Breaking: Mitch McConnell has enough support for nomination to the Supreme Court after statements from Grassley and Gardner

Even moderate Republicans see the importance of appointing a Constitutionalist to the SCOTUS.

One thing I keep hearing Democrats saying in the news is that a conservative appointment to the high court will result in Roe v Wade being overturned. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening and neither do they. They are using that as a scare tactic to cause greater division in the country.
 
I think it very possible that they will be a justice confirmed by election time. The GOP is worthless if they don't.

Most of us here know that changing the face of the Supreme Court is possibly the most important single thing Trump can do for this country.

Regarding Roe v Wade...no matter how you feel about abortion, the decision was based on very poor legal principle, and would have never came down that way had it not been for extreme activism on the court. It should be overturned, but I'll believe it when I see it. I'm not sure the court will have the balls to even go there.
 
I know that Collins and Murkowski are from purple districts, but if they vote against a woman that might be hard to explain to the soccer moms who put them there. The rock throwers have always voted against them.
 
lotstodo said:
I know that Collins and Murkowski are from purple districts, but if they vote against a woman that might be hard to explain to the soccer moms who put them there. The rock throwers have always voted against them.
Click to expand...
Both have said they will not support it. That's OK, we can afford to lose them.

Might even get s few Dem votes.
 
If the nomination goes forward (and it's a big IF) it will have a ginormous price tag. With the upcoming budget deadline looming, economic relief still needed (and wanted), and the election around the corner every politician voting FOR the nominee will expect (and probably get) pork with their order of bacon.
 
The left is still saying we should honor RBG's dying wish her seat not be filled until a new president is inaugurated. I don't believe that was her dying wish. I think her granddaughter is lying to us. RBG believed in the law and I doubt she would have wished for something like that.

So, what no precedent has ever been set that a SCOTUS appointment has never been made this close to an election. The left wants to use that as well for a reason not to do an appointment. Usually precedent is the first time for something to occur that others follow in the future. There are several states that have already started early voting. Never before has the nation had voting this early prior to the actual scheduled election day. The Democrats like it though and wanted it, but where was the precedent to do so? Hey Dems, you agree there is a first time for anything. Anything that is what you want.

The Dems think a dying person's last wish should trump the Constitution. If this were a case where the Dems held the WH and the senate majority; they would be moving forward with an appointment this close to the election.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top