RBG Politcal Discussion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm of the camp who believe she should have retired during the Obama administration. I do not intend to demean her historical contributions to the court, including those during the Obama administration that would not have occurred if she had retired, but she had five cancer diagnoses and said she was going to work until age 90. Last year she responded to critics calling for her retirement essentially saying that Obama could not have gotten as good of a justice confirmed:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/18/rbg-fires-back-against-critics-who-say-she-should-have-retired-under-obama.html

It's hard to say if it was commitment to the cause, denial about her health problems and longevity, or selfishness. Either way now her entire legacy and all she fought for is it stake.

+ 1

I think it was very selfish

But you are. You are also presuming to have better judgment than she, who had more knowledge of the situation than you an outsider.


Finally, being a Monday morning quarteback does nothing to fix the current situation we are in. How about using that energy towards something that is helpful now like vocally pressuring senators to abide by their words.

I mean she had a calendar and knew how old she was. I think she did AMAZING things for women and is a hero, but she fumbled the ball and thought of herself when things mattered the most. She should have been unselfish and stepped down for her replacement years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Murkowski already announced she wouldn’t vote for a nominee right?

Romney has been quiet, but I think he’s a probable no.

One thing to remember is that Martha McSally will probably lose her election and, since she was appointed, has to be out by November 30th (but Mark Kelly can kick her out on Nov 4th). Therefore, unless the GOP can get all of this done before the election, they’ll be down to 52 seats, which means 3 defections would be enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm of the camp who believe she should have retired during the Obama administration. I do not intend to demean her historical contributions to the court, including those during the Obama administration that would not have occurred if she had retired, but she had five cancer diagnoses and said she was going to work until age 90. Last year she responded to critics calling for her retirement essentially saying that Obama could not have gotten as good of a justice confirmed:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/18/rbg-fires-back-against-critics-who-say-she-should-have-retired-under-obama.html

It's hard to say if it was commitment to the cause, denial about her health problems and longevity, or selfishness. Either way now her entire legacy and all she fought for is it stake.

+ 1

I think it was very selfish

They all assumed that Hillary would win and then and wanted a female president to replace her. It was arrogance not selfishness.

They being one person- RBG.

It was her lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, it was never ours.

Yes but she should have cared enough about us and not her ‘lifetime’ appointment to leave us okay when she left. I think everything she did except not retiring was historic and amazing but that’s how I will remember her. The perfect cautionary tale of ego and putting others ahead of yourself. If she truly cared about American more than herself, she would have stepped down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Murkowski already announced she wouldn’t vote for a nominee right?

Romney has been quiet, but I think he’s a probable no.

One thing to remember is that Martha McSally will probably lose her election and, since she was appointed, has to be out by November 30th (but Mark Kelly can kick her out on Nov 4th). Therefore, unless the GOP can get all of this done before the election, they’ll be down to 52 seats, which means 3 defections would be enough.

There’s going be plenty of arm-twisting going on. I don’t think Romney remains a no. This is a golden opportunity for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Murkowski already announced she wouldn’t vote for a nominee right?

Romney has been quiet, but I think he’s a probable no.

One thing to remember is that Martha McSally will probably lose her election and, since she was appointed, has to be out by November 30th (but Mark Kelly can kick her out on Nov 4th). Therefore, unless the GOP can get all of this done before the election, they’ll be down to 52 seats, which means 3 defections would be enough.

There’s going be plenty of arm-twisting going on. I don’t think Romney remains a no. This is a golden opportunity for them.

Well, Romney best move is to stay on Biden's good side until after the election at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Grassley said it in July

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Murkowski already announced she wouldn’t vote for a nominee right?

Romney has been quiet, but I think he’s a probable no.

One thing to remember is that Martha McSally will probably lose her election and, since she was appointed, has to be out by November 30th (but Mark Kelly can kick her out on Nov 4th). Therefore, unless the GOP can get all of this done before the election, they’ll be down to 52 seats, which means 3 defections would be enough.

Won’t matter, Alabama is going Republican (also a special election seat)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Murkowski already announced she wouldn’t vote for a nominee right?

Romney has been quiet, but I think he’s a probable no.

One thing to remember is that Martha McSally will probably lose her election and, since she was appointed, has to be out by November 30th (but Mark Kelly can kick her out on Nov 4th). Therefore, unless the GOP can get all of this done before the election, they’ll be down to 52 seats, which means 3 defections would be enough.

But who would defect?

[Anonymous]

I think Biden is going to give Romney a cabinet position like Secretary of State if he votes no. The whole theme of unite our country

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Murkowski already announced she wouldn’t vote for a nominee right?

Romney has been quiet, but I think he’s a probable no.

One thing to remember is that Martha McSally will probably lose her election and, since she was appointed, has to be out by November 30th (but Mark Kelly can kick her out on Nov 4th). Therefore, unless the GOP can get all of this done before the election, they’ll be down to 52 seats, which means 3 defections would be enough.

But who would defect?

Romney, Murkowski, and Collins would be enough.

Doug Jones would not have to leave early because it was a special election, whereas McSally was appointed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Wow. I didn't expect such forthrightness of Collins. Major CYA to please both parties before her potential re-election. I'll take it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Wow. I didn't expect such forthrightness of Collins. Major CYA to please both parties before her potential re-election. I'll take it!

She will vote for the nominee after the election...win or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins says no vote before the election

So that's Collins

Do we have - or think we have - Romney and Murkowski? And then we need one more?

Wow. I didn't expect such forthrightness of Collins. Major CYA to please both parties before her potential re-election. I'll take it!

She will vote for the nominee after the election...win or not.

Maybe, maybe not. If she loses the election she will be free for the first time in her career. Then we will see what she really thinks. I think she really is pro-choice. I could be wrong though.

[Anonymous]

What am I missing? Trump is in office till Jan 21, so they still have almost 3 months after the election to install their GOP pick.

[Anonymous]

Mitch will find leverage over Collins even if she loses. He’s that powerful.