japantiger 4,051 Posted July 12, 2018 Author Share Posted July 12, 2018 12 hours ago, homersapien said: And he did so because the Republicans were refusing to appoint any district court judges. Pure obstructionism. So what you're saying then is McConnel is justified with Gorsuch and Kavenaugh...since, well, because Democrats were refusing to appoint any Supreme court judges. Pure obstructionism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,352 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 On 7/11/2018 at 10:58 PM, japantiger said: So what you're saying then is McConnel is justified with Gorsuch and Kavenaugh...since, well, because Democrats were refusing to appoint any Supreme court judges. Pure obstructionism. Sorry, but I don't understand that. I doesn't make sense. Democrats in congress don't get to appoint supreme court justices even though there were many positions to be filled. McConnell's obstructionism was blatant and is well recognized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 On 7/9/2018 at 10:03 PM, TexasTiger said: I don’t have strong feelings at the moment. Seems like a pick many Republicans could make . A lot of politics in his background, though. I would have preferred Hardiman from the list— paid tuition driving a cab. I think the Court benefits from someone with less of an Ivy League pedigree. His writings will be scrutinized, he’ll be questioned and perhaps I’ll feel differently. Don’t agree with his view shielding the President from all litigation. Hardiman may get another look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,469 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 Amy Coney Barrett, come on down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,131 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 9 hours ago, TexasTiger said: Hardiman may get another look. He was my preference on the initial go around. Titan's probably right that Barrett will get a good look. Rs will have an easier time ramming a hardliner through post scandal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,469 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, AUDub said: He was my preference on the initial go around. Titan's probably right that Barrett will get a good look. Rs will have an easier time ramming a hardliner through post scandal. And, it will be easier to get a woman confirmed after something like this than another white (trigger warning for PT) dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 1 hour ago, TitanTiger said: And, it will be easier to get a woman confirmed after something like this than another white (trigger warning for PT) dude. Depends. Collins and Murkowski may not support someone as avowedly against Roe v Wade. The choice is partisan fight to excite the base or a conservative choice who is less outspoken on the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,469 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 Maybe. I think they're less likely to reject a second nominee and hurt their party more than the Kavanaugh withdrawal already would have. But I'm sure that's part of the calculus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,131 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 8 minutes ago, TexasTiger said: Depends. Collins and Murkowski may not support someone as avowedly against Roe v Wade. The choice is partisan fight to excite the base or a conservative choice who is less outspoken on the issue. Well that leaves Kethledge or Hardiman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,469 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 1 minute ago, TitanTiger said: Maybe. I think they're less likely to reject a second nominee and hurt their party more than the Kavanaugh withdrawal already would have. But I'm sure that's part of the calculus. Plus, her statements on Roe aren't exactly that inflammatory: https://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2018/07/08/amy-coney-barrett-what-possible-supreme-court-nominee-has-said-roe-v-wade-and-other-issues/759076002/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 23 minutes ago, TitanTiger said: Maybe. I think they're less likely to reject a second nominee and hurt their party more than the Kavanaugh withdrawal already would have. But I'm sure that's part of the calculus. That may create pressure to have an easy confirmation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ATX 13,654 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 1 hour ago, TitanTiger said: Maybe. I think they're less likely to reject a second nominee and hurt their party more than the Kavanaugh withdrawal already would have. But I'm sure that's part of the calculus. Let's assume that Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed. If the Rs were to lose the Senate, do they risk also losing the White House in 2020 if they ram a nominee through post-midterm elections before January? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,469 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 2 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said: Let's assume that Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed. If the Rs were to lose the Senate, do they risk also losing the White House in 2020 if they ram a nominee through post-midterm elections before January? I don't think so. I'm sure the DNC will spin it that way, but I don't think it lodges with voters that way. I don't think a midterm election is held in the same high priority the way a presidential one is. And I say that believing that McConnell's tactic on Garland was actually underhanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ATX 13,654 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said: I don't think so. I'm sure the DNC will spin it that way, but I don't think it lodges with voters that way. I don't think a midterm election is held in the same high priority the way a presidential one is. And I say that believing that McConnell's tactic on Garland was actually underhanded. I guess I'm not thinking about the hard-cores, but rather the middle. I can see that being a big problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,469 Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 1 minute ago, Brad_ATX said: I guess I'm not thinking about the hard-cores, but rather the middle. I can see that being a big problem. I don't think the middle feels that way either. If they had, I think they would have punished the GOP for doing what they did with Garland and Trump loses big. The GOP may lose the White House in 2020, but there are myriad other reasons that would happen before anything about a SCOTUS nominee being rammed through prior to mid terms would register as a factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,352 Posted September 18, 2018 Share Posted September 18, 2018 9 hours ago, TitanTiger said: I don't think the middle feels that way either. If they had, I think they would have punished the GOP for doing what they did with Garland and Trump loses big. The GOP may lose the White House in 2020, but there are myriad other reasons that would happen before anything about a SCOTUS nominee being rammed through prior to mid terms would register as a factor. You're probably right, but keep in mind that Trump "won" with a ~3 million vote popular vote deficit. No way Trump gets re-elected, regardless of supreme court politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japantiger 4,051 Posted October 6, 2018 Author Share Posted October 6, 2018 Congrats Justice Kavanaugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japantiger 4,051 Posted October 7, 2018 Author Share Posted October 7, 2018 The best of Twitter today....here's what would happen if Trump nominated Jesus for SCOTUS: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,410 Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 52 minutes ago, japantiger said: The best of Twitter today....here's what would happen if Trump nominated Jesus for SCOTUS: I laughed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 On 9/17/2018 at 9:51 PM, homersapien said: You're probably right, but keep in mind that Trump "won" with a ~3 million vote popular vote deficit. No way Trump gets re-elected, regardless of supreme court politics. You’re in for a major let down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,352 Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 10 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said: You’re in for a major let down. Well, as a Auburn fan for over half a century I'll be well-equipped to deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.