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

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

Exactly. These clowns are in really tight races.

  • Sen. Martha McSally (Ariz.) - Lean Democratic
  • Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.) - Toss up
  • Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) - Toss up
  • Sen. Steve Daines (Mt.) - Toss up
  • Sen. Joni Ernst (Iowa) - Toss up
  • Sen. Cory Gardner (Colo.) - Toss up
  • Sen. David Perdue (Ga.) - Toss up
  • Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) - Lean Republican
 
Last edited:
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?
Oh silly, behind the RedCurtain one, presidents do not get to just declare victory...it doesn't work that way, here in America! ;)
 
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.
 
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.
 
Kamala mopped the floor with both Kavanaugh AND Barr.
I am sure mopping floors come natural to her. She could mop mine, but I have mostly carpeting.
She's going to tear Pence another asshole in the debates.
Just make sure you have your butthurt cream if you decide to watch.
She couldn't mop Pence's floor, let alone mop the floor with Pence. It is mind-boggling to think the Dems could find a woman less likable than the Beast
 
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?
Oh silly, behind the RedCurtain one, presidents do not get to just declare victory...it doesn't work that way, here in America! ;)
That’s not what I said
 
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.
Who says it is against the will of the people?
Republicans...

“I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination." ~ Lindsey Graham

"Rarely does a Supreme Court vacancy occur in the final year of a presidential term, and the Senate has not confirmed a nominee to fill a vacancy arising in such circumstances for the better part of a century. So the American people have a particular opportunity now to make their voice heard in the selection of Scalia’s successor as they participate in the process to select their next president — as they decide who they trust to both lead the country and nominate the next Supreme Court justice." ~ Mitch McConnell

"Our country is in the middle of a highly consequential presidential election. The American people should determine their next Supreme Court justice by their votes in November.- ~ Dan Coats

“We will see what the people say this fall and our next president, regardless of party, will be making that nomination.” ~ Joni Ernst

“A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice." ~ Chuck Grassley

"To respect the American people’s choice, I believe that Justice Scalia’s seat should not be filled until after the election, as is consistent with historical practice." ~ Orrin Hatch

"The American people should have a voice in who is the next Supreme Court Justice with their vote in the next presidential election. For that reason, I will oppose any Supreme Court nominee that President Obama sends to the Senate." ~ John Boozeman

"The best way to honor his immortal legacy is to let the next president pick his successor and I am pleased to see Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell agree with me. " ~ Paul Gosar

"As we are in the midst of a presidential campaign, I believe the Senate should delay confirmation of his successor until we have a new president." ~ Phil Roe

"It's been over 80 years since there was a vacancy, nom & confirm of a new SC Justice in a presidential election year. That's why I believe the Senate must stand strong in ensuring Scalia’s replacement waits until the American people have decided on a new Pres" ~ Brian Babin

"With voters heading to the polls in a few short months to elect our next President, each American should have a voice in the direction of the Supreme Court." ~ Patrick McHenry

"The 2016 election will give the American people a say in the nomination process and I trust their judgment to make the right choice." ~ Lynn Jenkins

"Senate leaders have said they will not consider a nominee to fill the vacancy until we have a new president. I agree that the American people deserve a voice in the nomination of a new Supreme Court Justice and we should wait ." ~ Buddy Carter

"Kansans and Americans deserve to have a voice in determining the future direction of our country...it only makes sense for this vacancy to not be filled until the American people elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice." ~ Mike Pompeo

"For my part I believe the next Court appointment should be made by the newly-elected President and I support delaying confirmation hearings until next year." ~ Leonard Lance

"As the future of our nation hangs in the balance, I urge Senate Majority Leader McConnell to hold fast to his promise of not confirming a successor until a new president takes office." ~ Barry Loudermilk

"But at this point I believe it would be more prudent to have the American people express their voice in deciding the future direction of our country.” ~ Bob Corker
 
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.
Who says it is against the will of the people?
Republicans...

“I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination." ~ Lindsey Graham

"Rarely does a Supreme Court vacancy occur in the final year of a presidential term, and the Senate has not confirmed a nominee to fill a vacancy arising in such circumstances for the better part of a century. So the American people have a particular opportunity now to make their voice heard in the selection of Scalia’s successor as they participate in the process to select their next president — as they decide who they trust to both lead the country and nominate the next Supreme Court justice." ~ Mitch McConnell

"Our country is in the middle of a highly consequential presidential election. The American people should determine their next Supreme Court justice by their votes in November.- ~ Dan Coats

“We will see what the people say this fall and our next president, regardless of party, will be making that nomination.” ~ Joni Ernst

“A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice." ~ Chuck Grassley

"To respect the American people’s choice, I believe that Justice Scalia’s seat should not be filled until after the election, as is consistent with historical practice." ~ Orrin Hatch

"The American people should have a voice in who is the next Supreme Court Justice with their vote in the next presidential election. For that reason, I will oppose any Supreme Court nominee that President Obama sends to the Senate." ~ John Boozeman

"The best way to honor his immortal legacy is to let the next president pick his successor and I am pleased to see Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell agree with me. " ~ Paul Gosar

"As we are in the midst of a presidential campaign, I believe the Senate should delay confirmation of his successor until we have a new president." ~ Phil Roe

"It's been over 80 years since there was a vacancy, nom & confirm of a new SC Justice in a presidential election year. That's why I believe the Senate must stand strong in ensuring Scalia’s replacement waits until the American people have decided on a new Pres" ~ Brian Babin

