Which Supreme Court nominees would you have supported a filibuster of?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2024, 09:19:31 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Which Supreme Court nominees would you have supported a filibuster of?		 « previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Which Supreme Court nominees would you have supported a filibuster of?
#1
Roberts		  
#2
Stevens		  
#3
Scalia		  
#4
Kennedy		  
#5
Souter		  
#6
Thomas		  
#7
Ginsburg		  
#8
Breyer		  
#9
Alito		  
#10
None of the above		  
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results
Total Voters: 19

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: Which Supreme Court nominees would you have supported a filibuster of?  (Read 1159 times)
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 26, 2006, 11:06:02 PM »
No hindsight.

Anyone you don't vote for is someone you would have voted for cloture on.
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,597


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2006, 11:16:46 PM »
« Edited: January 26, 2006, 11:19:49 PM by Porce »
Without hindsight, NOTA.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2006, 11:41:08 PM »
NOTA. With hindsight, maybe Stevens.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2006, 11:44:08 PM »
NOTA
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2006, 11:47:29 PM »
Quote from: A18 on January 26, 2006, 11:41:08 PM
NOTA. With hindsight, maybe Stevens.

Definitely with hindsight.  Of course, at the time of his appointment, he was thought to be a conservative.  Judges have a habit of often going their own way once they get onto the bench.
Logged
Virginian87
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,598
Political Matrix
E: -3.55, S: 2.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2006, 11:50:36 PM »
None, EXCEPT Thomas.  He never deserved to be on the Supreme Court in the first place.  Even if I don't agree with him much of the time, I would not have filibustered Scalia.  He is one of the most intelligent justices on the Court.  Unfortunately, Thomas does not share that intellect.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,541
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2006, 11:52:12 PM »
« Edited: January 26, 2006, 11:55:49 PM by Frodo »
Probably only Clarence Thomas -he got where he is not because of his intellect or his qualifications but because he is conservative and he is black.  And the Anita Hill scandal should have sunk him -it would have been enough in my eyes to conclude that he just doesn't belong in the Supreme Court, that added on top of his apparent lack of intellect and qualifications. 

Everyone else I would have voted to confirm, without a doubt.     
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,382
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2006, 12:51:49 AM »
Thomas and Scalia.

I'm undecided on Alito right now.
Logged
Cubby
Pim Fortuyn
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,067
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -3.74, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2006, 12:54:15 AM »
Scalia is a scumbag and I hate his guts. Thomas is better, even if he did get the job only due to his race.

Now that I got that off my chest, I can say that I would have filibustered Scalia, Thomas and Alito.

But we shouldn't have to filibuster them, that should be a last resort option. I wish there could be 50 or more Senators that oppose a given nominee, if he is a bad jurist. Sadly, thats only happened once in the past 30 years. It all comes down to politics, not the ideology of the nominee.
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2006, 01:38:39 AM »
I don't like filibustering judges.  I wouldn't have even filibustered Crazy Ruth.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,009


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2006, 08:31:00 AM »
Quote from: Pym Fortuyn on January 27, 2006, 12:54:15 AM
Scalia is a scumbag and I hate his guts. Thomas is better, even if he did get the job only due to his race.

Yes!  I beleive both are complete scumbags but at least Thomas is just a toady-scumbag: he keeps his mouth shut and votes the way massah wants.  Scalia has a record of the most heavy-handed and painful attempts at humour from the bench.  What a repulsive, arrogant asshole.  When he and his cronies re-oppress women, he'll probably make some joke about it to just stick it to them all that much better. 
Logged
nclib
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,303
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2006, 09:02:43 AM »
I would have filibustered Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.
Logged
Bdub
Brandon W
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,116
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2006, 11:03:43 AM »
I wouldnt have fillibustered any of them.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,935
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2006, 11:03:51 AM »
Scalia, Thomas and Alito.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.04 seconds with 13 queries.