A Ginsburg replacement is 'worth the White House and Senate'

whitehall

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
46,747
Reaction score
10,549
Points
2,040
Location
Western Va.
RBG obituary "Ginsberg was an advocate of progressive causes". What's wrong with those words? We don't want a Justice who is an advocate based on emotion or political expediency, we want a Justice who bases his/her opinions on the Constitution.
 

ColonelAngus

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
26,575
Reaction score
12,291
Points
1,100
RBG obituary "Ginsberg was an advocate of progressive causes". What's wrong with those words? We don't want a Justice who is an advocate based on emotion or political expediency, we want a Justice who bases his/her opinions on the Constitution.
Progessives go against the Constitution. Its what they do by definition.

They are supposed to uphold the Constitution.

If the Court was stacked 9-0 Liberal.....goodbye 2A . We all know it....so what does that tell you?
 

Sandy Shanks

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2018
Messages
1,387
Reaction score
416
Points
210
Assuming that a replacement for Ginsburg has not been confirmed by November 3, and further assuming that Trump loses the election, should a defeated President be allowed to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court?

It should be pointed out, both assumptions are extremely likely. Trump is the least popular President in modern American history.

There is a corollary to the question. Should the defeated party in the Senate be allowed to confirm a Supreme Court judge?

Based on limited researched, I have been unable to find those questions addressed. However, allow me to answer my own questions.

There is absolutely nothing in the past four years to suggest that Trump and Trump Republicans in the Senate will put the will of the American people first.

If Trump is defeated, if the GOP loses control of the Senate -- both likely, why else are Republicans in such a hurry -- and Trump Republicans confirm Ginsburg's replacement, the GOP is likely to lose power for at least a generation.
 

Mike473

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,941
Reaction score
627
Points
200
Assuming that a replacement for Ginsburg has not been confirmed by November 3, and further assuming that Trump loses the election, should a defeated President be allowed to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court?

It should be pointed out, both assumptions are extremely likely. Trump is the least popular President in modern American history.

There is a corollary to the question. Should the defeated party in the Senate be allowed to confirm a Supreme Court judge?

Based on limited researched, I have been unable to find those questions addressed. However, allow me to answer my own questions.

There is absolutely nothing in the past four years to suggest that Trump and Trump Republicans in the Senate will put the will of the American people first.

If Trump is defeated, if the GOP loses control of the Senate -- both likely, why else are Republicans in such a hurry -- and Trump Republicans confirm Ginsburg's replacement, the GOP is likely to lose power for at least a generation.
There is never a sure thing when it comes to winning an election. Who knows how the next couple decades turn out. What is a sure thing is a SC confirmation before the election if the GOP can maintain a back bone. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Trump needs to take this chance now, rather than playing games in hopes of winning reelection and holding the senate. He has both now. No need to be greedy. Fill the seat now. Let the election play out as it will.
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
611
Reaction score
608
Points
493
Location
Arizona
RBG obituary "Ginsberg was an advocate of progressive causes". What's wrong with those words? We don't want a Justice who is an advocate based on emotion or political expediency, we want a Justice who bases his/her opinions on the Constitution.
Progessives go against the Constitution. Its what they do by definition.

They are supposed to uphold the Constitution.

If the Court was stacked 9-0 Liberal.....goodbye 2A . We all know it....so what does that tell you?
Not just the Second Amendment, goodbye the entire Bill of Rights.
 

Fang

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
7,148
Reaction score
2,836
Points
350
Agreed. If pushing through a SCOTUS pick costs Trump the election it would be worth it. But I’m not so sure it would cost him the election. Sleepy Joe and Kamala is about the worst ticket the Dems could have come up with. Plus, regardless of what Dems say, it’s the President‘s job to fill the vacancy.
 
OP
Billy_Kinetta

Billy_Kinetta

Paladin of the Lost Hour
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
50,308
Reaction score
17,856
Points
2,280
Assuming that a replacement for Ginsburg has not been confirmed by November 3, and further assuming that Trump loses the election, should a defeated President be allowed to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court?

It should be pointed out, both assumptions are extremely likely. Trump is the least popular President in modern American history.

There is a corollary to the question. Should the defeated party in the Senate be allowed to confirm a Supreme Court judge?

Based on limited researched, I have been unable to find those questions addressed. However, allow me to answer my own questions.

There is absolutely nothing in the past four years to suggest that Trump and Trump Republicans in the Senate will put the will of the American people first.

If Trump is defeated, if the GOP loses control of the Senate -- both likely, why else are Republicans in such a hurry -- and Trump Republicans confirm Ginsburg's replacement, the GOP is likely to lose power for at least a generation.
Your assumption of his popularity is based upon evidence that is tenuous at best.

Should he lose (unlikely in my book), he is still president until noon on January 20, 2021. He will replace Ginsberg in any event.

Should the Democrats gain the Senate (also unlikely), the current majority serves until the Christmas recess. They will replace Ginsberg in any event.

With said replacement, it is far more likely that it is you people who will lose power for at least a generation.
 

BluesLegend

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
48,799
Reaction score
14,689
Points
2,630
Location
Trump's Army
Dem's haven't done us one damn favor in the past 4 years so the hell with them, fill the seat.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
17,304
Reaction score
12,902
Points
2,415
Assuming that a replacement for Ginsburg has not been confirmed by November 3, and further assuming that Trump loses the election, should a defeated President be allowed to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court?

It should be pointed out, both assumptions are extremely likely. Trump is the least popular President in modern American history.

There is a corollary to the question. Should the defeated party in the Senate be allowed to confirm a Supreme Court judge?

Based on limited researched, I have been unable to find those questions addressed. However, allow me to answer my own questions.

