CDZ How does replacing Kennedy help the GOP in November?

[BULLDOG]

You can bet Trump has a litmus test for whoever he picks. I suspect that anyone who doesn't pledge allegiance to Trump, and to make drastic changes to Roe V Wade, religious exceptions to existing laws, and god knows what else will never get his nomination.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Fingers crossed, posting this in the CDZ, hoping for a calm and interesting conversation.

Watching a few interviews after Kennedy's announcement yesterday, the conservative pundit guests, on top of obviously being happy about the chance to nominate a full-on conservative replacement, all looked giddy about what this all does for their prospects in November 2018.

With the country so divided on abortion, I'm not sure how conservatives thinks this helps them in November. One guy alluded to the fact that it would make it tougher on Dem candidates, but didn't get specific.

So let's say a full-on (and most likely anti-Roe vs. Wade) justice is placed before the November elections. How, exactly, does that help the GOP's chances?
.

/——/ The base hear Piglosi’s threat to take back the tax cut and Maxine Water’s promise to impeach the president if they take back the house. That will motivate them to turn out.

 

[DOTR]

/----/ They see the Progs attack on the president and understand that the USSC is the final say on the direction of the country. Yes we win on 5-4 decisions but it's razor thin. This will motivate the base to get out the vote.

Actually, I think you'll find Roberts will turn into a "moderate" when he realizes the radical implications of what the right wing wants to do.

There's are reason why the GOP has appointed 9 Justices to SCOTUS since Roe and Roe v. Wade is still there.

And that’s why we elected Donald Trump.

 

[SeaGal]

Our Country's partisans are gross and delusional. Judges arent and were never supposed to be better or worse based on their partisan political views, they're supposed to simply be objective and interpret the Laws as written.

When we say we want a "liberal" or a "conservative" judge, we outright admit that we dont respect the objective rule of law.

When I hear that said I don't think Democrat or Republican, though they may be members of one of those parties. Liberal or conservative in the case of SCJ's refers to their views on interpreting the Constitution/Law, whether it is 'flexible' therefore amendable/updated by the court (liberal view), or whether the Constitution is the standard against which all challenged law be measured (conservative view), imho. The liberal view would legislate law/enact policy (or weigh international law) from the bench, the conservative view would interpret law for what it says. That's the theory - nothing's quite that black and white - as each can take the opposite view on occasion.

To respond to Mac's question - I think it's more about behavior in the public arena. If the Left's leadership starts foaming at the mouth and subjects the SC nominee to the same shameful treatment they subjected Bork and Thomas to - it will put Dems running for re-election in the difficult position of taking a public stand either for or against the party line.

Obama's two picks, Sotomayor (a poor choice for objectivity, imo) and Kagan (dubious objectivity based on recent union comments), for the SC - both received some Republican votes. Let's see how many Dems vote for Trumps pick.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Fingers crossed, posting this in the CDZ, hoping for a calm and interesting conversation.

Watching a few interviews after Kennedy's announcement yesterday, the conservative pundit guests, on top of obviously being happy about the chance to nominate a full-on conservative replacement, all looked giddy about what this all does for their prospects in November 2018.

With the country so divided on abortion, I'm not sure how conservatives thinks this helps them in November. One guy alluded to the fact that it would make it tougher on Dem candidates, but didn't get specific.

So let's say a full-on (and most likely anti-Roe vs. Wade) justice is placed before the November elections. How, exactly, does that help the GOP's chances?
.

I watched some as well, on both Fox and CNN.
Fox was all giddy and smiles, and how this could be the best thing in America for the next 20 years.
CNN was in full swing.... reversal of gay rights, reversal of Affirmative Action, men getting away with rape and sexual harassment, the end of unions....they were going bat-shit crazy.

What I predict is this will just further divide the partisan clowns everywhere.

 

[mudwhistle]

Fingers crossed, posting this in the CDZ, hoping for a calm and interesting conversation.

Watching a few interviews after Kennedy's announcement yesterday, the conservative pundit guests, on top of obviously being happy about the chance to nominate a full-on conservative replacement, all looked giddy about what this all does for their prospects in November 2018.

With the country so divided on abortion, I'm not sure how conservatives thinks this helps them in November. One guy alluded to the fact that it would make it tougher on Dem candidates, but didn't get specific.

So let's say a full-on (and most likely anti-Roe vs. Wade) justice is placed before the November elections. How, exactly, does that help the GOP's chances?
.

Abortion is a fake Democrat issue.
This is about protecting our constitutional rights.
Gun ownership and freedom of religion come to mind.

 

[Votto]

Fingers crossed, posting this in the CDZ, hoping for a calm and interesting conversation.

Watching a few interviews after Kennedy's announcement yesterday, the conservative pundit guests, on top of obviously being happy about the chance to nominate a full-on conservative replacement, all looked giddy about what this all does for their prospects in November 2018.

With the country so divided on abortion, I'm not sure how conservatives thinks this helps them in November. One guy alluded to the fact that it would make it tougher on Dem candidates, but didn't get specific.

So let's say a full-on (and most likely anti-Roe vs. Wade) justice is placed before the November elections. How, exactly, does that help the GOP's chances?
.

By all means, let's ignore doing the right thing regarding abortion and just worry about votes.

After all, they are not really people, right?

The Pope just came out and called Progressives Nazis because of their stance on abortion. Do we end the slaughter or worry about votes and continue to vote for such people?

 

[Mac1958]

Abortion is a fake Democrat issue.

By all means, let's ignore doing the right thing regarding abortion and just worry about votes.

I guess we'll find out soon enough.
.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Abortion is a fake Democrat issue.

