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

[toobfreak]

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.

Exactly. With the Democrats doing as they have these past four years, now the mail-in voting, riots, Covid, impeachment and everything else, I think the Left is out to pull a political coup short of literally marching in and seizing the White House at gun-point and putting Trump in prison. He SHOULD win but it won't surprise me if they get Biden elected by hook or crook. I mean, choosing Hillary last time around showed us that they will literally stoop to any low level they have to.

THEN WHAT?

I'm certain they plan on "retiring" Joe ASAP and replacing him with Harris. You gotta grasp your opportunities while you have them and replace Ruthy with someone like Amy, then AT LEAST YOU KNOW YOU'VE GOTTEN THAT.

If Trump wins in Nov, icing on the cake, ITMT, at least the SCOTUS will be safely packed with constitutionalists for a long time.

IF NOTHING ELSE, that can be Trump's shining tribute for all of history-- -- for whatever else he might have done wrong, at least electing him got us that.

 

[kaz]

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.

I agree there is no Constitutional crisis. Just like there wasn't when Garland was left swinging in the wind. "Nine" is not even in the Constitution

 

[Faun]

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.

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.

Then it will take only 1 more Reublican to vote nay. And many Republicans are up for re-election.

 

[Hossfly]

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. ...

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?

Totally agree. Anything to piss off liberal socialist Democrats. I love to see them with their hair on fire.

 

[Faun]

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.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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.

You mean like how Congress decided the Bush/ Gore election?

The job of the Supreme Court is to rule on constitutional issues. If one party believes the Constitution was not followed properly in this election, it's not up to Congress to decide anything, it's up to the SC.

 

[Redcurtain]

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.

Hence the crisis,, we are just going to fill it real quick to avoid any chaos.

 

[Redcurtain]

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

 

[Faun]

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.

Hence the crisis,, we are just going to fill it real quick to avoid any chaos.

Again, there is no crisis. But try to force this through and there's a good chance the Senate will vote against confirmation.

 

[bluzman61]

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.

 

[Faun]

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.

 

[Redcurtain]

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.

Hence the crisis,, we are just going to fill it real quick to avoid any chaos.

Again, there is no crisis. But try to force this through and there's a good chance the Senate will vote against confirmation.

A 4-4 is a crisis,, they were picked to make these decisions.. and we will, how do you feel about Tom Fintton or Ann Coulter? Should Trump pack the court with 3 picks?

 

[bluzman61]

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.

Hence the crisis,, we are just going to fill it real quick to avoid any chaos.

Again, there is no crisis. But try to force this through and there's a good chance the Senate will vote against confirmation.

 

[bluzman61]

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.

 

[Redcurtain]

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 .

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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.

That is such a phony argument. It's like us playing bridge and I claim to be a better card player than you because I had a good poker hand. It's moot since that wasn't the game we were playing.

There are probably a lot of Republican voters in these big lib cities and states that just stay home on election day knowing their vote really has no chance at winning anything. If we chose Presidents by popular vote, those Republicans in NY, California, and NJ may come out in droves. Trump would have campaigned in those states more often, and Hillary in states she was likely to lose.

 

[Faun]

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.

Hence the crisis,, we are just going to fill it real quick to avoid any chaos.

Again, there is no crisis. But try to force this through and there's a good chance the Senate will vote against confirmation.

A 4-4 is a crisis,, they were picked to make these decisions.. and we will, how do you feel about Tom Fintton or Ann Coulter? Should Trump pack the court with 3 picks?

Again, it's not a crisis. Again, a SCOTUS tie would merely leave the most recent ruling by a lower court standing.

 

[Faun]

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.

 

[Redcurtain]

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.

Hence the crisis,, we are just going to fill it real quick to avoid any chaos.

Again, there is no crisis. But try to force this through and there's a good chance the Senate will vote against confirmation.

A 4-4 is a crisis,, they were picked to make these decisions.. and we will, how do you feel about Tom Fintton or Ann Coulter? Should Trump pack the court with 3 picks?

Again, it's not a crisis. Again, a SCOTUS tie would merely leave the most recent ruling by a lower court standing.

Again that’s not how it works you fill the seat. Trump was voted in by the people the American
People gave us the senate it’s what Americans want. Thank you .. try to win some elections and maybe one day you can pick.

 

[Turtlesoup]

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.

Hence the crisis,, we are just going to fill it real quick to avoid any chaos.

Again, there is no crisis. But try to force this through and there's a good chance the Senate will vote against confirmation.

Poor Faun---is negotiating/pleading for a bone.

Hun, Trump is president he gets to nominate even if he loses the election.
The Senate is republican controlled and they get to vote on that nomination even if they lose the election as well.

Election is what Nov 8 and the new (if there is a new) president and senate don't take over till next year. Plenty of time to put in a new TRUMP supreme court judge regardless of what happens in the election.

Poor faun--gets no bone from this. Trump and the republican senate are chosing the next TRUMP SC Justice. RBG's refusal to retire years ago as her brain began to fail just cost the libs a SC seat for decades to come.