Wow! Mcconnell vows to vote on nominee!

shockedcanadian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
13,094
Reaction score
9,416
Points
2,255

This is going to start a whole new round of crazy!


Jo
He really has no choice politically. If he doesn't put a butt in that seat, the Democrats probably take the Senate because clearly that is the prize. They may take it anyway but instead of academic ideas about what a Democratic Controlled Senate would do...it would be you elect this...you get that or you get 4 years of "no" if the blob wins. The hypocrisy may cost R's the senate but he'll keep his seat. He may lose that if he were to not be a hypocrite.
This will motivate every voter to get out and vote. Suspect they will have control of Supreme Court, but not likely to win the Presidency or keep the Senate.
Who?

What if Trump says "let's wait until after the election"? That is going to ensure they ALL vote. Even the RINOS will be cornered.

If Trump does it before, he chooses a woman and gains more female votes. He's in a win/win situation.
Voters will look at it as a complete betrayal by MCConnell, who said 10 months before election is too close before an election to make such a decision. They will take it out on Senate Republicans and on trump.
May be. However, it depends which voters view it as most sacred to them. Politics is dirty, I don't know the right manner to go, I'm not an American with a vote, though I would probably want the election to be about the vote for the President and for it to be delayed until after the election. That's just me.

However, Trump is a different cat. He doesn't care about politics long term, he wants to win in 2020. He will choose the best path to victory, whatever that is deemed. He also would love to have a lasting impression on his legacy, behind standing up to China.

I've heard CBC report the whole CNN narrative that "RBG wants to choose the replacement to be from whoever wins the election". I mean, why would anyone even go down that road to raise that? She is a S.C nominee, she isn't the president, whether she said it or not (which I suppose is debatable), it's not of significance, that isn't her job.
 

Ben Thomson

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
1,982
Reaction score
1,176
Points
1,893
Yet just a few short years ago

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday flatly rejected any person President Barack Obama nominates to the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, saying the voters should decide.

If the Communists had been in a majority that would have been different.

The Americans hold the Senate, so they get to decide, the Communists can go fuck themselves.
So anybody who doesn't fit your ideology is not an American..got it.
 

task0778

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
6,345
Reaction score
3,557
Points
1,065
Location
Texas hill country
Just wondering if Trump and the GOP push thru their nominee, would it enrage the Left enough to energize their base to vote? Some who might be debating whether or not to stay home and not vote will do so. Might cost the GOP their Senate majority too. IMHO, it's a risk worth taking but I'd still do it. Seats on the SCOTUS are maybe the most important power to have in our gov't.
 

Kilroy2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
2,607
Reaction score
506
Points
140
Yeah no reason except for what they did to Obama when he had every right to nominate someone to the court.
Oh he should wait for the election to be held and let the next president decide.

I am sure Trump will push for it and the line has been drawn
He did nominate someone. They weren’t approved.
Well your right he did nominate someone but he was not even voted on for approval. MC refused to have hearing or a vote on the nomination for 10 months as Scalia died in Feb 2016.

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,” McConnell said.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,518
Reaction score
12,600
Points
2,180

This is going to start a whole new round of crazy!


Jo
He really has no choice politically. If he doesn't put a butt in that seat, the Democrats probably take the Senate because clearly that is the prize. They may take it anyway but instead of academic ideas about what a Democratic Controlled Senate would do...it would be you elect this...you get that or you get 4 years of "no" if the blob wins. The hypocrisy may cost R's the senate but he'll keep his seat. He may lose that if he were to not be a hypocrite.
This will motivate every voter to get out and vote. Suspect they will have control of Supreme Court, but not likely to win the Presidency or keep the Senate.
It should. But it won't.
I disagree.
I hope you're right.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,887
Reaction score
12,079
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.

This is going to start a whole new round of crazy!


Jo
At this point, the leftist hatred of Trump is so irrational he could nominate Obama and they'd fight it to the death.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
68,741
Reaction score
14,297
Points
2,180
You go, Mitch!

No reason to not replace her now.


McConnell: Trump's Supreme Court nominee 'will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate'


Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said unequivocally Friday night that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee to fill the vacancy of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg “will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

Ginsburg, 87, died Friday from complications surrounding metastatic pancreas cancer.

“The Senate and the nation mourn the sudden passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the conclusion of her extraordinary American life,” McConnell said in a statement Friday.

