RIP...

[317Irish]

Extremely unlikely we'll get a nominee, hearings, and a vote before the election. I'd be surprised if Trump even nominates anyone until after the election.

You would be surprised if Trump doesn’t nominate someone before November 3rd?? He has to... this might shake things up one way or the other but he’s projected to lose... and not in the same way that he was in 2016

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

So no one wants to address Mitch’s clear hypocrisy. Y’all GOP supporters gonna stand by and take the win?

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I can't see a situation to be honest of it not happening. We all know both sides would do the same given the timing and situation. The average time from nomination to Senate vote is 67 days which easily puts it in the window, so not really a "ram". And we all know Trump won't take long to nominate.

The only obstacle is those 2-4 Senators who are always on the fringes. I expect Trump to nominate a female, in an attempt to make it hard on those fringe folks. What also works against the dems, is her faith to an extent, given she'll be buried quickly (likely early next week). Had she been another faith, we'd likely see at least a few weeks of mourning and ceremony, which would have delayed a nomination. Or at least it would have looked bad to nominate prior to a funeral.

He held up Merrick Garland for 237 days.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Cack, it’s the political landscape nowadays. It is what it is. I’m more interested in how things will work if it rolls into the lame duck session? Could it potentially come down to the Supreme Court vote if Trump tries to pass it through in December? My mind is a little rusty on what happened when Obama tried to implement an executive order back in 2010.

No sir. Mitch creates the rule last election he held up MG for 237 days. We are now at 50 days. If he tries it, and Dems win Senate and POTUS..... Dems should expand the SCOTUS to 11 and admit DC and PR as states.

 

[Irish YJ]

Yeah she was diagnosed with cancer in 2009 and it’s pretty odd she didn’t step down when Democrats had a super majority in Obama’s first term. But when they say appointment for life, they mean for life.

That would have absolutely been the ideal time from a political perspective. But hindsight because you never know when you'll lose the super majority, or plain majority. Or a huge presidential upset.

I've never liked the "for life" to be honest. I hate the lack of term limits across the board in the Senate, House, and SCOTUS. At minimum, should have an age limit of 80 or 85 for SCOTUS.

You talk about politics ..... RGB isn’t even in the ground And he just said he is gonna have a vote. Lol. Murkowski says she won’t vote. Fair is fair. I wonder what you all think of that? Should he hold a vote when he held up Garland?

How many GOP will not vote to confirm?

Already Romney and Murkowski a no.

I’m really interested in y’alls thoughts on Mitch’s hypocrisy.

Merrick Garland was nominated 237 days before the election.

I'm not sure why you would expect him to say anything different.

On Garland, technically, it's a different situation. Even at 237, we knew Obama was a lame duck, we don't yet know that Trump is a lame duck. And with Garland, the Dems didn't have a majority. At this point, Trump is still president, eligible for a 2nd term, and his party has the Senate.

Extremely unlikely we'll get a nominee, hearings, and a vote before the election. I'd be surprised if Trump even nominates anyone until after the election.

We'll get a nominee IMO within 2 weeks. He's already got his list, and I'm guessing he'll be working with Mitch to pick the one that will make it hardest on the fringe 2-4 folks in the GOP to go against. If Mitch can get control of a few fringe folks, hearings could start and confirmation done in early December.

I can't see Trump not nominating. I can see the process crashing if Mitch can't rally a few.

 

[Irish YJ]

He held up Merrick Garland for 237 days.

So no one wants to address Mitch’s clear hypocrisy. Y’all GOP supporters gonna stand by and take the win?

I addressed the Garland situation in the post I just made.

Honest question. Do you not think the Dems would do the exact same thing in the same situation?

 

[317Irish]

That would have absolutely been the ideal time from a political perspective. But hindsight because you never know when you'll lose the super majority, or plain majority. Or a huge presidential upset.

I've never liked the "for life" to be honest. I hate the lack of term limits across the board in the Senate, House, and SCOTUS. At minimum, should have an age limit of 80 or 85 for SCOTUS.





I'm not sure why you would expect him to say anything different.

On Garland, technically, it's a different situation. Even at 237, we knew Obama was a lame duck, we don't yet know that Trump is a lame duck. And with Garland, the Dems didn't have a majority. At this point, Trump is still president, eligible for a 2nd term, and his party has the Senate.



