Ruth Bader Ginsburg RIP

They'll refuse to confirm before the election. Once the election is over they'll confirm someone, guaranteed. They'll either be out of a job or secure for 2-4-6 years and people forget. No worries then.

If you're a woman, gay, lesbian, queer, an immigrant, whatever, you stand to lose big.

I hope all the people who "protest voted" for Trump in 2016 or those who voted for Jill whatsherface are happy with the conservative majority we'll have on the court for 20-30 years.

baking in Alaska wrote:

Murkowski says she will vote NO on a replacement before the next president assumes office. Romney will do the same. A few more senators will join them. Trump will not get another justice seated.

The reason is McConnell in 2016 when he refused to consider Merrick Garland: "That was too close to an election, and that the people needed to decide. That the closer you get to an election, that argument becomes even more important."

https://www.alaskapublic.org/2020/09/18/alaska-senator-murkowski-said-friday-she-would-not-vote-for-a-justice-ahead-of-election/

The only hope is 4 Republican Senators with a conscious.

You named Murkowski and Romney.

If Susan Collins loses, she may not go along on the lame duck session.

Need one more or Pence wound be the first VP to break a tie in a SCOTUS pick.

bad timing wrote:

“My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,” Ginsburg said.

A. Her wish isn’t relevant

B. Does re-elected Trump count as a new president?

If that was her wish, she should have retired under Obama. She gambled Hilary would be the one to replace her and lost. The best move for Trump would be to nominate a female to the court before the election. That way the dems have to bad mouth a female prior to the election (basically the reverse of the Kavanaugh charade).

joedirte wrote:

bad timing wrote:

“My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,” Ginsburg said.

A. Her wish isn’t relevant

B. Does re-elected Trump count as a new president?

If that was her wish, she should have retired under Obama. She gambled Hilary would be the one to replace her and lost. The best move for Trump would be to nominate a female to the court before the election. That way the dems have to bad mouth a female prior to the election (basically the reverse of the Kavanaugh charade).

They don't have to bad mouth the justice, they just have to bad mouth the GOP Senators that are going to sell their souls and confirm.

RIP RBG.

A great human being who was a wonderful supreme court justice and was tough as they come.

My prediction... I will be surprised if Mitch attempts to hold a vote before the election. I expect the republicans will look at this as an opportunity to get their base out to vote to keep trump in office. this will be their rallying cry. It may just save trump

masterbader wrote:

baking in Alaska wrote:

Several Republican Senators won't let it happen.

Brah, Jimmy Carter holds that title. Don't be obtuse.

lol, Carter sets the bar on character and does laps around trump in intelligence.

trollism wrote:

joedirte wrote:

If that was her wish, she should have retired under Obama. She gambled Hilary would be the one to replace her and lost. The best move for Trump would be to nominate a female to the court before the election. That way the dems have to bad mouth a female prior to the election (basically the reverse of the Kavanaugh charade).

They don't have to bad mouth the justice, they just have to bad mouth the GOP Senators that are going to sell their souls and confirm.

Lol. Never heard of such!

15_50 wrote:

RIP RBG.

A great human being who was a wonderful supreme court justice and was tough as they come.

My prediction... I will be surprised if Mitch attempts to hold a vote before the election. I expect the republicans will look at this as an opportunity to get their base out to vote to keep trump in office. this will be their rallying cry. It may just save trump

Much better to hold a vote in Dec. No need to rush...

douglas burke wrote:

First of all condolences to the Ginburg Family and Friends.

As for the Replacement, Ginsburg was voted on to the Supreme Court by a 96-3 Vote.

One way to Honor her is for President Trump to pick a replacement who will be voted in by a similar OVERWHELMING VOTE, By BOTH Parties, Think of a Replacement who has a chance to be voted in by a 100-0 Vote. Do NOT Replace her with someone who will squeek in by a 51-49 vote, A Replacement who gets in by a close vote, a replacement who gets in by an overwhelming vote (Meaning at least 90 Votes) keeps the Country United.

Mitch McConell already said he will go ahead with the replacement before the election.

