My disgust with Democrats regarding "court stacking"

[Dr. Shades]

Dear Perfumaniacs:

During the confirmation hearings of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, both within the hearings and without one constantly heard accusations from our Democratic friends that President Trump was "stacking the court" and that he was audacious for daring to nominate someone to replace Justice Ginsburg during an election year.

Although I'm normally quite politically apathetic, those accusations made my blood boil. The reason is because regardless of how one feels about Donald J. Trump, the fact of the matter is that it's his job to nominate Supreme Court justices when vacancies occur. Election years occur during a full 25% of every president's term. Is the President supposed to refrain from doing his job 25% of the time? In my view, we elect a president to do his or her job the full 100% of his or her time in office, not a mere 75% of the time.

Let me tell you this: If I only did my job 75% of the time, I'd be fired. Yet apparently that's what the Democrats were insisting must happen.

So, am I wrong to be angry at Democrats for expecting the President to refrain from doing his job? If so, please convince me how and why.

[Gadianton]

Since when is it a president's job to stack the court?

( sorry shades, just showing you what it's like)

(shades, feel free to remove this derail. After a couple beers, it was an attempt at a shades-like zinger for a response to a serious question. all in good fun, my friend)

[Dr. Shades]

Never one to be overly quick on the uptake, I sheepishly admit that you totally lost me here, Dean. :-(

[Res Ipsa]

Dear Perfumaniacs:

During the confirmation hearings of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, both within the hearings and without one constantly heard accusations from our Democratic friends that President Trump was "stacking the court" and that he was audacious for daring to nominate someone to replace Justice Ginsburg during an election year.

Although I'm normally quite politically apathetic, those accusations made my blood boil. The reason is because regardless of how one feels about Donald J. Trump, the fact of the matter is that it's his job to nominate Supreme Court justices when vacancies occur. Election years occur during a full 25% of every president's term. Is the President supposed to refrain from doing his job 25% of the time? In my view, we elect a president to do his or her job the full 100% of his or her time in office, not a mere 75% of the time.

Let me tell you this: If I only did my job 75% of the time, I'd be fired. Yet apparently that's what the Democrats were insisting must happen.

So, am I wrong to be angry at Democrats for expecting the President to refrain from doing his job? If so, please convince me how and why.

Shades,

During the Obama presidency, the Republican-controlled Senate adopted a strategy of trying to hold open spots for the next Republican President by not following the normal process of considering Obama's nominees for court position. This strategy culminated failing to even give a hearing to his last Supreme Court nominee because the nomination was made in an election year. By this strategy, the Republican senate held open over 100 federal district court and court of appeals judgeships and one Supreme Court Justice spot for Trump. Then, other than a tax cut and gutting Obamacare, the Senate spent four years rushing through judicial nominations of sometimes wholly unqualified judges, many from lists provided by the federalist society. That culminated in confirming the latest Supreme Court justice days before a presidential election. In four years, 220 Trump judges have been confirmed compared to 334 for Obama in eight. I think "court stacking" is a reasonable term for the Republican strategy.

As for the percentage of the time Trump "does his job," that could be a whole other thread.

[Dr. Shades]

I think "court stacking" is a reasonable term for the Republican strategy.

In that case, those Republicans are disgusting for failing to do their jobs. I don't think it obviates the point I made in my opening post, though.

[subgenius]

Dear Perfumaniacs:

During the confirmation hearings of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, both within the hearings and without one constantly heard accusations from our Democratic friends that President Trump was "stacking the court" and that he was audacious for daring to nominate someone to replace Justice Ginsburg during an election year.

Although I'm normally quite politically apathetic, those accusations made my blood boil. The reason is because regardless of how one feels about Donald J. Trump, the fact of the matter is that it's his job to nominate Supreme Court justices when vacancies occur. Election years occur during a full 25% of every president's term. Is the President supposed to refrain from doing his job 25% of the time? In my view, we elect a president to do his or her job the full 100% of his or her time in office, not a mere 75% of the time.

Let me tell you this: If I only did my job 75% of the time, I'd be fired. Yet apparently that's what the Democrats were insisting must happen.

