SCOTUS

[Ivytalk]

Jackson has strong academic and professional credentials. And she’s only in her early 50s. Haven’t heard much “far left” stuff about her, except she has a D next to her name. If she gets the nomination, she’ll be confirmed without breaking a sweat. At least 55 votes in favor.

[BDKJMU]

So the left pushed out Breyer. That leaves them with a solution to get rid of their Commiela at the top of the ticket in 2024 problem…

[Ibanez]

Let's hope. The Republican's will of course stonewall her, claiming that there's no way the could vote on a candidate, 9 months before a midterm election - those fucks will come up with any excuse. I'm surprised they haven't already said there's no way they could vote on a nominee as long as there's a "2" in the year or some other stupid bullshit. Democrats shouldn't back down from that crap like they have before. It's 50/50 in the Senate and they'll need to nominate a smart choice that can't be refused.

You’re obviously confusing a presidential election year with mid terms.

I'm not...i'm just used to politicians changing the rules, flip-flopping and all that shit to suit them. Like when Lady G said:

If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination," Graham said March 10, 2016. "And you could use my words against me, and you'd be absolutely right."

If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump's term, and the primary process has started, we'll wait until the next election," Graham said Oct. 3, 2018.

[Ibanez]

Jackson has strong academic and professional credentials. And she’s only in her early 50s. Haven’t heard much “far left” stuff about her, except she has a D next to her name. If she gets the nomination, she’ll be confirmed without breaking a sweat. At least 55 votes in favor.

She has to be the one and only choice, IMO. Looking at the short list that circulating, there's no other candidate that could have a swifter, easier confirmation.

And I say that knowing there's a SC Gamecock on the list.

[Ivytalk]

Jackson has strong academic and professional credentials. And she’s only in her early 50s. Haven’t heard much “far left” stuff about her, except she has a D next to her name. If she gets the nomination, she’ll be confirmed without breaking a sweat. At least 55 votes in favor.

She has to be the one and only choice, IMO. Looking at the short list that circulating, there's no other candidate that could have a swifter, easier confirmation.

And I say that knowing there's a SC Gamecock on the list.

Kruger from the CA Supreme Court was also mentioned. Harvard College, Yale Law. But California. Advantage: Jackson.

[GannonFan]

Jackson has strong academic and professional credentials. And she’s only in her early 50s. Haven’t heard much “far left” stuff about her, except she has a D next to her name. If she gets the nomination, she’ll be confirmed without breaking a sweat. At least 55 votes in favor.

Agreed. Heck, if anything, the left might be more concerned that she hasn't been outspokenly "far left" and they might be worried that Republicans actually vote for her.

[GannonFan]

She has to be the one and only choice, IMO. Looking at the short list that circulating, there's no other candidate that could have a swifter, easier confirmation.

And I say that knowing there's a SC Gamecock on the list.

Kruger from the CA Supreme Court was also mentioned. Harvard College, Yale Law. But California. Advantage: Jackson.

Kruger's only ace in the hole is that her mother was Jewish, and apparently Breyer is occupying the "Jewish" seat on the court right now. I didn't know such a thing existed until I looked it up. But yes, Jackson appears to be the better choice. Heck, if anything, Kruger might be even less left than Jackson.

[Ivytalk]

Jackson has strong academic and professional credentials. And she’s only in her early 50s. Haven’t heard much “far left” stuff about her, except she has a D next to her name. If she gets the nomination, she’ll be confirmed without breaking a sweat. At least 55 votes in favor.

Agreed. Heck, if anything, the left might be more concerned that she hasn't been outspokenly "far left" and they might be worried that Republicans actually vote for her.

When Garland was nominated, he had strong pro-labor sentiments that made him suspect in GOP eyes. Now he’s our political hack AG. Glad his SCOTUS nomination never moved forward.

[Ibanez]

She has to be the one and only choice, IMO. Looking at the short list that circulating, there's no other candidate that could have a swifter, easier confirmation.

And I say that knowing there's a SC Gamecock on the list.

Kruger from the CA Supreme Court was also mentioned. Harvard College, Yale Law. But California. Advantage: Jackson.

California is a no-go .

[Ivytalk]

Kruger from the CA Supreme Court was also mentioned. Harvard College, Yale Law. But California. Advantage: Jackson.

