To Replace Ginsberg Before the Election, Or Hold Off Until After the Election?

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
38,518
Reaction score
14,790
Points
1,590
Location
Florida
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
So if trump declared winner night of the election democrats will concede?
If Impeached Trump wins the election and Republicans retain control of the Senate, then there's no reason not to hold confirmation hearings.
No reason to not hold them now.
There's already 2, likely 3 nay votes should they try that. Plus there's Graham, who's on record for saying the American people should decide in an upcoming election ... and he himself is up for re-election. Is he willing to gamble his seat to get Ginsburg's replacement in before the election?what about any one of the other nearly 2 dozen Republican Senators up for re-election in November. It would prolly only take one.
If the way Republicans need to win elections is to capitulate to the Democrats, they they've lost already. Full speed ahead!
They don't have to capitulate to anyone.
They can abide by what they said in 2016.
It's as simple as that.

You mean when that asshole Obama nominated a Supreme Court Justice in an election year?

There have been 29 times when a President nominated a Supreme Court Justice in an election year.

So what the fuck problem do your stupid uneducated Moon Bats have with Trump doing what all the other Presidents have done?

Too bad for you idiot Moon Bats that we have a Republican Senate that will confirm the appointee. If that shithead Obama Muslim would have had a Democrat controlled Senate then his asshole nominee would have been confirmed. But that didn't happen, did it?

Obama got his two stupid Commie dingbats confirmed. Mitch wasn't going to allow any more damage and thank god he did.
 

eddiew

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
10,047
Reaction score
2,821
Points
185
But he can easily say that, because the majority of voters, chose him to be President.

President Trump doesn't have that luxury of support...

The people in this country, by majority, chose someone else to be President....the electoral college got him there....

Obama won both.

:)
Notice how liberals carefully use such terms as "voters" and "The people in this country", rather than Americans (which would have to exclude millions of illegal alien voters).

And it is the electoral college that gives the power of the vote to the 50 STATES, not the population. Somebody doesn't like that ? Plenty of countries out there to move to. Bon Voyage!
America is the entire continent of north america and south america and central america. Perhaps you mean US citizens.

Oooo....A politician expressed the exact opposite opinion of that which he held just a few years ago.

There's something we don't see every day! :rolleyes-41:

Like Obama thinking he could nominate a Supreme Court Justice in an election year but Trump shouldn't?
And Obama had 10 months left This pos has 45 days
 

eddiew

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
10,047
Reaction score
2,821
Points
185
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
So if trump declared winner night of the election democrats will concede?
If Impeached Trump wins the election and Republicans retain control of the Senate, then there's no reason not to hold confirmation hearings.
Well he won and can make a pick
The American people should decide which president replaces Ginsburg.
They did. In 2016.
They did in 2012 too. In 2016, Republicans threw that notion out the window.
Here's an interesting fact for you. In 2016 Obama did nominate a justice for the supreme court. No one took that power away from him.

Here's another interesting fact. The Senate was also elected and they have the Constitutional power of "advice and consent." And guess what. They were elected by the people too ...
I never said otherwise.
Of course you did. You said they had to confirm Obama's nomination. Obama can only nominate. The Senate has the power to say thumbs up or down. That's what they did, thumbs down
Yes they wouldn't have a vote What scum Hoping they pay down the road
 

eddiew

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
10,047
Reaction score
2,821
Points
185
Graham is a low life pos and a kiss ass
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
38,518
Reaction score
14,790
Points
1,590
Location
Florida
But he can easily say that, because the majority of voters, chose him to be President.

President Trump doesn't have that luxury of support...

The people in this country, by majority, chose someone else to be President....the electoral college got him there....

Obama won both.

:)
Notice how liberals carefully use such terms as "voters" and "The people in this country", rather than Americans (which would have to exclude millions of illegal alien voters).

And it is the electoral college that gives the power of the vote to the 50 STATES, not the population. Somebody doesn't like that ? Plenty of countries out there to move to. Bon Voyage!
America is the entire continent of north america and south america and central america. Perhaps you mean US citizens.