“In the last midterm election before Justice Scalia’s death in 2016, Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president’s second term. We kept our promise,” McConnell continued. “Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year.”

McConnell added that “by contrast, Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary.”

“Once again, we will keep our promise,” he said. “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG DIES AT 87

In May 2019, McConnell, R-Ky., made clear that should a vacancy materialize in the midst of the 2020 election cycle, the GOP-majority Senate would likely “fill it.”
McConnell’s comments last year were met with criticism from Democrats who accused him of hypocrisy, based on the treatment of former President Barack Obamas Supreme Court nominee and D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals chief Judge Merrick Garland.

Obama nominated Garland to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away in 2016, but McConnell and Senate Republicans refused to hold a hearing or vote on his nomination, citing the imminent 2016 presidential election.

Speaking to Fox News last year, McConnell suggested his stance was not hypocritical -- because in 2020, Republicans would control both the White House and the Senate, unlike Democrats in 2016, who controlled only the White House.
Let’s not forget Mitch BLOCKED the senate from even having a vote on Garland even though it was blatantly unconstitutional. I’m sure republicans are thrilled at Ginsburg’s passing. Them winning is all that matters to them.

Oh and also don’t forget Mitch’s blatant hypocrisy about election years and voting on judges. He’s a sociopath without any principles.
Please explain the unconstitutional part.
 

Jackson

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
27,487
Reaction score
7,873
Points
290
Location
Nashville
"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President," McConnell said in a statement hours after Scalia died in February 2016. - Mitch McConnell
You mean wait for 4 1/2 years?
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,887
Reaction score
12,079
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President," McConnell said in a statement hours after Scalia died in February 2016. - Mitch McConnell
Things have changed.

Fuck the Communists.
This is going to be a chaotic shit show
No question. I already feel sorry for the nominee. Democrats will make up horrific claims about him/her and insist their lies are fact.

You know -- like they always do.
 

BluesLegend

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
49,596
Reaction score
15,919
Points
2,630
Location
Trump's Army
Let’s not forget Mitch BLOCKED the senate from even having a vote on Garland even though it was blatantly unconstitutional.
Elections have consequences. Ginsburg stated there's nothing stopping the Senate from doing its job in an election year and the president is still the president. So we'll move forward to nominate and confirm a replacement.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
116,281
Reaction score
29,421
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President," McConnell said in a statement hours after Scalia died in February 2016. - Mitch McConnell
It's likely that Obama murdered Scalia for calling out his spying on SCOTUS
 

SassyIrishLass

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
66,736
Reaction score
24,347
Points
2,250
"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President," McConnell said in a statement hours after Scalia died in February 2016. - Mitch McConnell
Things have changed.

Fuck the Communists.
This is going to be a chaotic shit show
No question. I already feel sorry for the nominee. Democrats will make up horrific claims about him/her and insist their lies are fact.

You know -- like they always do.
Just remember Kavanaugh....same shit different nominee
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
31,618
Reaction score
15,896
Points
1,905
Location
Arizona

This is going to start a whole new round of crazy!


Jo
He really has no choice politically. If he doesn't put a butt in that seat, the Democrats probably take the Senate because clearly that is the prize. They may take it anyway but instead of academic ideas about what a Democratic Controlled Senate would do...it would be you elect this...you get that or you get 4 years of "no" if the blob wins. The hypocrisy may cost R's the senate but he'll keep his seat. He may lose that if he were to not be a hypocrite.
This will motivate every voter to get out and vote. Suspect they will have control of Supreme Court, but not likely to win the Presidency or keep the Senate.
Who?

What if Trump says "let's wait until after the election"? That is going to ensure they ALL vote. Even the RINOS will be cornered.

If Trump does it before, he chooses a woman and gains more female votes. He's in a win/win situation.
Voters will look at it as a complete betrayal by MCConnell, who said 10 months before election is too close before an election to make such a decision. They will take it out on Senate Republicans and on trump.
Are you claiming McConnell doesn’t have the right to pause the confirmation and vote on a SCOTUS nomination?
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,887
Reaction score
12,079
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President," McConnell said in a statement hours after Scalia died in February 2016. - Mitch McConnell
Things have changed.

