2020 US Senatorial elections

[Livingat45north]

Want to bet that Daines won't win by 9? Also, the Michigan Senate seat is not in danger. Your guy already lost in 2018 and he's not going to outrun Trump by the 5-8% necessary to win Michigan.

Lyin Howie

 

[KillerGopherFan]

You're such an embarrassing phony.

I said Graham is the only one that said that he wouldn’t confirm a Justice in 2020 if given the situation.

You got me on Rubio. I never heard that quote. Dumb for him to say it.

As far as the rest of those Republican Senators, none said that they wouldn’t do it if it was a Republican. That was what was in dispute.

I never said that Republican Senators said they wouldn’t confirm Obama’s pick in the year of an election. Obviously, they wouldn’t vote to confirm.

B/C THE REPUBLICANS HELD THE MAJORITY IN THE SENATE. AND THE DEMOCRATS DON’T.

PRECEDENT!!!!

 

[KillerGopherFan]

Want to bet that Daines won't win by 9? Also, the Michigan Senate seat is not in danger. Your guy already lost in 2018 and he's not going to outrun Trump by the 5-8% necessary to win Michigan.

I didn’t say he’d win by 9% idiot. But he will win and I’m willing to bet to shut your mouth.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

There are single polls showing Kelly up double digits in AZ and Cunningham up double digits in NC. Should R's scratch them off the list?

No, b/c the polls biased against Republicans.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

Within the margin of error.

 

[stocker08]

I said Graham is the only one that said that he wouldn’t confirm a Justice in 2020 if given the situation.

You got me on Rubio. I never heard that quote. Dumb for him to say it.

As far as the rest of those Republican Senators, none said that they wouldn’t do it if it was a Republican. That was what was in dispute.

I never said that Republican Senators said they wouldn’t confirm Obama’s pick in the year of an election. Obviously, they wouldn’t vote to confirm.

B/C THE REPUBLICANS HELD THE MAJORITY IN THE SENATE. AND THE DEMOCRATS DON’T.

PRECEDENT!!!!

That was the point of my second post. It had ZERO to do with any previous precedent. All of those HYPOCRITES said it was because it was an election year. They all said that the voters should have a say with the election.

Not the case anymore. They've all changed their minds on that. All hypocrites. The right is the party of hypocrites.

As I said before. Anyone up for the senate....regardless of their thoughts on expanding the Supreme Court or extending statehood to D.C. and PR should say little on the topic. The phony a$$ repubs like you won't have a leg to stand on if they go through with those moves.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

That was the point of my second post. It had ZERO to do with any previous precedent. All of those HYPOCRITES said it was because it was an election year. They all said that the voters should have a say with the election.

Not the case anymore. They've all changed their minds on that. All hypocrites. The right is the party of hypocrites.

As I said before. Anyone up for the senate....regardless of their thoughts on expanding the Supreme Court or extending statehood to D.C. and PR should say little on the topic. The phony a$$ repubs like you won't have a leg to stand on if they go through with those moves.

It was an election year WITH DIVIDED POWER, not with majority power as this year is.

We’ve been over this ad nauseam. I conceded your example of Rubio. Good work!

Democrats would do exactly the same thing b/c it is constitutional and with a lot of precedent.

 

[justthefacts]

Within the margin of error.

Congrats to Republicans on being within the margin of error in a Republican poll in that Marxist bastion of Kansas

 

[KillerGopherFan]

Congrats to Republicans on being within the margin of error in a Republican poll in that Marxist bastion of Kansas

It’s one poll. And a state poll at that. Talk to me when it’s 9%.

 

[howeda7]

I didn’t say he’d win by 9% idiot. But he will win and I’m willing to bet to shut your mouth.

I never said Biden would win Florida by 6%, idiot, but you lead with the chin then.

 

[howeda7]

It was an election year WITH DIVIDED POWER, not with majority power as this year is.

None of them mentioned DIVIDED POWER when they were excusing their actions in 2016. It was all about not confirming any justice in an election year. PERIOD. That's what makes them all HYPOCRITES including you.

