Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dead

[WuDrWu]

Yep. Lock up that Florida vote.

In the TINY bit of research I've done, I'm not as convinced she'd be the Constitutional Conservative judge I am hoping for.....BUT I am neither informed enough or smart enough to debate that. I want the best person for the court that wants to be on the court.

[Shockm]

This is the type of thing I find troubling, and a microcosm of what is wrong with politics. I'm not satisfied that having a Democrat in the White House in 2016 is a satisfactory excuse to have a double standard. He shirked his Constitutional duty in 2016.

History has not had a problem with election year nominations, regardless of who occupied the Senate or White House. So I don't see an issue with Trump making a nomination or for the Senate to vote on it. But McConnell was wrong in 2016 and he should admit that, rather than give some silly justification that wouldn't pass muster on an elementary school playground.

You’re not the only one to be disillusioned by Washington DC politics. But do you see what will happen if Biden wins the election and the Democrats win the majority in the Senate?

it will be worse than you can imagine for your kids and grandkids or future grandkids. They are already talking about changing the courts and Congress for a generation or more (by packing the Supreme Court with several more ultra liberal Democrat judges, and add 4 more Democrat Senators by granting Peurto RICO, and Washington DC statehood. Those areas are more liberal than New York and we could have several more AOC’s in the Senate (4) and House(at least a couple). You may think I’m crazy when I say that Venezuela could be a possibility but it could. In addition to Socialism, Religious Freedom could be more at risk.

[WstateU]

[WstateU]

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

In the TINY bit of research I've done, I'm not as convinced she'd be the Constitutional Conservative judge I am hoping for.....BUT I am neither informed enough or smart enough to debate that. I want the best person for the court that wants to be on the court.

I agree. I kind of think Barrett is the top choice. Trump reportedly met with her today. She has the experience and started as a clerk for Scalia. She would be my choice. She's a true conservative and pro-life. Lagoa (Cuban) is very highly thought of but spent a lot of time as a legal scholar rather than on the bench. She would help with Florida for sure. I think she also tends to be more moderately conservative which might help with confirmation (although probably not).

[wufan]

GOP are saying they have the vote. If they get this through, but loose the Senate and Presidency, we will see a dramatic radical agenda from the Dems. If they don’t get this through, but loose, the radical agenda will be much slower.

[Shockm]

I think that the actual confirmation will happen after the election. The committee work will happen before.

[ShockerPrez]

I think that the actual confirmation will happen after the election. The committee work will happen before.

Honestly, if you wanted to see leftists head explode, you would want Biden to win, then after the election, Trump and the Senate push through their nomination.

HOLY ****!! That would be pretty damn entertaining. Then the country would fall apart, but that would be funny....

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

GOP are saying they have the vote. If they get this through, but loose the Senate and Presidency, we will see a dramatic radical agenda from the Dems. If they don’t get this through, but loose, the radical agenda will be much slower.

The Dems are going to push their radical agenda regardless of what happens with the latest confirmation. They will stop at nothing and the SCOTUS situation really changes nothing. Even more reason for the President and Senate to continue to push forward with their plans.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

Romney now saying he supports proceeding with a vote.

[ShockingButTrue]

Stinky Fingers says the public "shouldn't have a right to know" who he would nominate.

They've. Learned. Nothing. And Trump's the one who's a criminal, eh?

crybaby.jpg

[ShockerPrez]

The Dems are going to push their radical agenda regardless of what happens with the latest confirmation. They will stop at nothing and the SCOTUS situation really changes nothing. Even more reason for the President and Senate to continue to push forward with their plans.

Yes, the rules are not being broken by the GOP going forward. The Dems citing decorum or anything else in that light is laughable, just based on the circus that was Brett Kavanaugh, and should be dismissed on it's face.

Also, if the GOP pushes this through, then it takes the issue off the ballot and may, in fact, de-energize any momentum for the Dems going into the election they otherwise might have had.

There is zero reason not to go forward, other than snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, which the GOP does all to often.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

Stinky Fingers says the public "shouldn't have a right to know" who he would nominate.

They've. Learned. Nothing. And Trump's the one who's a criminal, eh?

crybaby.jpg

No different than the rest of his campaign. No real plans or solutions to the "problems". Just, "trust me, I am going to do great things so vote for me".

[ShockingButTrue]

No different than the rest of his campaign. No real plans or solutions to the "problems". Just, "trust me, I am going to do great things so vote for me".

Then the old goat has the pomposity to say his President "never wants to talk about the issue at hand." Only his (bidens) voters would agree with that, and maybe not all of them even.

But that's alright because they can discuss many things when the first debate takes place next Tuesday.

[shockfan89_]

This is the type of thing I find troubling, and a microcosm of what is wrong with politics. I'm not satisfied that having a Democrat in the White House in 2016 is a satisfactory excuse to have a double standard. He shirked his Constitutional duty in 2016.

History has not had a problem with election year nominations, regardless of who occupied the Senate or White House. So I don't see an issue with Trump making a nomination or for the Senate to vote on it. But McConnell was wrong in 2016 and he should admit that, rather than give some silly justification that wouldn't pass muster on an elementary school playground.

I read that Ted Cruz addressed this recently. I have not independently done the research to verify this, but Ted Cruz usually has his facts straight before he speaks.

This has happened 29 times in the history of our nation.

19 times the Presidency and the Senate were controlled by the same party and 17 of the 19 were confirmed during an election year.

10 times the Presidency and the Senate were controlled by opposing parties and only 2 of the 10 were confirmed during an election year.

If that information is accurate, the Republicans were historically correct not to take up the Obama nominee in 2016, and Republicans are also historically correct to push Trump's nominee through in 2020.