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?
Trump being a milquetoast Republican and giving the Democrats their way would be the worst possible think he could do for his base of support.
It's a given at this point that Democrats would not confirm a Republican nominee for SCOTUS ever much less in an election year. And they would 100% do it if they had the Senate and Presidency themselves.
How does it help us to agree to live by rules they don't live by? And this is totally the Constitutional process.
As I pointed out,
- Democrats invented the court nominee filibuster under W and eliminated it under Obama
- Democrats invented the administration nominee filibuster under W and eliminated it under Obama
- Democrats changed the voting rules to get Obamacare when Scott Brown was elected removing their filibuster proof majority
- Democrats have already said they will change the rules and start nominating more left judges than the current limit of 9 to get control of the court when they can
- Democrats have already said the filibuster is gone so they can get the green new deal and Marxist government enacted
We're fighting for our lives at this point, and you're still worried about fighting barbarians with Marcus of Queensbury rules. You're a good guy, but you're not being realistic about what it takes to fight back