There is absolutely nothing in the past four years to suggest that Trump and Trump Republicans in the Senate will put the will of the American people first.

If Trump is defeated, if the GOP loses control of the Senate -- both likely, why else are Republicans in such a hurry -- and Trump Republicans confirm Ginsburg's replacement, the GOP is likely to lose power for at least a generation.
There is absolutely nothing in the past four years to suggest that Trump and Trump Republicans in the Senate will put the will of the American people first.

Well than, they are about to make your day because 2/3 of Americans want GInsberg replaced prior to the election, which is exactly what Trump and the Republicans are about to do.
 

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
48,576
Reaction score
6,970
Points
1,860
We are at war. Sure...it's currently a cold war...but a war none the less. The Dems have launched their offensive with the universal mail-in voting fiasco. This totally blunts that attack. A Conservative Constitutional Supreme Court will not hand the election to the Dems.

That leaves them high and dry. Trump will be the President. Conservatives will defend their Senators that fought to achieve a conservative court...and that will help down-ballot races.

On the other side...dems are already pissed off and have been since 2016. The only effect on them will demoralization. It takes the Supreme Court off the table. They lose again, and Trump wins again.

KAG.
Exactly. The GOP have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain.

The time for niceties ended when Obama and the Democrats spied on the Trump campaign, acused him of being a Russian agent, called him a Nazi, and then staged a phony impeachment.

They tried to destroy Brett Kavanaugh., Crazy Nanshee tearing up the State of the Union address on TV, Biden shamelessly enriching his son and brother....the list is endless.

It is time we send Crazy Nanshee, AOC and her squad of scumbag commies, Cryin' Chuck Schumer, Comrade deBlasio, Governor Nuisance, Governer Half Whitmer, Little Mikey Bloomberg, Governer Cuomo, the entire MSM, Antifa, BLM, and the rest of these America hating shitbirds a clear message - YOUR DAYS ARE NUMBERED.

This ain't your Daddy's Democrat party, this is a party that hates America and Americans.
The GOP have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain.
Wrong, you can't trust a GOP, amoral killers that go for the jugular. Fight fire with fire, put 2 more members on the Supreme Court.
 

DGS49

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
9,509
Reaction score
3,708
Points
360
Location
Pittsburgh
The only conceivable votes that Trump will lose if he succeeds in replacing RBG with a Conservative are the votes of a few Independents who think he should wait until after the election, in the interest of "fairness." OTOH, I don't see him gaining any votes if he succeeds. People who support him will only support him more fervently.
 

Rocko

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
17,404
Reaction score
4,381
Points
280
Location
NY
Romney and Murkowski are in the way
 

Disir

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
22,753
Reaction score
5,131
Points
290
It's not.

Stop politicizing the courts. People need to cut the crap and lets get on with the show. We need to get on with nominee ASAP. I absolutely do not believe that the rest of us need to stop so that the Democratic Party can use this in an attempt to win. Nobody gives a damn. Nobody wants to listen to their attempts to dig a bunch of useless shit up.
 

BluesLegend

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
48,799
Reaction score
14,689
Points
2,630
Location
Trump's Army
Romney and Murkowski are in the way
Romney will fold, also likely Murkowski. Lindsey Graham folded yesterday. The nominee is the KEY and this morning Trump is saying he's very likely to nominate a woman and floated a couple at the top of his list. If Trump nominates a woman it's over, none of these RINO hacks can oppose voting on a woman nominee.
 

Rocko

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
17,404
Reaction score
4,381
Points
280
Location
NY
Romney and Murkowski are in the way
Romney will fold, also likely Murkowski. Lindsey Graham folded yesterday. The nominee is the KEY and this morning Trump is saying he's very likely to nominate a woman and floated a couple at the top of his list. If Trump nominates a woman it's over, none of these RINO hacks can oppose voting on a woman nominee.
I’m not sure. If Romney, Colins, and Murkowski don’t fold then it won’t happen until after the election
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
100,280
Reaction score
34,292
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Assuming that a replacement for Ginsburg has not been confirmed by November 3, and further assuming that Trump loses the election, should a defeated President be allowed to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court?

It should be pointed out, both assumptions are extremely likely. Trump is the least popular President in modern American history.

There is a corollary to the question. Should the defeated party in the Senate be allowed to confirm a Supreme Court judge?

Based on limited researched, I have been unable to find those questions addressed. However, allow me to answer my own questions.

There is absolutely nothing in the past four years to suggest that Trump and Trump Republicans in the Senate will put the will of the American people first.

If Trump is defeated, if the GOP loses control of the Senate -- both likely, why else are Republicans in such a hurry -- and Trump Republicans confirm Ginsburg's replacement, the GOP is likely to lose power for at least a generation.
Your assumption of his popularity is based upon evidence that is tenuous at best.

Should he lose (unlikely in my book), he is still president until noon on January 20, 2021. He will replace Ginsberg in any event.

Should the Democrats gain the Senate (also unlikely), the current majority serves until the Christmas recess. They will replace Ginsberg in any event.

With said replacement, it is far more likely that it is you people who will lose power for at least a generation.


An opportunity that cannot and should not be missed!
 
OP
Billy_Kinetta

Billy_Kinetta

Paladin of the Lost Hour
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
50,308
Reaction score
17,856
Points
2,280
Romney and Murkowski are in the way
Romney will fold, also likely Murkowski. Lindsey Graham folded yesterday. The nominee is the KEY and this morning Trump is saying he's very likely to nominate a woman and floated a couple at the top of his list. If Trump nominates a woman it's over, none of these RINO hacks can oppose voting on a woman nominee.
I’m not sure. If Romney, Colins, and Murkowski don’t fold then it won’t happen until after the election
They could at most create a tie that Pence would break.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top