Fuck the Communists.
This is going to be a chaotic shit show
No question. I already feel sorry for the nominee. Democrats will make up horrific claims about him/her and insist their lies are fact.

You know -- like they always do.
Just remember Kavanaugh....same shit different nominee
It'll be even worse.

And even less credible.

But that won't stop them. They'll be desperate.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
18,011
Reaction score
13,629
Points
2,415
You go, Mitch!

No reason to not replace her now.


McConnell: Trump's Supreme Court nominee 'will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate'


Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said unequivocally Friday night that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee to fill the vacancy of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg “will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

Ginsburg, 87, died Friday from complications surrounding metastatic pancreas cancer.

“The Senate and the nation mourn the sudden passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the conclusion of her extraordinary American life,” McConnell said in a statement Friday.

“In the last midterm election before Justice Scalia’s death in 2016, Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president’s second term. We kept our promise,” McConnell continued. “Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year.”

McConnell added that “by contrast, Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary.”

“Once again, we will keep our promise,” he said. “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG DIES AT 87

In May 2019, McConnell, R-Ky., made clear that should a vacancy materialize in the midst of the 2020 election cycle, the GOP-majority Senate would likely “fill it.”
McConnell’s comments last year were met with criticism from Democrats who accused him of hypocrisy, based on the treatment of former President Barack Obamas Supreme Court nominee and D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals chief Judge Merrick Garland.

Obama nominated Garland to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away in 2016, but McConnell and Senate Republicans refused to hold a hearing or vote on his nomination, citing the imminent 2016 presidential election.

Speaking to Fox News last year, McConnell suggested his stance was not hypocritical -- because in 2020, Republicans would control both the White House and the Senate, unlike Democrats in 2016, who controlled only the White House.
Let’s not forget Mitch BLOCKED the senate from even having a vote on Garland even though it was blatantly unconstitutional. I’m sure republicans are thrilled at Ginsburg’s passing. Them winning is all that matters to them.

Oh and also don’t forget Mitch’s blatant hypocrisy about election years and voting on judges. He’s a sociopath without any principles.
What part of the Constitution did he violate?

Be specific and quote the actual Constitution Billy000
In the 2016 election year, the Senate refused to consider President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, maintaining that no language in the Appointments Clause imposes an affirmative duty on the Senate to give any nominee a vote and that the Senate’s power to refuse consent under that clause implies the authority to determine whether, and under what political circumstances, actual consideration of a nominee should occur. This Article contends that the text of Article II actually provides a surprising level of guidance in discerning the respective powers of President and Senate in the appointment process. Specifically, it concludes that ARTICLE II, SECTION 2—both understood in whole and in its parts—requires the Senate to consider a President’s nominees. It posits further that the Constitution’s language implies some modest, but important, requirements for what Senate consideration must entail. Specifically, it observes that settled understandings of the Senate’s rule-making authority require that the Senate provide a process by which a President’s nominee could plausibly be confirmed. This Article will also examine how the Constitution’s original framers, advocates and opponents understood the distribution of power between the branches set forth in the Appointments Clause. By evaluating the instant constitutional problem with primary reference to a semantic analysis of the text—and thereafter exploring the reliability of those conclusions with reference to original understandings of that text—this Article’s interpretive framework conforms to the interpretive approach fervently preached by Justice Scalia and usually praised by the leadership of the 114th Senate.

ARTICLE II, SECTION 2—both understood in whole and in its parts—requires the Senate to consider a President’s nominees. It posits further that the Constitution’s language implies some modest, but important,
So?
Yep, you got nothing. I proved you wrong.
Exactly what was I wrong on? Be specific.
This should be fun.
 

Kilroy2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
2,607
Reaction score
506
Points
140
Yet just a few short years ago

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday flatly rejected any person President Barack Obama nominates to the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, saying the voters should decide.
Well he has the right to reject any person President Trump nominates today too. Don’t see why you are complaining.
yet that is not what he is saying. He is saying that they will have a vote with 2 months to go. He can nominate Barr and they will approve it. Mitch refused to have a vote or hearing on Obama nomination with 10 months to go until the election. Now he has put it out there that they will have a vote on Trump nomination.

The interesting thing is will he (Trump) do it. If he does, then this could well cost him the election and becoming president again. Something Trump has to thing about. I believe he really likes to being the president. If he wins then he can still nominate whomever. So it will be interesting.

 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top