We'll get a nominee IMO within 2 weeks. He's already got his list, and I'm guessing he'll be working with Mitch to pick the one that will make it hardest on the fringe 2-4 folks in the GOP to go against. If Mitch can get control of a few fringe folks, hearings could start and confirmation done in early December.

I can't see Trump not nominating. I can see the process crashing if Mitch can't rally a few.

One would think Collins, Jones, and Gardner are a few others to watch. YJ I’m not sure if December would work logistically? But I also think as long as Republicans get to 50 we will have another justice before the election. If net 4 say no then it will push on to 46 (or Jan 20)

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I addressed the Garland situation in the post I just made.

Honest question. Do you not think the Dems would do the exact same thing in the same situation?

You can’t justify it. Nope. THat is not at all what Mitch’s rule said.

 

[ulukinatme]

So no one wants to address Mitch’s clear hypocrisy. Y’all GOP supporters gonna stand by and take the win?

After the way the left has fought tooth and nail against Trump since 2016, including his justice nominations, I say push it through. The Kavanaugh situation was ridiculous. Feels like karma.

 

[317Irish]

After the way the left has fought tooth and nail against Trump since 2016, including his justice nominations, I say push it through. The Kavanaugh situation was ridiculous. Feels like karma.

Well placed GIF lol

 

[Irish YJ]

One would think Collins, Jones, and Gardner are a few others to watch. YJ I’m not sure if December would work logistically? But I also think as long as Republicans get to 50 we will have another justice before the election. If net 4 say no then it will push on to 46 (or Jan 20)

I'm honestly not sure of the timing either, but Nov28 to Dec20 is considered a legislative period. McConnell has done an incredible job on the courts in general, so I'm not going to bet against him. This will likely be one of the toughest of his battles, if not his toughest.

Get your popcorn.


Here's a list of their off periods.


Feb 17 - Feb 21 State Work Period Presidents' Day - Feb 17
Mar 16 - Mar 20 State Work Period
Apr 6 - Apr 17 State Work Period
May 25 - May 29 State Work Period Memorial Day - May 25
Jul 3 - Jul 17 State Work Period Independence Day - Jul 4
Aug 10 - Sep 7 State Work Period Labor Day - Sep 7
Sep 28 - Sep 29 State Work Period
Oct 12 - Nov 6 State Work Period Columbus Day - Oct 12
Nov 11 Veterans Day
Nov 23 - Nov 27 State Work Period Thanksgiving - Nov 26
Dec 21 - Dec 31 State Work Period

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

After the way the left has fought tooth and nail against Trump since 2016, including his justice nominations, I say push it through. The Kavanaugh situation was ridiculous. Feels like karma.

I imagine that is what it must feel like. I’m just here for the gymnastics

 

[Sea Turtle]

It's going to be interesting.

 

[317Irish]

I feel bad for contributing to this. A Supreme Court justice just passed away. The last time this happened was ions ago when the worst thing was a few days later a small group of people screaming conspiracy via a pillow choking death and a (per Cack) 237 day mistreatment of Garland. The country has evolved so much that within 30 minutes we forgot a human life and went to to “let’s see what sneaky Mitch is able to accomplish!” This country is not great again folks. I understand the political implications of that statement but fuck no this country isn’t great right now.

 

[Irish YJ]

You can’t justify it. Nope. THat is not at all what Mitch’s rule said.

Oh based on his statement, it's absolutely hypocritical. It's DC. But let's not pretend the left would not do the same thing.

McConnell slowed down all of Obama's nominations for his last two years, not just SCOTUS. He's actually responsible for the large amount of vacancies that Trump has filled. And he's a big reason why the process of filling those vacancies has gone into overdrive.

As an IND who is against "policy by SCOTUS" (or courts in general), I think McConnell has done absolutely a great job, and has absolutely represented his base well. So regardless of hypocrisy, he's doing exactly what his voters want him to do.

It's DC, and it's politics. Not shocked. But I'm sure a bunch of folks will act shocked, and the faux outrage will be on full display.

 

[317Irish]

Oh based on his statement, it's absolutely hypocritical. It's DC. But let's not pretend the left would not do the same thing.

McConnell slowed down all of Obama's nominations for his last two years, not just SCOTUS. He's actually responsible for the large amount of vacancies that Trump has filled. And he's a big reason why the process of filling those vacancies has gone into overdrive.

As an IND who is against "policy by SCOTUS" (or courts in general), I think McConnell has done absolutely a great job, and has absolutely represented his base well. So regardless of hypocrisy, he's doing exactly what his voters want him to do.