So, am I wrong to be angry at Democrats for expecting the President to refrain from doing his job? If so, please convince me how and why.

No you are not wrong. Dems are just butt-hurt that they could not play the political game better in 2016 and Obama, rather thN nominate someone who could get approved, lost the bet over waiting to let Hillary Clinton make the nominatuon...but alas, she magically lost the election.
And true...President is elected for 48 months of being President to whatever extent of the Constitution etc.

[subgenius]

Dear Perfumaniacs:

During the confirmation hearings of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, both within the hearings and without one constantly heard accusations from our Democratic friends that President Trump was "stacking the court" and that he was audacious for daring to nominate someone to replace Justice Ginsburg during an election year.

Although I'm normally quite politically apathetic, those accusations made my blood boil. The reason is because regardless of how one feels about Donald J. Trump, the fact of the matter is that it's his job to nominate Supreme Court justices when vacancies occur. Election years occur during a full 25% of every president's term. Is the President supposed to refrain from doing his job 25% of the time? In my view, we elect a president to do his or her job the full 100% of his or her time in office, not a mere 75% of the time.

Let me tell you this: If I only did my job 75% of the time, I'd be fired. Yet apparently that's what the Democrats were insisting must happen.

So, am I wrong to be angry at Democrats for expecting the President to refrain from doing his job? If so, please convince me how and why.

Shades,

During the Obama presidency, the Republican-controlled Senate adopted a strategy of trying to hold open spots for the next Republican President by not following the normal process of considering Obama's nominees for court position. This strategy culminated failing to even give a hearing to his last Supreme Court nominee because the nomination was made in an election year. By this strategy, the Republican senate held open over 100 federal district court and court of appeals judgeships and one Supreme Court Justice spot for Trump. Then, other than a tax cut and gutting Obamacare, the Senate spent four years rushing through judicial nominations of sometimes wholly unqualified judges, many from lists provided by the federalist society. That culminated in confirming the latest Supreme Court justice days before a presidential election. In four years, 220 Trump judges have been confirmed compared to 334 for Obama in eight. I think "court stacking" is a reasonable term for the Republican strategy.

As for the percentage of the time Trump "does his job," that could be a whole other thread.

Res,
it was a legal strategy and one which the Dems were unable to effectively counter.
But while you're sliding the definition of "court stacking" to make the Democrats tantrum more palatable, sour grapes are still sour grapes.
Personally, i don't think the Dems have political capital or the cojonés to stack the courts in the wake of a Biden miracle victory.

[Nomomo]

So, am I wrong to be angry at Democrats for expecting the President to refrain from doing his job? If so, please convince me how and why.

So selecting a Justice for the Supreme Court with the prerequisite that they are likely to be helpful in your effort to dishonestly steal the election if actually you lose is "doing your job"? Odd Job description you endorse.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

The reason is because regardless of how one feels about Donald J. Trump, the fact of the matter is that it's his job to nominate Supreme Court justices when vacancies occur. Election years occur during a full 25% of every president's term.

You're not wrong, but you're working against this:

"I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say, 'Let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination,' and you could use my words against me and you'd be absolutely right." -Senator Lindsey Graham, 2016

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President,” - Sen. Mitch McConnell

"“The fact of the matter is that it’s been standard practice over the last nearly 80 years that Supreme Court nominees are not nominated and confirmed during a presidential election year.” Sen. Chuck Grassley

"At this critical juncture in our nation’s history, Texans and the American people deserve to have a say in the selection of the next lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. The only way to empower the American people and ensure they have a voice is for the next President to make the nomination to fill this vacancy.” Sen. John Cornyn

I mean. I can keep going. If the Senate doesn't abide by its own rules and procedures then it becomes a free-for-all. If the Dems take the House, Senate, and Presidency I fully expect them to do whatever the “F” they want because Republicans have lowered the bar to "Screw you".

- Doc

[Nomomo]

So, am I wrong to be angry at Democrats for expecting the President to refrain from doing his job? If so, please convince me how and why.

Dr. Shades, could you please provide me with a link to your previous post of 4 years ago where you complained about the Republican Senate preventing Obama from "doing his job" by appointing a Supreme Court Justice in his last year of office?

I thought not!