Kruger's only ace in the hole is that her mother was Jewish, and apparently Breyer is occupying the "Jewish" seat on the court right now. I didn't know such a thing existed until I looked it up. But yes, Jackson appears to be the better choice. Heck, if anything, Kruger might be even less left than Jackson.

Actually, Kagan is Jewish. That issue is a wash.

[GannonFan]

Agreed. Heck, if anything, the left might be more concerned that she hasn't been outspokenly "far left" and they might be worried that Republicans actually vote for her.

When Garland was nominated, he had strong pro-labor sentiments that made him suspect in GOP eyes. Now he’s our political hack AG. Glad his SCOTUS nomination never moved forward.

We dodged a bullet with him, he's such a mental lightweight, he would've been an albatross on that Court for years to come. I don't know if Obama could've made a worse pick.

[BDKJMU]

You’re obviously confusing a presidential election year with mid terms.

I'm not...i'm just used to politicians changing the rules, flip-flopping and all that shit to suit them. Like when Lady G said:

If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination," Graham said March 10, 2016. "And you could use my words against me, and you'd be absolutely right."

If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump's term, and the primary process has started, we'll wait until the next election," Graham said Oct. 3, 2018.

I don’t care what Graham said. 2016 amd 2020 were 2 different things

-2016 donk POTUS and conk senate. Conks were absolutely right to wait until 2017. That was their ONLY chance to get a conk pick confirmed. Was proved to be a very fortuitous move- otherwise we’d have leftist Garland instead of Kavanaugh.

-2020 conk POTUS and conk senate. Conks were absolutely right to force a confirmation vote 2016. Their best chance to get a conk pick confirmed. Turned out to be a very smart move. Otherwise we’d have Biden’s 1st pick instead of Barrett.

-2022 donk POTUS and donk (barely) Senate. Donks would be absolutely right, and smart, to force a confirmation vote this year. The donks best chance to guarantee a donk pick (but they can’t afford a single Senate defection)

Elections have consequences. And since the donks started the Borking of SCOTUS nominees in the 80s, turning the process 100% political, you do everthing to try to get your pick confirmed, and everything to block the other sides.

[Ivytalk]

When Garland was nominated, he had strong pro-labor sentiments that made him suspect in GOP eyes. Now he’s our political hack AG. Glad his SCOTUS nomination never moved forward.

We dodged a bullet with him, he's such a mental lightweight, he would've been an albatross on that Court for years to come. I don't know if Obama could've made a worse pick.

Garland has two Harvard degrees and graduated at or near the top of his class. I wouldn’t call him a mental lightweight, but it’s fair to call him a political hack. Case in point: the Virginia school board letter.

[HI54UNI]

Conspiracy theory - Biden appoint Kamala Harris to the seat to get her out of the VP position so the Dems can put someone else in there to be the "incumbent" when Biden doesn't run again in 2024 because they know she is a loser.

[BDKJMU]

Conspiracy theory - Biden appoint Kamala Harris to the seat to get her out of the VP position so the Dems can put someone else in there to be the "incumbent" when Biden doesn't run again in 2024 because they know she is a loser.

Yeah, I alluded to that above:

So the left pushed out Breyer. That leaves them with a solution to get rid of their Commiela at the top of the ticket in 2024 problem…

[BDKJMU]

Conks have had several picks in my lifetime that turned out to be more moderate (OConner, Kennedy, Roberts, Kavanaugh), or liberal (Souter).

Funny how the donks never seem to have a pick that doesn’t turn out out to be liberal. In that regard they do a better job than conks.

[Ivytalk]

Conspiracy theory - Biden appoint Kamala Harris to the seat to get her out of the VP position so the Dems can put someone else in there to be the "incumbent" when Biden doesn't run again in 2024 because they know she is a loser.

I’ve heard speculation to that effect, but Harris is a REAL mental lightweight and a failed California AG. If Biden pledged to nominate a black woman, he’ll pick someone with unquestioned legal talent. His handlers won’t let him make that mistake.

[Ivytalk]

Conks have had several picks in my lifetime that turned out to be more moderate (OConner, Kennedy, Roberts, Kavanaugh), or liberal (Breyer).

