Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSince "precedent" is a big deal among jurists...
Wouldn't it be a hoot if every nominee 45 comes up with says, "sorry, but you and your party set a precedent 4 years ago... I'm going to follow it. I decline the nomination."?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 370 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Since "precedent" is a big deal among jurists... (Original Post)
MissMillie
Sep 2020
OP
FoxNewsSucks
(10,435 posts)1. That would be funny, but
anyone with enough integrity to do that would never be nominated by MF45. That's not the kind of person they want.
MissMillie
(38,578 posts)2. Oh, I figured that to be true.
But maybe someone big should float the idea publicly.
chowder66
(9,080 posts)3. They would have to come up with principled and moral nominees first.
JHB
(37,161 posts)4. That would require more integrity than zealotry...
...and nobody on the short list fits that description.