Anonymous wrote:
You can scream and cry all you want, but Trump will nominate an extreme conservative and a Republican Senate will quickly confirm. Is it fair? No, absolutely not. But that’s what’s going to happen. And the Dems won’t pack the Court if they win the Presidency and the Senate (and that’s a big if), because then the Republicans would just do the same down the road. This is all very nasty and sad, but it’s what will happen. End of debate. End of story.
Glad to see someone has already reached the Acceptance phase of Grief.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
The biggest problem for Democrats is that voters will be thinking about the SC instead of COVID. We're numb as a country to 200,000 deaths and now we'll have confirmation hearings to distract us.
Very good point. The news media will now focus on her funeral/legacy, then off to the races on the Supreme Court nominee’s background, confirmation hearings, etc. COVID news will be back burner.
People don't care about covid anyway. People care about the economy. That's not changing.
People whose kids are doing "distance learning" care about COVID.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/410686-grassley-says-judiciary-panel-wouldnt-consider-supreme-court-nominee-in
Grassley has already said that he would not consider a SC justice nomination in 2020. So have Murkowski, Collins and Romney. Unless McConnell can pressure these four to change their minds, they have all publicly said that they would not vote to fill a SC seat in 2020. And they have all said so in the last few months.
Graham said it in 2018. So we'll see if he keeps his word.
Lindsey has a surprisingly tough re-election this year. He’ll cave.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
The biggest problem for Democrats is that voters will be thinking about the SC instead of COVID. We're numb as a country to 200,000 deaths and now we'll have confirmation hearings to distract us.
Very good point. The news media will now focus on her funeral/legacy, then off to the races on the Supreme Court nominee’s background, confirmation hearings, etc. COVID news will be back burner.
People don't care about covid anyway. People care about the economy. That's not changing.
Anonymous wrote:You can scream and cry all you want, but Trump will nominate an extreme conservative and a Republican Senate will quickly confirm. Is it fair? No, absolutely not. But that’s what’s going to happen. And the Dems won’t pack the Court if they win the Presidency and the Senate (and that’s a big if), because then the Republicans would just do the same down the road. This is all very nasty and sad, but it’s what will happen. End of debate. End of story.
Anonymous wrote:You can scream and cry all you want, but Trump will nominate an extreme conservative and a Republican Senate will quickly confirm. Is it fair? No, absolutely not. But that’s what’s going to happen. And the Dems won’t pack the Court if they win the Presidency and the Senate (and that’s a big if), because then the Republicans would just do the same down the road. This is all very nasty and sad, but it’s what will happen. End of debate. End of story.
Anonymous wrote:You can scream and cry all you want, but Trump will nominate an extreme conservative and a Republican Senate will quickly confirm. Is it fair? No, absolutely not. But that’s what’s going to happen. And the Dems won’t pack the Court if they win the Presidency and the Senate (and that’s a big if), because then the Republicans would just do the same down the road. This is all very nasty and sad, but it’s what will happen. End of debate. End of story.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The biggest problem for Democrats is that voters will be thinking about the SC instead of COVID. We're numb as a country to 200,000 deaths and now we'll have confirmation hearings to distract us.
Very good point. The news media will now focus on her funeral/legacy, then off to the races on the Supreme Court nominee’s background, confirmation hearings, etc. COVID news will be back burner.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/410686-grassley-says-judiciary-panel-wouldnt-consider-supreme-court-nominee-in
Grassley has already said that he would not consider a SC justice nomination in 2020. So have Murkowski, Collins and Romney. Unless McConnell can pressure these four to change their minds, they have all publicly said that they would not vote to fill a SC seat in 2020. And they have all said so in the last few months.
Graham said it in 2018. So we'll see if he keeps his word.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So McConnell can ram through a SC confirmation but cannot pass another bill to help people who have lost their jobs because of Covid? Interesting.
THIS.
He knows his constituents. Guns, God, Gays. And corporate welfare.
Anonymous wrote:The biggest problem for Democrats is that voters will be thinking about the SC instead of COVID. We're numb as a country to 200,000 deaths and now we'll have confirmation hearings to distract us.