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

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
56,911
Reaction score
15,298
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
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:


"Elections have consequences"-Barry Hussein Obama.
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.

:)
 

Bush92

GHBush1992
Joined
May 23, 2014
Messages
33,424
Reaction score
9,040
Points
1,330
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?
Run the most right wing sonofabitch we can find. Straight through the Judiciary Committee right to the Senate floor. They want to play their stupid little fuck, fuck impeachment games...we can play ours.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
40,243
Reaction score
18,339
Points
2,330
Location
Florida
The Democrats are contracting themselves.

In 2016 the Democrats were calling for an election year confirmation.
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
4,615
Reaction score
5,464
Points
1,903
The day after that far left liberal loon is lowered into the ground.
Pres.Trump needs to present the person he has chosen to take her place. .. :cool:
He needs to offer up several...so the dems can't villify one and use them as a rallying cry to get their base to vote--trump needs to have multiple races and special groups--then hold the vote right after the election--end of November.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
20,825
Reaction score
16,208
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:


"Elections have consequences"-Barry Hussein Obama.
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.

:)
Trump won 304-232

It's well past time you accept the results of the election, and learn how our system works.
 

iamwhatiseem

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
26,327
Reaction score
8,600
Points
900
Location
On a hill
Democrats want to pack the court.

They wouldn't think twice about doing this if the shoe was on the other foot.

What would harry reid do?
Precisely, if Hillary Clinton was President now... you bet your ass every single Democrat would be saying we need to replace her before the year ends. 100%
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
72,254
Reaction score
13,359
Points
2,210
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:
If Biden wins and Republicans try to go against the voice of the American voters and hold hearings before January, they will not have the votes to confirm. By December, Republicans could have 3 nay votes which might be enough to kill confirmation.
 

B. Kidd

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
26,484
Reaction score
9,178
Points
900
Location
Western Lands
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:


"Elections have consequences"-Barry Hussein Obama.
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.

:)
Such a trivial and moot point at this juncture. :laugh:
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
56,911
Reaction score
15,298
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, then it is Congress who decides, according to the Constitution, not the Court.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
20,825
Reaction score
16,208
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:
If Biden wins and Republicans try to go against the voice of the American voters and hold hearings before January, they will not have the votes to confirm. By December, Republicans could have 3 nay votes which might be enough to kill confirmation.
That's one reason it will happen before the election.
 

Redcurtain

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Messages
3,738
Reaction score
3,637
Points
1,908
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?
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
20,825
Reaction score
16,208
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.
Democrats don't plan to challenge anything

Bullshit. Explain why Crazy Joe has hired 600 lawyers.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
72,254
Reaction score
13,359
Points
2,210
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.
The Dem's already go after Trump 24/7/365 over everything and anything. One more item on their TDS hate list really isn't going to make a difference. ... :cool:
Oh, I agree, fully, Sunni, but it's the drip, drip, drip this close to the election with fresh meat on the table.
Trump won 2016 by putting pedal to the floor, balls to the wall, full steam ahead, no second guessing, never looking back.

2020, Trump starts making measured decisions, does the "sensible" thing and holds off replacing Ruth until after the election, then loses the election, Biden gets in and replaces Ruth with another Kagan.

You really want to gamble that?
It is a gamble either way it goes, and I'm inclined to have it completed before 2021.
Trouble is that if Harris gets in and the dems win the Senate, they could pack the
courts with liberals.
As they should if Republicans confirm a new justice after the election should that happen. Who could blame them?
 

bluzman61

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
26,713
Reaction score
25,024
Points
2,415
Location
Valparaiso, Indiana USA
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?
:thankusmile:
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
48,543
Reaction score
16,143
Points
2,250
An election has consequences for a few years.............SCOTUS for decades.........

There is no comparison......and we should push it now. The last Presidential election's BIGGEST ISSUE was the Supreme Court...........to me.............as had we lost the ramifications of Judicial Activism by the left would have been on steroids.........Not to mention Ginsberg would have retired under Hillary as well.

That would have been a disaster for this nation.

RAM IT HOME........damn the torpedoes.
 

WEATHER53

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
11,369
Reaction score
3,549
Points
360
Seems line 4/5 weeks to nominate is long enough. If liberals could get a liberal in they would be rioting that the election be postponed until they complete their task
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
62,707
Reaction score
12,040
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
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:


"Elections have consequences"-Barry Hussein Obama.
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.

:)
Trump got a clear majority of the votes. 304-227.

The rest is you not knowing how elections are run in this country. Here you go, a fascinating link.


You also aren't exactly college material, huh? Changing the rules after the election and counting votes across States, which is irrelevant to our election process, does not mean it would have turned out the same way if rules were different. It just doesn't. If you grasped basic logic you'd know that.

Nowhere in the Constitution are Trump's powers limited because of the PV. The PV isn't even a thing
 

B. Kidd

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
26,484
Reaction score
9,178
Points
900
Location
Western Lands
An election has consequences for a few years.............SCOTUS for decades.........

There is no comparison......and we should push it now. The last Presidential election's BIGGEST ISSUE was the Supreme Court...........to me.............as had we lost the ramifications of Judicial Activism by the left would have been on steroids.........Not to mention Ginsberg would have retired under Hillary as well.

That would have been a disaster for this nation.

RAM IT HOME........damn the torpedoes.
Yupp!
Onward and forward into the future!
Dimm's are boxed in....
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
72,254
Reaction score
13,359
Points
2,210
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.
If that were to happen, then the most recent ruling by a lower court would stand. So no, there would be no Constitutional crisis.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top