Oooo....A politician expressed the exact opposite opinion of that which he held just a few years ago.

There's something we don't see every day! :rolleyes-41:

Like Obama thinking he could nominate a Supreme Court Justice in an election year but Trump shouldn't?
And Obama had 10 months left This pos has 45 days

Don't mean jackshit.

That worthless affirmative action Muslim got to appoint two idiots to the Supreme Court and the Republicans weren't about to let him appoint a third. God bless 'em.

If you stupid Moon Bats hadn't put up such shitty Senate bat shit crazy hate America candidates in 2014 you would have held the Senate and could have confirmed that asshole Obama's nominee.
 

eddiew

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
10,047
Reaction score
2,821
Points
185
But he can easily say that, because the majority of voters, chose him to be President.

President Trump doesn't have that luxury of support...

The people in this country, by majority, chose someone else to be President....the electoral college got him there....

Obama won both.

:)
Notice how liberals carefully use such terms as "voters" and "The people in this country", rather than Americans (which would have to exclude millions of illegal alien voters).

And it is the electoral college that gives the power of the vote to the 50 STATES, not the population. Somebody doesn't like that ? Plenty of countries out there to move to. Bon Voyage!
America is the entire continent of north america and south america and central america. Perhaps you mean US citizens.

Oooo....A politician expressed the exact opposite opinion of that which he held just a few years ago.

There's something we don't see every day! :rolleyes-41:

Like Obama thinking he could nominate a Supreme Court Justice in an election year but Trump shouldn't?
And Obama had 10 months left This pos has 45 days

Don't mean jackshit.

That worthless affirmative action Muslim got to appoint two idiots to the Supreme Court and the Republicans weren't about to let him appoint a third. God bless 'em.

If you stupid Moon Bats hadn't put up such shitty Senate bat shit crazy hate America candidates in 2014 you would have held the Senate and could have confirmed that asshole Obama's nominee.
Here Flash
Jumpin' Jack Flash
The Rolling Stones

I was born in a cross-fire hurricane
And I howled at the morning driving rain
But it's all right now, in fact, it's a gas
But it's all right. I'm Jumpin' Jack Flash
It's a gas, gas, gas
I was raised by a toothless, bearded hag,
I was schooled with a strap right across my back
But it's all right now, in fact, it's a gas
But it's all right, I'm Jumpin' Jack Flash
It's a gas, gas, gas
I was drowned, I was washed up and left for dead
I fell down to my feet and I saw they bled , yeah yeah
I frowned at the crumbs of a crust of bread
Yeah, yeah, yeah
I was crowned with a spike right through my head
But it's all right…





Source: LyricFind
 

Mike473

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,939
Reaction score
627
Points
200
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
Don't forget what Leningrad Lindsey said.

Zoom to :20 seconds, if you have the balls to watch this at all.

Republican hypocrisy at it's best.

Lindsey now supports going forward with nomination.

He has evolved on the issue as leaders sometimes do. I accepted that Hillary and Obama evolved over the years and respect Lindsey for doing so now.
 

BluesLegend

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
48,766
Reaction score
14,621
Points
2,560
Location
Trump's Army
Democrats have argued it BOTH ways. When a Dem was president they argued the confirmation should proceed even during an election year. When a Dem was not president they argued the confirmation should not proceed. Double talking flip flopping Dems have painted themselves into a corner.
 

saveliberty

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
57,751
Reaction score
9,447
Points
2,030
RBG was confirmed in 42 days. The shortest confirmation was 19. Currently the sitting president has the right to submit a name for approval. The Senate can then address the process as they see fit. Sorry, that is how it works.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
17,132
Reaction score
12,641
Points
2,415
Even if Biden were to win (perish the thought), Trump would still be POTUS for 3 more months and can select a justice before or after the election. I say do it immediately, to stop any leftist loon lower court decision already on the dockets.

