Forums - Politics Discussion - Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead

Snesboy said:

Damn guys, no need to attack conservatives with your conspiracy theories about who Trump is going to appoint.

It's gonna be Amy Coney Barrett. A nice, Catholic, conservative woman.



EDIT: Here's a link:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/09/18/replacing-ruth-bader-ginsburg-list-starts-amy-coney-barrett/2669382002/

"Conspiracy Theories"

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/09/911194201/trump-adds-ted-cruz-tom-cotton-to-list-of-potential-scotus-picks

Trump Adds Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton To List Of Potential Supreme Court Picks



Around the Network

I hope you Americans wise up and remove Putin's puppetry.



Hopefully this lights a fire under the asses of fence-sitting progressives everywhere and gets them to vote Biden. This is why elections matter. Republicans will never play fair, so we have to beat them at the ballot box.



If you thought America was a shitshow before, just wait until the next justice is nominated/confirmed by Republicans.



Shadow1980 said:
Hopefully this lights a fire under the asses of fence-sitting progressives everywhere and gets them to vote Biden. This is why elections matter. Republicans will never play fair, so we have to beat them at the ballot box.

Yeah, I'm trying to think about what this means for the election and it is hard to say. I think it may motivate some Progressives, but we also have to assume that it will motivate the pro-life crowd. 

I feel if Republicans try to brute force this, it will help Democrats in the election, but if they wait its a toss up imo



Around the Network
NightlyPoe said:
Moren said:
If Republicans do end up filling this seat, I hope Democrats respond in kind with adding more justices to the court should they gain power.

I would point out that filling a vacant seat (or refusing to) is normal.  Democrats, including Biden himself, have said they would have done the same to a Republican nominee in an election year.

Packing the court is not a proportional response.  It is extremist and incredibly destabilizing to the integrity of the courts.

Edit:  If you don't believe me that the Democrats have said these were the rules, here's the video of Biden (then Chairman of the Judiciary Committee) on the subject in 1992.  So please, stop with the idea that Republicans are the ones playing hardcore or that Democrats don't fight tooth and nail on court nominations.  Historically, Democrats have been much more willing to bend rules to suit them on the subject.

I watched the video. He said that confirmations in the summer or fall (y'know, a couple months out from the election) are rare and that Bush shouldn't nominate someone in that time frame. Obama nominated someone March 15th. Seems pretty consistent to me. McConnell is only consistent in that he'll do anything to put in as many judges as possible. 



...

Shadow1980 said:
Hopefully this lights a fire under the asses of fence-sitting progressives everywhere and gets them to vote Biden. This is why elections matter. Republicans will never play fair, so we have to beat them at the ballot box.

While the odds are really low that Trump fills the position with another liberal leaning individual, female at that, even if he did, would the media and Dems sit back and think they may have Trump wrong? How many would give him any credit for making that decision period? Just something to ponder.



NightlyPoe said:
sundin13 said:

Yeah, I'm trying to think about what this means for the election and it is hard to say. I think it may motivate some Progressives, but we also have to assume that it will motivate the pro-life crowd. 

I feel if Republicans try to brute force this, it will help Democrats in the election, but if they wait its a toss up imo

Well, no matter what, no one will be confirmed before the election.  It takes about 2 months to confirm a justice.  Even if a nominee happens tomorrow and everything is expedited, we're still talking about late-November.  Nevermind, all the time off the Senate will be taking off between now and January to run for election and holiday breaks.

As for "who it helps", it's probably Republicans.  What Trump needs is for the people who don't like him but generally disagree with him to vote for him.  There's nothing that brings wayward Republicans back into the camp than the court.

Susan Collins just got one heck of a headache though.


While they wouldn't get confirmed before the election, I don't believe there is anything technically stopping them from confirming someone in the lame-duck session beyond precedent. I think there are too many Republican senators who would stand in the way of that, but it is hard to say for sure. If Republicans think they are going to lose, they might do a suicide run.



NightlyPoe said:
sundin13 said:

While they wouldn't get confirmed before the election, I don't believe there is anything technically stopping them from confirming someone in the lame-duck session beyond precedent. I think there are too many Republican senators who would stand in the way of that, but it is hard to say for sure. If Republicans think they are going to lose, they might do a suicide run.

Of course not.  But Republicans using "brute force" after the election will obviously not add any votes to either way.

They'll already know that they've either lost or won.

You said it yourself, the confirmation process takes several months. They would likely have to start brute forcing before the election, therefore...



And just like that the US inches ever closer to a theocracy and a complete buttfuck of the separation of church and state. Thank you Regressive Left for your identity politics and all your BS that ignited and emboldened the Right.

The Left should be trying to seduce people in the Right to increase numbers and become stronger, not alienate everyone with your fucking purity tests.



Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1