2020 Democrats should listen to 2016 Democrats #FillThatSeat

MTHead said:

Does it really matter what Gibbering Joe says anymore? No one on either side is really listening to him for actual content.

I say, “Yes, it matters.” When someone says something to the effect of, “The Senate should wait for the new president.” It seems to me an effective counter to that is, “Joe Biden disagrees with you.

But, I’m willing to not push the point. How about a bunch of democrats in addition to Joe Biden? Doesn’t that matter?

Via Donald Trump Jr.:


4 thoughts on “2020 Democrats should listen to 2016 Democrats #FillThatSeat

  1. But they cannot, because every year is year zero to the good leftist, and they are not bound by past statements. Sort of like Muhammad in the Koran.

  2. Your right, What Joe says is extremely important. As Joe is a garbage in, garbage out type person at this point. Obama could never tell Biden a secret even in his hay-days. Without it getting dropped in a gaffe somehow.
    The nice thing about now. He’s the commie mouth piece. They have to telegraph what their up to through Joe. And thus to us all.
    I should have said; No one is looking to Joe for what he thinks anymore.

  3. An important distinction, one that makes all the difference in the world, is in this Presidential election, one candidate is the incumbent. In 2016, neither candidate was an incumbent, and Merrick Garland was to be a parting gift, similar in effect to President Obama’s order greatly expanding the number of people who could request unmasking of American citizens who were speaking to foreign government representatives.
    Garland, of course would have longer lasting effect.

    • That is one of the first distinctions I made too. But I ultimately decided that is irrelevant. The constitution certainly doesn’t make any such distinction. And there aren’t any laws or even Senate rules which make this distinction.

      It boils down to the president nominates someone then the Senate grants or withholds consent as it so chooses. The Senate could reject a different SCOTUS nomination every day for four straight years. It would be entirely permissible and not something anyone should get all that worked up about. The president MUST appoint someone who meets the criteria of the Senate with no timeline. Nothing else matters. End of story.

Comments are closed.