I agree.
Abortion is not going to go back to being illegal nationally ever again.
It's not going to happen.
But that has nothing to do with whether it will be, yet again, a hot button issue.

It's the same with "rape culture".
There is no rape culture in America, utter nonsense.
But that doesn't stop the anti-male feminist from foaming at the mouth over it.

 

[Pete7469]

It helps The Constitution for years to come. November is only this year. I doubt it helps

or hurts "conservatives" in November. The Supreme Court's function is about adhering

to

the Constitution, and the Founding Fathers' intent. It is supposed to be apolitical.

Right, except the left hates the COTUS as it's written. They look to undermine it most every case.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It helps The Constitution for years to come. November is only this year. I doubt it helps

or hurts "conservatives" in November. The Supreme Court's function is about adhering

to

the Constitution, and the Founding Fathers' intent. It is supposed to be apolitical.

Right, except the left hates the COTUS as it's written. They look to undermine it most every case.

Hate is a strong word.
There are those that believe the constitution is antiquated and we need to redo it. And in some applications that might even be true. But there is NO ONE in government that I would trust today to come within 100 yards of it with their corrupt grubby fingers.

 

[Some Guy]

Perhaps it helps in that they could use it as a way of saying "we're winning and here's why, new supreme court justice, but we need you to vote to keep winning" or something like that. It could be just as likely that it makes the republican base complacent.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Fingers crossed, posting this in the CDZ, hoping for a calm and interesting conversation.

Watching a few interviews after Kennedy's announcement yesterday, the conservative pundit guests, on top of obviously being happy about the chance to nominate a full-on conservative replacement, all looked giddy about what this all does for their prospects in November 2018.

With the country so divided on abortion, I'm not sure how conservatives thinks this helps them in November. One guy alluded to the fact that it would make it tougher on Dem candidates, but didn't get specific.

So let's say a full-on (and most likely anti-Roe vs. Wade) justice is placed before the November elections. How, exactly, does that help the GOP's chances?
.

Abortion is a fake Democrat issue.
This is about protecting our constitutional rights.
Gun ownership and freedom of religion come to mind.

We be a-clinging to our God, and our guns.

 

[eagle1462010]

Both sides need voters to show up next election. Both sides will use this as a major issue and rightfully so if they don't push one through by October.

Dems are attempting to enrage their base......get them fired up so they will show up for the elections. It will do the same to many conservatives who want a better selection as well............It's a toss up.

I believe we will have a new Justice in October though.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Both sides need voters to show up next election. Both sides will use this as a major issue and rightfully so if they don't push one through by October.

Dems are attempting to enrage their base......get them fired up so they will show up for the elections. It will do the same to many conservatives who want a better selection as well............It's a toss up.

I believe we will have a new Justice in October though.

I do as well, I hope it's the right choice.

 

[DOTR]

Our Country's partisans are gross and delusional. Judges arent and were never supposed to be better or worse based on their partisan political views, they're supposed to simply be objective and interpret the Laws as written.

When we say we want a "liberal" or a "conservative" judge, we outright admit that we dont respect the objective rule of law.

When I hear that said I don't think Democrat or Republican, though they may be members of one of those parties. Liberal or conservative in the case of SCJ's refers to their views on interpreting the Constitution/Law, whether it is 'flexible' therefore amendable/updated by the court (liberal view), or whether the Constitution is the standard against which all challenged law be measured (conservative view), imho. The liberal view would legislate law/enact policy (or weigh international law) from the bench, the conservative view would interpret law for what it says. That's the theory - nothing's quite that black and white - as each can take the opposite view on occasion.

To respond to Mac's question - I think it's more about behavior in the public arena. If the Left's leadership starts foaming at the mouth and subjects the SC nominee to the same shameful treatment they subjected Bork and Thomas to - it will put Dems running for re-election in the difficult position of taking a public stand either for or against the party line.

Obama's two picks, Sotomayor (a poor choice for objectivity, imo) and Kagan (dubious objectivity based on recent union comments), for the SC - both received some Republican votes. Let's see how many Dems vote for Trumps pick.

I actually think he will get one or two. Public opinion is obviously on Trumps side, this pick throws into a stark lightcdhats at strake. A few Senators up for re-election will not risk it in hopes of living to fight another day.

 

[candycorn]

All trump is about is “sticking it” to someone…be it illegal aliens, the Canadians, Mexicans, Democrats, people who don’t agree with his prevailing position regardless of Party….

Appointing a Supreme Court justice is just another way to “stick it” to someone.

 

[eagle1462010]

All trump is about is “sticking it” to someone…be it illegal aliens, the Canadians, Mexicans, Democrats, people who don’t agree with his prevailing position regardless of Party….

Appointing a Supreme Court justice is just another way to “stick it” to someone.

And you don't see it as familiar to your own party...............LOL

 

[candycorn]

All trump is about is “sticking it” to someone…be it illegal aliens, the Canadians, Mexicans, Democrats, people who don’t agree with his prevailing position regardless of Party….

Appointing a Supreme Court justice is just another way to “stick it” to someone.

And you don't see it as familiar to your own party...............LOL

I don’t see the Dems actively working to punish our allies economically.

 

[eagle1462010]

All trump is about is “sticking it” to someone…be it illegal aliens, the Canadians, Mexicans, Democrats, people who don’t agree with his prevailing position regardless of Party….

Appointing a Supreme Court justice is just another way to “stick it” to someone.

And you don't see it as familiar to your own party...............LOL

I don’t see the Dems actively working to punish our allies economically.

Punish..............telling them to take off their protectionism under the false term Free Trade...........He's calling them out on it and I agree. If they are true allies then they shouldn't be trying to screw us on Trade.

It's long passed time we called them on this. And told the WTO to take a flying hike..............