View Single Post
Old 09-20-2020, 08:50 PM   #9
sir shovelhands
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Houston
Hunt In: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artos View Post
It's really NOT Hypocrisy from either side...history says so & simply how it works out 95% of the time.

Sen. Cruz: ‚€œThat's What Presidents Do, If There's A Vacancy, They Make A Nomination‚€Ě - YouTube
Ted is certainly right that McConnell's moves are standard political maneuvering, but the definition of hypocrisy is "behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel."

McConnell believed in 2016 that "It is important for the Senate to give the people a voice in the filling of this vacancy by waiting until the next president takes office. The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration The next president may also nominate someone very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice."

Yet now he clearly doesn't want "the people" to have a say in the decision. By definition, that's hypocrisy.

Schumer now (2020) believes “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, the vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president"

He obviously held a different opinion in 2016. By definition, that's hypocrisy.

Does it matter? I guess to some people. Just a normal day in politics.

Edit: my personal opinion is that a President is elected for a full 4 year term (and no less), and their nominees should receive a confirmation hearing from the senate regardless of how close an election is. Senators are elected for a full 6 year term (and no less), and they should exercise their power to hold a vote on confirming a nominee regardless of how close an election is.

I'd even apply this same standard to a lame duck President/Senate.

Last edited by sir shovelhands; 09-20-2020 at 09:06 PM.
sir shovelhands is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top