It's DC, and it's politics. Not shocked. But I'm sure a bunch of folks will act shocked, and the faux outrage will be on full display.

I agree with everything you just said. The only thing is I truly think that the left would not have performed a Merrick Garland treatment prior to that. They one up’ed it with the Kavanaugh BS (Im not trying to disqualify a woman’s statement but the whole ordeal was done improperly), but I didn’t think that treatment was possible until Mitch threw out the script to his advantage.

 

[TheRealLynch51]

Oh based on his statement, it's absolutely hypocritical. It's DC. But let's not pretend the left would not do the same thing.

McConnell slowed down all of Obama's nominations for his last two years, not just SCOTUS. He's actually responsible for the large amount of vacancies that Trump has filled. And he's a big reason why the process of filling those vacancies has gone into overdrive.

As an IND who is against "policy by SCOTUS" (or courts in general), I think McConnell has done absolutely a great job, and has absolutely represented his base well. So regardless of hypocrisy, he's doing exactly what his voters want him to do.

It's DC, and it's politics. Not shocked. But I'm sure a bunch of folks will act shocked, and the faux outrage will be on full display.

You really trying to say you're an independent?

 

[FDNYIrish1]

Just what we needed leading up to the election. More fuel for the fire. Poor woman isn’t even cold yet and the battle has begun.

 

[Irish YJ]

After the way the left has fought tooth and nail against Trump since 2016, including his justice nominations, I say push it through. The Kavanaugh situation was ridiculous. Feels like karma.

2013 Harry Reid Nuclear Option, 2016-? collusion delusion, 2017 Gorsuch obstruction and McConnell going Harry Reid, the dem led fiasco against Kav....

Yup, classic Karma.

I agree with everything you just said. The only thing is I truly think that the left would not have performed a Merrick Garland treatment prior to that. They one up’ed it with the Kavanaugh BS (Im not trying to disqualify a woman’s statement but the whole ordeal was done improperly), but I didn’t think that treatment was possible until Mitch threw out the script to his advantage.

I disagree to an extent on the Left pulling a Garland. If you want to pick a spot that changed the game, you have to go back to 2013 with Dem Harry Reid and the Nuclear Option. It's always been cutthroat, but it went "nuclear" in 2013 lol. The Kav stuff just upped the game. And keep in mind Mitch used Reid's own ploy against the Dems in 2017 because the Dem's were being trying to block Gorsuch. In short, it just all started going off the tracks in 2013.

 

[317Irish]

2013 Harry Reid Nuclear Option, 2016-? collusion delusion, 2017 Gorsuch obstruction and McConnell going Harry Reid, the dem led fiasco against Kav....

Yup, classic Karma.



I disagree to an extent on the Left pulling a Garland. If you want to pick a spot that changed the game, you have to go back to 2013 with Dem Harry Reid and the Nuclear Option. It's always been cutthroat, but it went "nuclear" in 2013 lol. The Kav stuff just upped the game. And keep in mind Mitch used Reid's own ploy against the Dems in 2017 because the Dem's were being trying to block Gorsuch. In short, it just all started going off the tracks in 2013.

I guess that’s a fair point to use about Reid and I had a feeling that someone would use that as a counterpoint, but I feel like it’s almost apples and oranges when u talk about the way that Mitch used it early in 2016 to say that it was “so close to an election”

 

[317Irish]

I guess that’s a fair point to use about Reid and I had a feeling that someone would use that as a counterpoint, but I feel like it’s almost apples and oranges when u talk about the way that Mitch used it early in 2016 to say that it was “so close to an election”

Honesty I think the election will resolve all issues. If Biden is elected in a fair election, and we already have our new 9th, then pack the courts will unfortunately be discussed. If Biden is elected with no 9th, then dems will prolly also control the senate and control the pick. If Trump is elected then the dems don’t have a lot of room to bitch as long as it’s a fair election.

 

[Irish YJ]

You really trying to say you're an independent?

I'm absolutely independent and have gone split ticket most of my life. I'm pro national health care, pro lesbian/gay/bi, "pro-choice" first trimester and pro-life 2nd and 3rd, pro flat tax, pro keeping out stupid wars, and pro-limited gov.

If you consider that fitting neatly into the box of GOP or conservative, I'm not sure what to tell you. If there was a Dem candidate that held those views, or at least was a centrist and was not afraid to tell the far left to F-off, I'd vote for them. They haven't existed for the last several years.

