The guy you're replying to is correct. Republican Senate leaders declared that because Scalia's seat had become vacant during an election year, the Senate would not even consider a nomination from the president.
I know. People keep derailing the discussion. I was just letting you know that the guy was right, in that the republican senators who said they would never appoint a SCJ during an election year were technically hypocrites (per definition). And there's nothing wrong with that, what's best for the America comes first!
The guy you're replying to is correct. Republican Senate leaders declared that because Scalia's seat had become vacant during an election year, the Senate would not even consider a nomination from the president.
It was the end of Barry's second term and we were guaranteed to get a new president
And they owned the Senate.
Why does everyone leave out this distinction?
Exactly if the democrats wanted their pick of SCJ, then they should have won the senate. “Elections have consequences”
I know. People keep derailing the discussion. I was just letting you know that the guy was right, in that the republican senators who said they would never appoint a SCJ during an election year were technically hypocrites (per definition). And there's nothing wrong with that, what's best for the America comes first!