I love this [sarcasm].

When Republicans have the opportunity to win big, it some how is right for them to compromise but when Democrats have the same opportunity, there is no call for moderation.

Obama and Senate Republicans: put in a hard-right, religious, Constitutional judge. It will be in your favor come election day.

Also, when is Clarence Thomas retiring...? All-star move would be for him to retire and give Trump #4 in the beginning of his second term. Remember Gizzburg and Thomas were buddy-buddy. I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas steps down soon.

baking in Alaska wrote:

The reason is McConnell in 2016 when he refused to consider Merrick Garland: "That was too close to an election, and that the people needed to decide. That the closer you get to an election, that argument becomes even more important."

McConnell was also against stimulus bills back in 2009 because they would inflate the deficit. has he cared at all about deficits since 2016? The guy has no core morals that we have ever seen. He will do what politically makes sense for him.

CorrectorII wrote:

Wonder if justice Trump will make the list

1, It makes no sense to put an 83 yr old woman on the court. How many years does she have left?

2. Trump actually hates her sister, and the feelings are mutual.

15_50 wrote:

My prediction... I will be surprised if Mitch attempts to hold a vote before the election.

That doesn’t mean the vote will be before the election.

It could be right after the election but before the year ends.

L L wrote:

15_50 wrote:

My prediction... I will be surprised if Mitch attempts to hold a vote before the election.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-supreme-court-nominee-vote-floor

My prediction is that he will be convinced to hold off.... truly it is a great opportunity for the repubs to further energize their base. I don't want trump to win but if they vote prior to the election they are not taking advantage of an opportunity.

They can always vote after the election...

L L wrote:

That doesn’t mean the vote will be before the election.

It could be right after the election but before the year ends.

well then my prediction will be correct

douglas burke wrote:

First of all condolences to the Ginburg Family and Friends.

As for the Replacement, Ginsburg was voted on to the Supreme Court by a 96-3 Vote.

One way to Honor her is for President Trump to pick a replacement who will be voted in by a similar OVERWHELMING VOTE, By BOTH Parties, Think of a Replacement who has a chance to be voted in by a 100-0 Vote. Do NOT Replace her with someone who will squeek in by a 51-49 vote, A Replacement who gets in by a close vote, a replacement who gets in by an overwhelming vote (Meaning at least 90 Votes) keeps the Country United.

Mitch McConell already said he will go ahead with the replacement before the election.

I can't believe you are so DUMB. In 2006 Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate in a UNANIMOUS vote to the tenth circuit court. Then when he was nominated for the Supreme Court the democrats went SCORCHED EARTH to oppose him because they oppose everything Trump does. He was confirmed with only a 54-45 vote. Trump could nominate Obama to the supreme court and the democrats would all still vote against it.

L L wrote:

That doesn’t mean the vote will be before the election.

It could be right after the election but before the year ends.

Well, McSally from Arizona would lose her seat at the end of November when AZ certifies their election. It is a special election because McSally was appointed and not elected. The winner of the seat complete the final few weeks of McCain's term, and sits for a six year term.

Meanwhile the presidential election would be certified. And with Trump losing McConnell will only have 52 senators to heard with two on record of denying him (Murkowski and Romney). I expect Collins to vote no as well, even if she loses in November, because she will try to make the best of a future consulting career. She does not want to be known as the vote that puts Roe v. Wade to death. In the consulting world she will want to appear as a centrist to help her employer maximize her political value.

fact checker 642572498 wrote:

In 2006 Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate in a UNANIMOUS vote to the tenth circuit court. Then when he was nominated for the Supreme Court the democrats went SCORCHED EARTH to oppose him because they oppose everything Trump does.

Merrick Garland.

Timmy Treadwell wrote:

I hope all the people who "protest voted" for Trump in 2016 or those who voted for Jill whatsherface are happy with the conservative majority we'll have on the court for 20-30 years.

Those people are some of the dumbest in the land. I’d personally place them at Trump supporter levels. Their low levels of logic, and comical moral absolutism, are astounding.