I don't care to fit into a box. Most people that do fit perfectly into either left or right box are nothing more than sheep. Politics will never be a religion to me.

 

[TheRealLynch51]

I'm absolutely independent and have gone split ticket most of my life. I'm pro national health care, pro lesbian/gay/bi, "pro-choice" first trimester and pro-life 2nd and 3rd, pro flat tax, pro keeping out stupid wars, and pro-limited gov.

If you consider that fitting neatly into the box of GOP or conservative, I'm not sure what to tell you. If there was a Dem candidate that held those views, or at least was a centrist and was not afraid to tell the far left to F-off, I'd vote for them. They haven't existed for the last several years.

I don't care to fit into a box. Most people that do fit perfectly into either left or right box are nothing more than sheep. Politics will never be a religion to me.

What if I told you that no democrat candidate will ever fill those boxes the rest of the time you live and that you'll vote republican for the rest of the time you live? Would you believe me?

 

[Irish YJ]

I guess that’s a fair point to use about Reid and I had a feeling that someone would use that as a counterpoint, but I feel like it’s almost apples and oranges when u talk about the way that Mitch used it early in 2016 to say that it was “so close to an election”

McConnell's statement in itself is hypocritical. He should have just been honest and said the GOP held the Senate majority, and that's that. Instead he wanted to spin saying:

"'The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,'"

Conversely though, President Obama responded that he intended to

"fulfill my constitutional duty to appoint a judge to our highest court," and that there was no "well established tradition" that a president could not fill a Supreme Court vacancy during the U.S. President's last year in office.

So it's funny now that the right will go all Obama, and the left will all McConnell. The hypocrisy from all sides is strong lol.

 

[Irish YJ]

What if I told you that no democrat candidate will ever fill those boxes the rest of the time you live and that you'll vote republican for the rest of the time you live? Would you believe me?

What if I told you that doesn't mean I'm a "republican", or that I'm not an IND.

It might make me a never-Dem again, but it doesn't make me a republican. The parties have changed, my views for the most part haven't. I'll just pray in the meantime for someone, or some party, to emerge with common sense and more center views. In fact, most of my views are held by most of the people. It's the parties, especially the left right now, that have gone extreme. I don't have to go along.

 

[317Irish]

I'm absolutely independent and have gone split ticket most of my life. I'm pro national health care, pro lesbian/gay/bi, "pro-choice" first trimester and pro-life 2nd and 3rd, pro flat tax, pro keeping out stupid wars, and pro-limited gov.

If you consider that fitting neatly into the box of GOP or conservative, I'm not sure what to tell you. If there was a Dem candidate that held those views, or at least was a centrist and was not afraid to tell the far left to F-off, I'd vote for them. They haven't existed for the last several years.

I don't care to fit into a box. Most people that do fit perfectly into either left or right box are nothing more than sheep. Politics will never be a religion to me.

The problem is the evolution of the parties straying further away, each way, from the things that many moderates believe in. The only thing that still amazes me is the allowance that Trump gets on the human front. I would rather have a far right conservative that has dignity and respect for all, and has the back of the entire country in hard times, being the bigger man and not stooping to lower levels like an adolescent. I’m willing to forgo any political leanings where the alternative intentionally creates such a toxic environment.

 

[317Irish]

McConnell's statement in itself is hypocritical. He should have just been honest and said the GOP held the Senate majority, and that's that. Instead he wanted to spin saying:



Conversely though, President Obama responded that he intended to



So it's funny now that the right will go all Obama, and the left will all McConnell. The hypocrisy from all sides is strong lol.

Wait, what are you trying to say? That is the president’s role and until 2016 we have never had quite the same issue confirming the person the president recommended.

 

[Irish YJ]

The problem is the evolution of the parties straying further away, each way, from the things that many moderates believe in. The only thing that still amazes me is the allowance that Trump gets on the human front. I would rather have a far right conservative that has dignity and respect for all, and has the back of the entire country in hard times, being the bigger man and not stooping to lower levels like an adolescent. I’m willing to forgo any political leanings where the alternative intentionally creates such a toxic environment.

I don't like Trump as a person at all. Pretty disgusting to me (HRC was too). But let's be honest, the constant faux outrage (by the media and the left) over every breath he takes, and every fart he makes (yes, gonna play some Police now), has a lot to do with the toxic environment. I don't care what GOP candidate is elected, the mainstream media and left politics is unhinged and will find outrage in everything now. Trump didn't create that. He's a symptom of the disease.