Should be interesting to see Kamala Harris trying to knock down Trump's pick, like she outrageously did to Kavanaugh. Will give Trump and Pence lots of ammunition for the debates. :biggrin:
Kamala mopped the floor with both Kavanaugh AND Barr.


She made a fool of herself, and they were both confirmed you imbecile.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
17,132
Reaction score
12,641
Points
2,415
Trump needs to act immediately. To see the Democrats come unhinged like they did with Kavanaugh, just weeks before the election, will remind people of who they really are. This is a no brainer for Trump.
Lyin, cheatin, Moscow Mitch:

We have a new president
We have a corrupt con man president who's quickly become an autocrat.
You must like living in an autocracy.
(Look it up.)
LOL, how dare Trump and the Senate exercise their Constitutional powers! That's just undemocratic!!!!!

Um ... what ???
Blainey is getting hysterical.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: kaz

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
17,132
Reaction score
12,641
Points
2,415
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
So if trump declared winner night of the election democrats will concede?
If Impeached Trump wins the election and Republicans retain control of the Senate, then there's no reason not to hold confirmation hearings.
Well he won and can make a pick
The American people should decide which president replaces Ginsburg.
And they did .
They did with Obama too. That no longer matters according to the GOP. Now it should be left up to the American people. And if you try to force it against the will of the American people, then Democrats will be justified to stack the court next year should they win this election.
He did pick, and we picked the senate,, Hussain lost a lot of seats. Elections have consequences
This isn't about an election, numbnuts.
It's about the absolute corruption of Moscow Mitch and Leningrad Lindsey, who, like Trump, are so comfortable with being unaccountable for what they say and do.
And you poor, mindless, drooling fools let them get away with it.
Nothing corrupt about following the process laid out in the Constitution, you raving lunatic.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
17,132
Reaction score
12,641
Points
2,415
Let's comply with Chuckie's wishes. He's got it backed it up with history and precedent. Sometimes we forget what a brilliant statesman he is....


:oops8:

All you hysterical Dimwingers are now free to STFU.:iyfyus.jpg:
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,060
Reaction score
19,362
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
So if trump declared winner night of the election democrats will concede?
Will Trump concede if Biden wins?
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
19,814
Reaction score
6,560
Points
360
n
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
So if trump declared winner night of the election democrats will concede?
Will Trump concede if Biden wins?
no indication to say he wont,,,
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,060
Reaction score
19,362
Points
2,180
Location
in between
n
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
So if trump declared winner night of the election democrats will concede?
Will Trump concede if Biden wins?
no indication to say he wont,,,
That is not what he said.

What has Biden said?
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
19,814
Reaction score
6,560
Points
360
n
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
So if trump declared winner night of the election democrats will concede?
Will Trump concede if Biden wins?
no indication to say he wont,,,
That is not what he said.

What has Biden said?
when did he say that???
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
55,456
Reaction score
13,950
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
I'm torn over the replacing of Ms Ginsberg before the end of the year. On one hand, it would insure a conservative justice replacing her.
On the other hand, it would give the left a lot of negative ammunition to go after Trump for trying to replace her after what McConnell did in 2016.
Trump doesn't need the extra distraction during the campaigning, along with the msm going after him relentlessly for trying.
If he was upfront and saying that he's going to hold off, it could give him some positive momentum in the eyes of the voters in the swing states.
What say you?
It’s not a option we need her seat filled, it could be a constitutional crisis if it’s not filled.. I would hold hearings ASAP
Oh? Why would there be a Constitutional crisis?
Democrats plan to challenge the 2020 election, and having a 4-4 court would “risk a constitutional crisis” given that likelihood.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything, except Trump abuse of power and cheating.

If Trump doesn't try to pull a fast one, the winner will be who all the citizens voted for, on their ballot...

The supreme court is not suppose to decide any election.... if there are problems, the it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything

Bullshit. Explain why Crazy Joe has hired 600 lawyers.
He hired 600 lawyers to combat the 1000 lawyers Trump had already put in place.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top