RBG Politcal Discussion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, Biden made several errors in his speech today.

200 million dead from COVID--later in the speech he did say 200,000 "as I said earlier" but he said 200 million earlier.

Here is some more--he said that there would not be a Supreme Court session until after the election. It actually opens Oct 5.

He said that the GOP started asking for his list when Ginsburg died. They've been asking for it for months. In fact, he said awhile back that he had it and would be releasing it. Story has now changed. He did make it clear that his nominee would be a Black woman. (He may have said woman of color, but I think he said Black.)

from NPR
https://twitter.com/NPRnie/status/1307752679943348224

p.s. He was reading from a teleprompter. It seems like he would know that a Supreme Court session is getting ready to start, however. But, shouldn't his staff check these things?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they win Democrats must pack the court.

What does this mean and how would we do this? Increase the number of justices from nine? What does that require? Constitutional amendment?

I don’t think there’s anything in the constitution that says that there needs to be nine justices. FDR tried to do this during one of his terms.

"A switch in time saved nine"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, Biden made several errors in his speech today.

200 million dead from COVID--later in the speech he did say 200,000 "as I said earlier" but he said 200 million earlier.

Here is some more--he said that there would not be a Supreme Court session until after the election. It actually opens Oct 5.

He said that the GOP started asking for his list when Ginsburg died. They've been asking for it for months. In fact, he said awhile back that he had it and would be releasing it. Story has now changed. He did make it clear that his nominee would be a Black woman. (He may have said woman of color, but I think he said Black.)

from NPR
https://twitter.com/NPRnie/status/1307752679943348224

p.s. He was reading from a teleprompter. It seems like he would know that a Supreme Court session is getting ready to start, however. But, shouldn't his staff check these things?

Yes. But nobody cares.

[Anonymous]

RGB’s seat should be filled by Leondra Krueger if Biden is elected. She is far more qualified than the candidates being batted around by Trump.

[Anonymous]

Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:National polls are useless. The only states that matter are AZ, WI, MI, PA, NC, and FL. That's were the race will be decided. RBG's death may help Trump in the coming few weeks, especially if he nominates a well-qualified woman with a solid background. However, I doubt he pulls enough support to eek out a victory over Biden.

With that said, it's more likely than not that Biden's victory won't be a landslide. The Dems may take control of the Senate, but if they do, it's likely to be a 51-49 majority or 50-50 with the VP tie-breaking vote.

A narrow Biden victory gives the GOP enough political ammunition to place the Trump nominee on the Court before the end of the end of the year.

I know some liberals want to expand the court next year, but I don't think they'll have the votes or support to do it.

Five states should not decide the presidency. The people in those five states are no better than anyone else.

Electoral college needs to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

Duh.
And the republicans said, “oh no, it’s an election year so we can’t”
How are you not getting this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

Duh.
And the republicans said, “oh no, it’s an election year so we can’t”
How are you not getting this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National polls are useless. The only states that matter are AZ, WI, MI, PA, NC, and FL. That's were the race will be decided. RBG's death may help Trump in the coming few weeks, especially if he nominates a well-qualified woman with a solid background. However, I doubt he pulls enough support to eek out a victory over Biden.

With that said, it's more likely than not that Biden's victory won't be a landslide. The Dems may take control of the Senate, but if they do, it's likely to be a 51-49 majority or 50-50 with the VP tie-breaking vote.

A narrow Biden victory gives the GOP enough political ammunition to place the Trump nominee on the Court before the end of the end of the year.

I know some liberals want to expand the court next year, but I don't think they'll have the votes or support to do it.

Five states should not decide the presidency. The people in those five states are no better than anyone else.

Electoral college needs to go.

It's also wild how even when the Republicans lose in this scenario, they win. Somehow Biden winning and the Democrats taking the Senate still means the people want Trump's nominee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

No, we are mad that McConnell is violating established norms in ways that created many more conservative judges than there otherwise would have been and we aren't going to take it anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

Are you really trying to argue that the Democrats are the ones being inconsistent here? Really? Are you not aware of what the outcome was in 2016?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

If the senate had done their job back in 2016, there'd be no argument. Would people be disappointed? Absolutely. The righteous indignation is the result of the blatant hypocrisy of the GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

... In which case Merrick Garland would be on the bench right now. But he’s not because Rs changed the rules. Now they want to change it back when it suits them. That’s the issue here. Rs can’t do anything without being cheating, lying, hypocrites. Do you really not see the issue here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

... In which case Merrick Garland would be on the bench right now. But he’s not because Rs changed the rules. Now they want to change it back when it suits them. That’s the issue here. Rs can’t do anything without being cheating, lying, hypocrites. Do you really not see the issue here?

Biden changed the rules when he made approving a Supreme Court justice a political football. He was the first one to hold hearings where the nominee was attacked. Before Biden, most SC justices were approved almost unanimously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everybody does realize that RGB was for President Obama filling the seat back in 2016. Saying it was the Senates job and that the President does not not stop being President in his last year. Everyone is just mad that it will be a conservative judge. I bet there is not one of you liberals that supported keeping Obama’s nominee off the court.

... In which case Merrick Garland would be on the bench right now. But he’s not because Rs changed the rules. Now they want to change it back when it suits them. That’s the issue here. Rs can’t do anything without being cheating, lying, hypocrites. Do you really not see the issue here?

There are no "rules." It's just policy.

And since you obviously need a reminder, Obama was a lame duck president when he appointed Garland. Big, big difference.