Look no further than the Kav stuff. That wasn't Trump. Or even stupid stuff like the MSM slamming Melania's shoes, while praising the same shoes on Harris. Everything is simply off the charts dumb these days. It's a new world with social media, mainstream media, and the overall "everything conservative is evil and immoral" position of the left. Biden, depending on how you view him, is either status quo swampy, or now a far left cuck. Anyway, I don't vote on personality. I vote on issues.

 

[Irish YJ]

Wait, what are you trying to say? That is the president’s role and until 2016 we have never had quite the same issue confirming the person the president recommended.

Not really true.

Opposition to the President
Opposition to the nominating President played a role in at least 16 of the 36 nominations that were not confirmed. Many of the 16 were put forward by a President in the last year of his presidency—seven occurred after a successor President had been elected, but before the transfer of power to the new administration. Each of these "lame duck" nominations transpired under 19th century Presidents when the post-election period lasted from early November until early March. Four one-term Presidents made nominations of this kind. President John Quincy Adams nominated John J. Crittenden in December 1828, after losing the election to Andrew Jackson.17 President Tyler's third nomination of Walworth, second nomination of King, and only nomination of Read all came after Tyler had lost to James Polk.18 President Millard Fillmore nominated George E. Badger and William C. Micou after Franklin Pierce had been elected to replace him.19 Finally, President James Buchanan forwarded the name of Jeremiah S. Black to the Senate less than a month before Abraham Lincoln's inauguration.20 Other nominations where opposition to the President was a major factor include the remaining unsuccessful Tyler nominations, Fillmore's nomination of Edward A. Bradford, and Andrew Johnson's nomination of Henry Stanbery.21

President Lyndon B. Johnson's two unsuccessful nominations (Fortas and Thornberry) occurred during the last seven months of his presidency, when, having announced he was not seeking re-election, he was considered by some to be a lame duck even before the election of his successor. Nineteen Senators issued a statement indicating that, on this basis, they would oppose any nomination by President Johnson.22 The committee report accompanying the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice, however, suggests that the opposition to Justice Fortas was based, to a considerable extent, on concern about money received by Fortas for delivering university lectures while an Associate Justice, Fortas's close relationship and advisory role with President Johnson while an Associate Justice, and his judicial philosophy.23

President Rutherford B. Hayes nominated Stanley Matthews in late January 1881, about six weeks before the transfer of power to the Garfield administration. In this case, however, the opposition seems to have centered on the nominee and his views, as discussed below, rather than on the nominating President.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL31171.html

And I'd add in that opposition to views (if you read the full study), is many times also opposition to the sitting president. So it's muddy view of things. But bottom line, it's not like 2016 was "new"

 

[317Irish]

I don't like Trump as a person at all. Pretty disgusting to me (HRC was too). But let's be honest, the constant faux outrage (by the media and the left) over every breath he takes, and every fart he makes (yes, gonna play some Police now), has a lot to do with the toxic environment. I don't care what GOP candidate is elected, the mainstream media and left politics is unhinged and will find outrage in everything now. Trump didn't create that. He's a symptom of the disease.

Look no further than the Kav stuff. That wasn't Trump. Or even stupid stuff like the MSM slamming Melania's shoes, while praising the same shoes on Harris. Everything is simply off the charts dumb these days. It's a new world with social media, mainstream media, and the overall "everything conservative is evil and immoral" position of the left. Biden, depending on how you view him, is either status quo swampy, or now a far left cuck. Anyway, I don't vote on personality. I vote on issues.

MSM is the copout. Trump seeps his way into the brain of his enablers to blame MSM, or Antifa, or crazy Nancy or sleepy Joe or whatever his latest twist is. What’s crazy is the media has to choose what to do: report on the typical Trump absurdity and risk the polarization that comes with it from his 40%, or decide that stating that POW’s are losers, he didn’t have sex with a pornstar, the audio with Woodward was him proving that he’s the most pro-America President, those are all non-stories. The media, as much as we are all now taught to hate them, has a duty to report the absurdity that we have lived in the last 4 years. I get that your an “issue voter”. Me too bud. The thing is that if 46 says you know what, Kim Jong Un really knows how to run his country, lets all give him an American salute, I will quickly be requesting #47 ASAP. I guess that’s the difference between me and Trump’s enablers?