Funny how the donks never seem to have a pick that doesn’t turn out out to be liberal. In that regard they do a better job than conks.

Breyer was a Clinton appointee, not a GOP appointee. Maybe you meant to say Souter.

[BDKJMU]

Conks have had several picks in my lifetime that turned out to be more moderate (OConner, Kennedy, Roberts, Kavanaugh), or liberal (Breyer).

Funny how the donks never seem to have a pick that doesn’t turn out out to be liberal. In that regard they do a better job than conks.

Breyer was a Clinton appointee, not a GOP appointee. Maybe you meant to say Souter.

Yeah, I meant Souter. Had Breyer on the brain since his name is all over the news.

[AZGrizFan]

Conks have had several picks in my lifetime that turned out to be more moderate (OConner, Kennedy, Roberts, Kavanaugh), or liberal (Souter).

Funny how the donks never seem to have a pick that doesn’t turn out out to be liberal. In that regard they do a better job than conks.

They should all be moderates.

[JoltinJoe]

Jackson has strong academic and professional credentials. And she’s only in her early 50s. Haven’t heard much “far left” stuff about her, except she has a D next to her name. If she gets the nomination, she’ll be confirmed without breaking a sweat. At least 55 votes in favor.

She's not nearly liberal enough for the Democratic/progressive base. She'd get over 50 votes if nominated, but Biden is going to be disappointing a lot of his base with a carbon copy of Kagan.

[CID1990]

She has to be the one and only choice, IMO. Looking at the short list that circulating, there's no other candidate that could have a swifter, easier confirmation.

And I say that knowing there's a SC Gamecock on the list.

Kruger from the CA Supreme Court was also mentioned. Harvard College, Yale Law. But California. Advantage: Jackson.

How serendipitous is it that since Biden pigeonholed himself into picking a woman of cullah, that at this moment in time the only realistic choices are two women with some pretty good resumes and they aren't from the klamwing?

[Ibanez]

I'm not...i'm just used to politicians changing the rules, flip-flopping and all that shit to suit them. Like when Lady G said:

I don’t care what Graham said. 2016 amd 2020 were 2 different things

-2016 donk POTUS and conk senate. Conks were absolutely right to wait until 2017. That was their ONLY chance to get a conk pick confirmed. Was proved to be a very fortuitous move- otherwise we’d have leftist Garland instead of Kavanaugh.

-2020 conk POTUS and conk senate. Conks were absolutely right to force a confirmation vote 2016. Their best chance to get a conk pick confirmed. Turned out to be a very smart move. Otherwise we’d have Biden’s 1st pick instead of Barrett.

-2022 donk POTUS and donk (barely) Senate. Donks would be absolutely right, and smart, to force a confirmation vote this year. The donks best chance to guarantee a donk pick (but they can’t afford a single Senate defection)

Elections have consequences. And since the donks started the Borking of SCOTUS nominees in the 80s, turning the process 100% political, you do everthing to try to get your pick confirmed, and everything to block the other sides.

I’m not surprised you don’t care about a Republican flip flopping and being dishonest. The margins of power don’t matter 1 iota.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

I don’t care what Graham said. 2016 amd 2020 were 2 different things

-2016 donk POTUS and conk senate. Conks were absolutely right to wait until 2017. That was their ONLY chance to get a conk pick confirmed. Was proved to be a very fortuitous move- otherwise we’d have leftist Garland instead of Kavanaugh.

-2020 conk POTUS and conk senate. Conks were absolutely right to force a confirmation vote 2016. Their best chance to get a conk pick confirmed. Turned out to be a very smart move. Otherwise we’d have Biden’s 1st pick instead of Barrett.

-2022 donk POTUS and donk (barely) Senate. Donks would be absolutely right, and smart, to force a confirmation vote this year. The donks best chance to guarantee a donk pick (but they can’t afford a single Senate defection)

Elections have consequences. And since the donks started the Borking of SCOTUS nominees in the 80s, turning the process 100% political, you do everthing to try to get your pick confirmed, and everything to block the other sides.

I’m not surprised you don’t care about a Republican flip flopping and being dishonest. The margins of power don’t matter 1 iota.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lindsey is your Senator. Don’t blame me.

[HI54UNI]

Does an American Indian count as a woman of color? Asking for a friend.

Spoiler: show