# How are the Clinton hating dems feeling now? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 25, 2022, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-are-the-clinton-hating-dems-feeling-now/966862 "2022-06-25T22:15:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 561
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2023, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-are-the-clinton-hating-dems-feeling-now/966862/561 "2023-04-15T01:27:31Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > They did account for the health issues mentioned in that article …how did they account for them exactly? > [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > and confirmed judges at a record pace for two years. > [@ABC](#): > > While Biden is currently pacing ahead of his three immediate predecessors – and [tied with Reagan](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/18/us/politics/biden-judges-reagan-record.html) for the fastest first-year confirmations in four decades – **he is not on track to outpace President Trump’s overall rate**. > **[Biden has appointed 105 federal judges, outpacing Trump, Obama and Bush](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-appointed-105-federal-judges-outpacing-trump-obama/story?id=97200133)** > > The Senate has confirmed 105 Biden judicial nominees, exceeding the pace set by predecessors George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump Bolding mine. > [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > She’s out now with a completely unrelated health issue that is not mentioned in that article. It is causing a delay and if a solution arises in a reasonable amount of time there will be no long term damage. Do you understand what the word “emblematic” means? Because I said this: > [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > Feinstein is just emblematic of this. This was never just about Feinstein. This is the thing you seem to be missing. If it was only this single issue then maybe it wouldn’t matter so much. But it isn’t just this. > [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > You keep saying that they should have dealt with this issue but they have successfully dealt with it for two years and are continuing to deal with it now. By “successfully dealing with it” you mean they ignored it. And are only dealing with it now because some democrats spoke out. > [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > But I’m honestly curious what dealing with this issue looks like to you. Because it seems like you want to force old people to do things they don’t wish to do, or bar the elderly from office, or I don’t know what. I’ll give you the numbers again. The median age in the Senate is 65.3. There have only ever been eleven Black senators. Only _five_ American Indian senators. Only 25 out of 100 serving senators are women. I’m not calling for a “bar on the elderly from office.” I’m merely pointing out to you that this isn’t a representative group. That the senate is made up primarily of elderly white men, this has always been the case, and will continue to be the case unless the Democrats decide to change that. As for Feinstein? From 2022. > [@Vanity Fair](#): > > According to lawmakers and former staffers cited in the report, Feinstein’s memory is “rapidly deteriorating.” The 88-year-old lawmaker has, at times, seemed to have difficulty recognizing longtime colleagues, recalling conversations and complicated policy, and “can no longer fulfill her job duties without her staff doing much of the work required to represent the nearly 40 million people of California,” according to the _Chronicle_ . > > … > > While the colleagues who raised concerns about her condition said that her memory lapses “do not appear to be constant,” they recounted distressing episodes that raised significant questions about her ability to govern. In one, a congressional Democrat from California who has known Feinstein for 15 years had to repeatedly introduce themself to the senator over the course of several hours of “small talk.” It really comes down to what it is you want from your elected officials. If you just need a body who _might_ vote the way you want it, then fine. But personally? I have higher expectations for the people I vote to represent me. > [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > What does dealing with this issue look like to you? No more nonsensical they need plan and a strategy talk. What does dealing with this issue look like to you? Don’t put the fucking burden back on me. Feinstein is _emblematic_ of the issue. But she isn’t the fucking issue. The issue is that the democrats are just “going with the flow.” The leadership simply isn’t there. If there was, then Feinstein wouldn’t have been sitting on the Judiciary committee in the first place. Its emblematic in the same way as people had convinced themselves not to worry, roe vs wade is never getting overturned. > [@Don't worry, Roe v. Wade is never getting overturned](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-worry-roe-v-wade-is-never-getting-overturned/913683): > > I am convinced that the conservative powers that be have no interest in overturning Roe v. Wade. Overturning it would give a great deal of single issue voters no reason to vote Republican anymore. Republicans could pack the court with more conservative judges and would always remain “one more vote away” from overturning it. If they tried it right now I bet Gorsuch or even Kavanaugh would vote against if it was needed to keep Roe. Its this belief that “everything is fine, we are doing _fantastic_” right up to the moment everything falls off a cliff. Everything is **not fine**. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-are-the-clinton-hating-dems-feeling-now/966862)._