 

[stocker08]

It was an election year WITH DIVIDED POWER, not with majority power as this year is.

We’ve been over this ad nauseam. I conceded your example of Rubio. Good work!

Democrats would do exactly the same thing b/c it is constitutional and with a lot of precedent.

Yes. "DIVIDED POWER!" That is the excuse NOW. Notice how NONE of those senators said anything about divided power. Only about allowing Americans to make a choice in an election year.

Of course they were going to have to come up with excuses to make the hypocrisy a little less potent. Nobody buys their change of tune except dotards like you. Good thing the lies and the hypocrisy comes back around. And when the democrats are back in power in short term....your cries of righteousness will be a nice joke.

 

[howeda7]

Congrats to Republicans on being within the margin of error in a Republican poll in that Marxist bastion of Kansas

Always a sign it's going well for R's when they're citing the margin of error in Kansas. But Trump's going to turn the tables on the Dems in New York...

 

[stocker08]

None of them mentioned DIVIDED POWER when they were excusing their actions in 2016. It was all about not confirming any justice in an election year. PERIOD. That's what makes them all HYPOCRITES including you.

Yup. That's just the new excuse that they are now rolling with. The shilliest of shills think that people don't notice the hypocrisy.

 

[howeda7]

It’s one poll. And a state poll at that. Talk to me when it’s 9%.

View attachment 9634

You're worse than Unskewwed Polls Beeg was in 2012.

 

[justthefacts]

Thread

 

[KillerGopherFan]

I never said Biden would win Florida by 6%, idiot, but you lead with the chin then.

I was flipping the question you asked me about Ohio, idiot.

Sorry I have to “mansplain it” to you.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

Yes. "DIVIDED POWER!" That is the excuse NOW. Notice how NONE of those senators said anything about divided power. Only about allowing Americans to make a choice in an election year.

Of course they were going to have to come up with excuses to make the hypocrisy a little less potent. Nobody buys their change of tune except dotards like you. Good thing the lies and the hypocrisy comes back around. And when the democrats are back in power in short term....your cries of righteousness will be a nice joke.

It’s not an “excuse”. It’s precedent. It has always been precedent whether they bothered to mention it or not.

If it wasn’t precedent, you’d have a point. Unfortunately for you, it is.

 

[stocker08]

It’s not an “excuse”. It’s precedent. It has always been precedent whether they bothered to mention it or not.

If it wasn’t precedent, you’d have a point. Unfortunately for you, it is.

No. It has never been a "precedent". You're just too big of a shill to admit otherwise.

 

[Gopher_In_NYC]

Love the name of that paper - sooo beautifully heartlandesque.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

No. It has never been a "precedent". You're just too big of a shill to admit otherwise.

I literally posted about this the night RBG died and the day after. Stop making yourself look like a total moron.

Loading…

www.forums.gopherhole.com

Loading…

www.forums.gopherhole.com

Loading…

www.forums.gopherhole.com

A posted this article on the precedent from August 2020, before RBG died:

Loading…

www.nationalreview.com

 

[stocker08]

I literally posted about this the night RBG died and the day after. Stop making yourself look like a total moron.

View attachment 9637

Loading…

www.forums.gopherhole.com

Loading…

www.forums.gopherhole.com

Loading…

www.forums.gopherhole.com

A posted this article on the precedent from August 2020, before RBG died:

Loading…

www.nationalreview.com

You truly are stupid beyond reproach. Want to explain which $hithead right wing trash can you got your information from? There have been eleven rejections to the Supreme Court in the HISTORY of the United States. And in almost every one of those cases....the President confirmed another nomination.

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

So let's hear about those nine rejections.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

You truly are stupid beyond reproach. Want to explain which $hithead right wing trash can you got your information from? There have been eleven rejections to the Supreme Court in the HISTORY of the United States. And in almost every one of those cases....the President confirmed another nomination.

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

So let's hear about those nine rejections.

Did you read the article? It’s history. It’s fact. If McConnell‘s Senate had confirmed Garland, it would’ve been an exception to precedent.

