the primary or the general. I do not base my vote on who will win.

I base my vote on who will fight for economic equality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #15)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:20 PM

16. Your pal said this mythical third party candidate will win in 2016.

When the winner of the primary loses the general, it's the fault of her supporters for choosing her.

Choose a loser at their peril.

I'm going with winners.



I want to know how this works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #15)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:31 PM

23. Translation: I usually flush my vote down the toilet from my high horse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FSogol (Reply #23)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:41 PM

27. Folks should be able to vote for whomever they want...

I just find the proposition that a third party candidate who runs to the left of Hillary can win the general election patently absurd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #27)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:45 PM

29. Completely Agree. Wanting America to turn into a liberal paradise overnight is

a nice dream, but at the end of the day you need to pull the lever for someone who can win. The person with the D after their name thinks the Free Lunch Program for poor school kids is a good idea. The person who with the R thinks giving a free lunch is an evil government intrusion. Vote Democratic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 06:56 PM

6. Yeah



I could see her choosing people who often straddle the line between the two parties. Has she spoken about this?







Like Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg...Oh, she's not her husband, that's right...She voted against the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:07 PM

9. I could see her asking Scalia to retire just so she can nominate him again

Because she's clever like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:37 PM

25. Democratic Primary is Labor vs Banksters and Wall Street

 

Bernie will run as a Dem, so the title reads Bernie (Labor) vs Hillary (Banksters and Wall Street)

Now this will be interesting!!!

The key question here is: If Hillary can't beat Bernie in the primary, will the raging, Hillary Army "drop out". You know, the Army that screams bloody murder that since you're not supporting Hillary now, you're obviously going to vote for a Republican.

So if the Democratic Party supports Labor over Banksters and Wall Street, what will Hillary's Angry and Despondent Army do?

I'm with those who say good on social issues, bad on economic issues.

*Punchline: Americans don't pay attention to the issues. They have no idea what Hillary stands for and who she stands with. They love or hate her, but most Democrats will vote for her because they won't pay attention to the opposition within the party. Hillary's money will drown out other voices, and Joe blurts out funny things, and Bernie looks like the nutty professor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #25)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:48 PM

32. Well, yeah, but...

Economic issues trumps everything ya know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #32)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:52 PM

35. It's not that economic issues trump everything. It's that you cannot separate economic

and social issues. Democrats have made this nice tidy little bow for themselves. They separate economic issues from social issues and as long as they are good on social issues they can completely ignore economic issues. Well you cannot separate the two. You cannot have social justice without economic justice. The poverty stricken single mothers, the educationally disenfranchised African Americans, the disabled. Economic justice is social justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:49 PM

33. pretty much the same as any democrat: as liberal as the senate would allow.

if someone like warren were president, she'd have be able to drive a pretty liberal agenda and certainly could steer the executive branch in a very liberal direction. but getting a liberal nominee past the senate, even if just a republican filibuster, is another matter.

on that score, i don't think there's much difference between any potential democratic president. the best any of them can do is nominate the most liberal person that can get through the senate process.

which, sadly, isn't anywhere liberal enough for me. but that only means we need to fix the senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:50 PM

34. Whoever they are, they'll need to be confirmed.

I mean, I'd like to see JP Barlow on the SCOTUS, but I wont hold my breath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #34)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:57 PM

41. Russ Feingold is my dreamy SCOTUS pick.

But I'm super excited that we might get him back in the Senate and right the terrible wrong we made a few years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #41)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:10 PM

45. Our party needs people like him, absolutely

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 07:56 PM

39. much better than Cruz, Rubio, Walker, Ryan, Huckabee, or any of the other idiots

much better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:12 PM

47. she sits about the same place as obama. he made a couple excellent choices. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:19 PM

49. She should appoint Anita Hill./NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #49)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:23 PM

51. wouldnt that be a slap across a face. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #51)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:43 PM

58. Perhaps but a deserved one. In my book she is a heroine./NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #58)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:48 PM

59. i agree and i agree. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #49)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:44 PM

88. I would stand up and shout for joy over this!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:26 PM

52. A lot more liberal than any Republican's pick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:39 PM

55. I dunno

 

But unless Scalia finally chokes on one of his own asscheeks, the next seat to open will be one of the "liberal" ones. So, would we get a Sotamoyer, or a Kennedy?

The answer to that question depends on whether you think Clinton will actually take a stand, or will "compromise for bipratisanship."

Me, I'm holding out hope for Scalia choking on his own asscheeks. It's overdue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #55)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:49 PM

60. gosh that man is so unhealthy, one would think. then i think about cheney. how? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #60)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:53 PM

65. Hate is a surprisingly strong motivator, it seems.

 

of course, being able to loot the poor to buy spare body parts probably helps too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #55)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:20 PM

71. Here is why this election is so important



Kennedy should also be circled

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:52 PM

63. I know they would be voting with SCJ Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsburg, and Breyer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:58 PM

66. It will probably depend how deep the Senate is in Democrats. There is a need to have sixty votes

To prevent a filibuster by the GOP. I am sure whoever it may be it will be someone with great character, maybe even Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:59 PM

67. How corporate friendly would Hillary's

Supreme Court picks be ???

How Wall Street friendly would Hillary's

Supreme Court picks be ???

9 people should not be deciding ANYTHING that affects 317+ million people.

They entire system stinks.

Science and biology were totally ignored in the Hobby Lobby case.

Religious considerations took precedence or facts, science, and biology.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:05 PM

68. One thing is for absolute sure...

If she gets the nomination and is elected, Hillary's appointments will be far, far better than adding more theocrats to SCOTUS, no matter who they are.

The extent that those who profess to dislike Hillary do not comprehend this, is the extent to which the Democratic Party is utterly screwn.

Note: I support nobody at this time, mainly because it is almost 19 months until the fucking election! and nobody knows who will be the nominee of either party.

But one things is absolutely true. Any Democratic nominee will be an easy choice over the theocratic, lunatic clown car that the GOP puts forward (so to speak).

I will work for any progressive in the running. But Hillary Clinton will be okay with me, if no other Democratic candidate is competitive.

Hillary would be a very easy choice, no matter what her previous Senate votes were.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:12 PM

69. Any justices selected by HRC would be far better than a justice selected by Jeb or Scott Walker

Until the Democrats get 60 votes in the Senate, it will be difficult to get another Ruth Bader Ginsburg confirmed but a Sotomayor or a Kagan is far better than an Alito or Roberts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wheniwasincongress (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 09:33 PM

77. Problem is many here don't give a shit...

they even say it..........its oligarchy this and oligarchy that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread