The dems “said” something (in response to mcconnel) and it was as bad as the republicans “doing” something to the POTUS choice? Saying and doing are different. The real comparison is what they do in the same situation. We already know.
You have in fact laid out your case, and repeated it a few times. It is not for a lack of explanation, but for a lack of merit that I reject your assertion.
The simple fact is, is that asking someone to follow a standard that they themselves set is not hypocrisy, no matter how much you want it to be.
Bricker liked to use the free parking example. Let’s say we are playing monopoly, and you land on free parking, and state that that means that you should get all the fines and payments. I disagree, but, it’s your house, so you insist that that is the rule. Later, I land on free parking, and I start to collect the money from fines and such, and you claim that I shouldn’t because I objected to the rule earlier.
Am I a hypocrite to complain about your actions?
Your argument includes the caveat that the party needs to be one or the other, which means that you are arguing for simple raw power for the ruling party and not for historicity or normativeness
Well, I reject your rejection of my assertion. 
So there! 
Might I ask you to do this: Tell me specifically what you don’t like about what I said:
Because it seems to me that I’m the one being specific about this, and you are only responding in generalities. Now, I am loathe to suggest to others here how to respond, so if you don’t want to, I completely understand.
You are the one making the accusation, so it is on you to back your assertion of wrongdoing. I have been very specific as to why your accusation has no merit, and you have simply repeated your accusation as though it is self justifying. You have given absolutely no specifics as to what actions the Democrats have done that were hypocritical or bullshit, other than them criticizing Republicans for not holding to a standard that they themselves set.
The parts of my post that you chose not to quote were very specific, and even provided an analogy that you chose to ignore. But they are still there for anyone to see, and to see that I have in fact made a case, to which you chose not to even try to respond, and instead make another unsubstantiated assertion as to what I have and have not said.
I’m not sure what part of this you find hard to understand. The Democrats did not do anything. They did not refuse to hold hearings, or refuse to allow this nomination to come to a vote. They did not invent a rule that a SCOTUS seat should not be filled during an election year. The Democrats do not have “similar” reasonings to the one given by the Republicans, the Democrats are pointing to the reasonings that were given by the Republicans, and pointing out that they are not being consistent.
Once again, all they have done is point out the hypocrisy of the Republicans in this matter. That is the only action that they have taken. Pointing out that someone else is not living up to a standard that they themselves have set is not hypocrisy.
Since you chose not to respond to it, I will assume that in the Monopoly analogy, you would in fact accuse your opponent of hypocrisy and bullshit when they ask that you both play by the same rules.
The only argument that you have had to offer is that it is in fact hypocrisy and bullshit to point out that someone is not following a standard that they have themselves set, and that is a weak assertion that is simply farcical.
Anyway, I’m going to leave this here, as you seem very devoted to the idea of finding fault in the Democrats for anything they do, so there is very little chance of this being a productive discussion. I’m certainly not going to convince you that your accusations are baseless, and you have utterly failed to convince anyone that they have merit.
Which I have done, multiple times (see below).
I have tried to explain it, but you just don’t get it. I think you can’t get past the fact that I do not agree that any standard was set. If a legitimate one had been set, you might be on to something. So be it. We will never agree.
No, they invented one that a seat shouldn’t be filled this close to an election. Same fucking thing.
I could respond by saying that you seem very devoted to the idea of never finding fault in the Democrats. I could say it, but I would never do that, because I have no idea if you feel this way. But here, you are making an unfounded assumption. Yes, I do criticize Democrats. I seem to be the only liberal on the board who will do so, and I never get that. They are not perfect, and I will point things out for discussion when I think it is appropriate.
Finally, something we can agree on.
See, this is the part that of your claim that is counterfactual. They did not invent any such claim. They simply stated that the Republicans had made such a claim, and asked if they would hold themselves to the same standard.
The idea that the Democrats made up or invented this claim is entirely false, and is in opposition to the facts of what actually transpired.
And that is where your argument fails, in that the Republicans did in fact set and enforce such a standard. Your argument would have merit if they had in fact held hearings and a vote on Garland, but they did not.
It may not be a legitimate standard, and I will agree with you that it is not, but it was a standard that they created, justified their own actions with, that they then refused to abide by.
No, this is another thing that is not true. There are plenty of liberals on this board who criticize Democrats. It’s just that here you are, calling the Democrats hypocrites and bullshitters solely for pointing out the hypocrisy of the Republicans. You are making up a reason, counter to the facts, to criticize Democrats.
I note that you do not answer the Monopoly analogy. I can only assume it is because you realize that your answer will either point out how farcical your viewpoint is, or it will undercut it entirely.
So, I ask a simple question, is it really hypocrisy to ask that both sides play by the same rules?
Sorry, only read the last 2 posts in the thread. Seemed enough, considering the topic. I been trying to get back to mildly annoyed ever since the impeachment. It’s been mostly seething deep-seated rage for me ever since. These people® are just vile scum.
I wonder if the light-bulb went on over McConnell’s head before or after the election. Now they finally have the opportunity to really go for what they’ve been aiming at for the past 40 years.
A: “Apply the same rules to your nominee that you applied to my nominee”
B: “Hypocrite!”
This is a stupid argument.
Hi, welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board! I encourage you to get to know board culture. </sarcasm>
Because while this place DEFINITELY leans left, the idea that it is wholly supportive of the Democrats is ludicrous.
Biden: “The only court packing going on right now, is going on with Republicans packing the court now,” Biden said to reporters on Saturday. “It is not constitutional what they are doing.”
Bullshit.
Biden “clarification”: “The fact check sought a clarification from the Biden campaign, which admitted that the nomination process was not strictly against the Constitution, but that it was against the spirit and intent of the founding document.”
This is what McConnell said during the Garland nomination. Clearly the Biden campaign is making up a rule that it’s too close to an election, the people should get their say.
As for the Monoply analogy, when I first read it, you mentioned Free Parking and a “house”. I didn’t remember being able to build houses on Free Parking, and basically just asked myself, WTF is he talking about, thought it ridiculous, so didn’t reply. I just went back and read it again, and realized you meant the house where the game is being played.
Okay, say the owner of the house is the Republican. He makes up a bullshit rule, the other guy (Democrat) complains. So far, so good. Bullshit Republican rule followed by Democratic complaints. Then the Democrat lands on Free Parking. He decides to use the same bullshit rule. But to me, you are still using a bullshit rule to benefit yourself, just the way the Republican did (and Biden, as shown above). I think it is hypocritical.
But I never said that. I said it “seems” liberals never criticize Democrats. Been here for 20+ years. Of course I know they do. But as you say, it leans left, to the point of tilting over, IMO.
Ah, yes, those are certainly not the words you said. You are just the lone liberal voice on this highly liberal board that is critical of the Democrats.
After your edit, I’ll leave it there.
I feel like Carl Sagan, on people imitating him about “billions and billions.” - I never said it.
Exactly. That is why they are using their own words against, them, just as Lindsey Graham invited them to do.
You contradict yourself, as you just admitted that they didn’t make up the rule, but instead reminded Republicans of the rule that they themselves had made and implemented.
There is also the fact that, they are different scenarios, in that Garland was told that he would get no hearings 8+ months before the election, while Barret was confirmed after a substantial portion of the voting public had already cast their ballots.
I see. So you say that you are pretty careless in your reading, and miss quite a bit, and if you don’t understand it, you write it off as ridiculous, rather than examine it to see if it was a misunderstanding on your part.
Okay, so you believe that asking someone to play by the same rules is hypocrisy. I will take note of that, and keep that in consideration for interpreting your future posts.
Basically, all this was, was an exercise in the Republicans declaring that the SCOTUS is now a political organ of the Republican party. Yet your only criticism is of those who called them out for their hypocrisy.
To be fair, he has admitted to being fairly unperceptive of what others have to say. It could very well seem to him that he is is the only one who criticizes democrats, if he doesn’t bother to pay attention to the times when others do.
Neither Biden nor his clarifiers mentioned McConnell. They made statements for themselves, hoping to get across that the idea that nominating Barrett was wrong for a bullshit reason. Using their own language, and not saying Biden said what he did in response to McConnell. That was the key part, and you missed it.
About Monopoly, you are wrong yet again with your foolish assumptions. I read it and truly didn’t think you or Bricker remembered the rules of the game. Why would I bother responding? But then you brought it up, so I went back as I said to re-read it. And then, and this is the key part, I fully explained this to you, and yet you still have a problem with it. Further, do you not see how ridiculous it is for you to say that I admit to being careless and miss quite a bit, when I only admitted to not understanding one paragraph you wrote? God only knows what you will make up about me next.
Well, I see that you are yet again saying foolish things about me, as I have admitted to nothing of the kind. 
Nice discussion. Go find someone else to invent things about, because I am done with you.
I’m not sure what you are annoyed about, or whom the “vile scum” are. But if you are for Biden, your annoyance level is very like to dissipate quite a bit come election day.