GlockTalk Forum banner

Should Trump nominate a replacement for Ginsburg?

  • Yes, nominate someone immediately and begin hearings

    Votes: 281 93.4%
  • No, wait until after inauguration

    Votes: 20 6.6%
161 - 180 of 211 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,434 Posts
So watching Biden talking now, he admitted if elected, he will select an African American liberal women. He would “consult” both sides first though.
lol.
It is VERY important to select someone next week and have them (her) appointed this year.
Senate-do your job!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,651 Posts
Trump will nominate some woman this week. FBI background checks could commence but there won’t be any hearings for quite a while. The Senate won’t even be in session for another 2 weeks. I don’t see any possibility of a Senate vote before the election. My guess the vote will be in the lame duck session.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,125 Posts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,493 Posts
Yes

Now


Do it


God Bless America
 
  • Like
Reactions: spork and NoJoy

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,241 Posts
Don’t we already have a wise Latina on the bench?
Here's the more relevant tactics: Nominate the Hispanic/Latino Barbara Lagoa.

Mitt goes against that, he's done in Utah.
Dems go against that, they're done in south Florida where the Cubans traditionally voted Dems.
Oh yes, there are other states with huge Latino and Hispanic votes. They're becoming part of the silent majority.

Let's put the Dems against the Identity politics they like to play. Let that chicken comes home to roost!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
I know I'm thinking narrowly, but Congress is weaponizing things that were never meant to be used for partisan reasons.

Filling a SC vacancy promptly is just appropriate procedure. Impeachment is not intended to be a casual game.

Some of the stuff I heard this weekend was disturbing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
Since Trump already said he would nominate a woman this week, this question has already been answered. And when you're dealing with an unscrupulous adversary who has openly vowed to disrupt the process by any and all means and that no opption is off the table no matter how destructive it is to the country, Trump has nothing to lose by doing his Presidential duty and nominating someone for the vacancy immediately. JMHO.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
458 Posts
Since Trump already said he would nominate a woman this week, this question has already been answered. And when you're dealing with an unscrupulous adversary who has openly vowed to disrupt the process by any and all means and that no opption is off the table no matter how destructive it is to the country, Trump has nothing to lose by doing his Presidential duty and nominating someone for the vacancy immediately. JMHO.
Does anyone else think it’s WRONG to make the initial SCOTUS screening by DNA/sex gland type??? This eliminates many (most?) of the senior experienced jurists in the U.S.! Doesn’t it embarrass the final Supreme Court Judge to say: “well, no, I wasn’t the most qualified attorney but I had the specified sex glands.....?”
 
161 - 180 of 211 Posts
Top