"With voters heading to the polls in a few short months to elect our next President, each American should have a voice in the direction of the Supreme Court." ~ Patrick McHenry

"The 2016 election will give the American people a say in the nomination process and I trust their judgment to make the right choice." ~ Lynn Jenkins

"Senate leaders have said they will not consider a nominee to fill the vacancy until we have a new president. I agree that the American people deserve a voice in the nomination of a new Supreme Court Justice and we should wait ." ~ Buddy Carter

"Kansans and Americans deserve to have a voice in determining the future direction of our country...it only makes sense for this vacancy to not be filled until the American people elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice." ~ Mike Pompeo

"For my part I believe the next Court appointment should be made by the newly-elected President and I support delaying confirmation hearings until next year." ~ Leonard Lance

"As the future of our nation hangs in the balance, I urge Senate Majority Leader McConnell to hold fast to his promise of not confirming a successor until a new president takes office." ~ Barry Loudermilk

"But at this point I believe it would be more prudent to have the American people express their voice in deciding the future direction of our country.” ~ Bob Corker
They were hired to fill the seat that they will do
 
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!
It's not capitulation to Democrats -- it's capitulation to the Republicans who held that very position 4 years ago. I didn't think Biden stood a chance at winning this election. I think this would change that.
 
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.

It's a game they won, Trump is the 3rd POTUS to be impeached, and the FIRST one to be impeached in his FIRST term.
I hope he nominates someone further to the right than George C. Wallace.
 
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.
Who says it is against the will of the people?
Republicans...

“I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination." ~ Lindsey Graham

"Rarely does a Supreme Court vacancy occur in the final year of a presidential term, and the Senate has not confirmed a nominee to fill a vacancy arising in such circumstances for the better part of a century. So the American people have a particular opportunity now to make their voice heard in the selection of Scalia’s successor as they participate in the process to select their next president — as they decide who they trust to both lead the country and nominate the next Supreme Court justice." ~ Mitch McConnell

"Our country is in the middle of a highly consequential presidential election. The American people should determine their next Supreme Court justice by their votes in November.- ~ Dan Coats

“We will see what the people say this fall and our next president, regardless of party, will be making that nomination.” ~ Joni Ernst

“A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice." ~ Chuck Grassley

"To respect the American people’s choice, I believe that Justice Scalia’s seat should not be filled until after the election, as is consistent with historical practice." ~ Orrin Hatch

"The American people should have a voice in who is the next Supreme Court Justice with their vote in the next presidential election. For that reason, I will oppose any Supreme Court nominee that President Obama sends to the Senate." ~ John Boozeman

"The best way to honor his immortal legacy is to let the next president pick his successor and I am pleased to see Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell agree with me. " ~ Paul Gosar

"As we are in the midst of a presidential campaign, I believe the Senate should delay confirmation of his successor until we have a new president." ~ Phil Roe

"It's been over 80 years since there was a vacancy, nom & confirm of a new SC Justice in a presidential election year. That's why I believe the Senate must stand strong in ensuring Scalia’s replacement waits until the American people have decided on a new Pres" ~ Brian Babin

"With voters heading to the polls in a few short months to elect our next President, each American should have a voice in the direction of the Supreme Court." ~ Patrick McHenry

"The 2016 election will give the American people a say in the nomination process and I trust their judgment to make the right choice." ~ Lynn Jenkins

"Senate leaders have said they will not consider a nominee to fill the vacancy until we have a new president. I agree that the American people deserve a voice in the nomination of a new Supreme Court Justice and we should wait ." ~ Buddy Carter

"Kansans and Americans deserve to have a voice in determining the future direction of our country...it only makes sense for this vacancy to not be filled until the American people elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice." ~ Mike Pompeo

"For my part I believe the next Court appointment should be made by the newly-elected President and I support delaying confirmation hearings until next year." ~ Leonard Lance

"As the future of our nation hangs in the balance, I urge Senate Majority Leader McConnell to hold fast to his promise of not confirming a successor until a new president takes office." ~ Barry Loudermilk

"But at this point I believe it would be more prudent to have the American people express their voice in deciding the future direction of our country.” ~ Bob Corker
They were hired to fill the seat that they will do
If they do that before the election and Democrats go on to winthe election...

#stackthecourt2021
 
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.
WTF do you mean "force it thru"? The normal process will be followed.
Even some Republicans say confirmation hearings should wait until after the election in circumstances like this. Forcing it through means going against that.

So just to be clear, you're claiming that in 92 Biden meant that if Democrats had the Senate and White House, he would not have moved ahead with confirmation hearings. You're actually claiming that?
In 1992, a Republican sat in the White House. And Biden’s position at the time was to hold off confirmation hearings, had there been a vacancy, until after the election.
 
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.
icon_rolleyes.gif
 
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?

The Dims will throw a hissy fit no matter what Trump does. Nominate a new Justice immediately.
 
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.

It's a game they won, Trump is the 3rd POTUS to be impeached, and the FIRST one to be impeached in his FIRST term.
I hope he nominates someone further to the right than George C. Wallace.
I want ann Coulter
 
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:

EiSTWEyWsAAKpec
Wow!....A politician spun on a dime to have a completely opposite opinion today!

Knock me over with a feather.

A Republican, let's be clear.
And the Senate may not move on this.
There's many Republican senators who are in very tight races, like Spineless Susan Collins, who is another piece of GOP filth.
Don't give a fuck....They're all a bunch of hypocrite jackasses, including the braying buttpipes on your team.
 

Forum List

Back
Top