This chart summarized the outcomes of presidential SC nominations made in the last year of the president’s term when the Senate Majority is the opposition party of the president. Note the number of “Lose” outcomes.


This is a Senate Election thread. We’re done here.

 

[stocker08]

Did you read the article? It’s history. It’s fact. If McConnell‘s Senate had confirmed Garland, it would’ve been an exception to precedent.

This chart summarized the outcomes of presidential SC nominations made in the last year of the president’s term when the Senate Majority is the opposition party of the president. Note the number of “Lose” outcomes.
View attachment 9638

This is a Senate Election thread. We’re done here.

Confirmed. You are a total shill, a failure, and a liar. And just as I thought....you pulled this chart from another dotard like yourself. Which trash can righty website?

A BUNCH of those "losses"....were withdrawn nominations. Lol....four of them were for the same two nominations by the SAME President (Tyler)....who ended up getting a nomination through anyways.

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

So no....it never has been a precedent. Even if your chart wasn't full of $hit....you still are. Refusing to even hold a vote has NEVER been a precedent. Only in your pea brain.

 

[howeda7]

Confirmed. You are a total shill, a failure, and a liar. And just as I thought....you pulled this chart from another dotard like yourself. Which trash can righty website?

A BUNCH of those "losses"....were withdrawn nominations. Lol....four of them were for the same two nominations by the SAME President (Tyler)....who ended up getting a nomination through anyways.

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

So no....it never has been a precedent. Even if your chart wasn't full of $hit....you still are. Refusing to even hold a vote has NEVER been a precedent. Only in your pea brain.

And all his non-Trump examples are from the 1800's except one. "It's about the precedent!" Lol. So pathetic.

 

[stocker08]

And all his non-Trump examples are from the 1800's except one. "It's about the precedent!" Lol. So pathetic.

And even if his "facts" weren't wrong (they are)....it wouldn't change the fact that at least some of those came to a vote. Refusing to even put a nominee up for a vote is NOWHERE close to being a "precedent".

Maybe less time with the propaganda....and more time doing something constructive....would be good for KFC.

 

[howeda7]

And even if his "facts" weren't wrong (they are)....it wouldn't change the fact that at least some of those came to a vote. Refusing to even put a nominee up for a vote is NOWHERE close to being a "precedent".

Maybe less time with the propaganda....and more time doing something constructive....would be good for KFC.

But then who would defend the honor of the Whig Party and their principles and precedents? The modern GOP is about to follow them into the graveyard of history. KGF will go down with the ship.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

Confirmed. You are a total shill, a failure, and a liar. And just as I thought....you pulled this chart from another dotard like yourself. Which trash can righty website?

A BUNCH of those "losses"....were withdrawn nominations. Lol....four of them were for the same two nominations by the SAME President (Tyler)....who ended up getting a nomination through anyways.

Loading…

en.wikipedia.org

So no....it never has been a precedent. Even if your chart wasn't full of $hit....you still are. Refusing to even hold a vote has NEVER been a precedent. Only in your pea brain.

For the record, I never said refusing a vote was a precedent. I said confirming a nominee made by the opposition party president was precedent.

If you don’t understand the argument that you’re having, it’s difficult for you and me. I’m sorry for you.

 

[KillerGopherFan]

But then who would defend the honor of the Whig Party and their principles and precedents? The modern GOP is about to follow them into the graveyard of history. KGF will go down with the ship.

Don’t be as stupid as stocker. It’s not a good look, even for you.

 

[stocker08]

For the record, I never said refusing a vote was a precedent. I said confirming a nominee made by the opposition party president was precedent.

If you don’t understand the argument that you’re having, it’s difficult for you and me. I’m sorry for you.

Well I already proved that your chart was a joke and that a lot of those "losses" were not actually votes...but withdrawls.

And YOU'VE continued to say that they were just following the precedent.

And now you have your foot fully jammed in your mouth. It's never been a precedent to refuse to take a vote.

FAIL!