TexasCHLforum.com

ELB wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 10:35 am TRUMP CUTS GORDIAN KNOT!

In Lieu Of New Justice, Trump Announces He Will Simply Grant Clarence Thomas Two Votes

...And he now has two chairs, which means that during hearings he can use the second seat to put his feet up. “It’s pretty sweet,” Thomas told reporters.

That is too funny. If he had actually said that I'd say he was taking a cue from Rush and just having a little fun trolling the left.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ginsburg-n ... omination/

“The president is elected for four years, not three years, so the power he has in year three continues into year four,” she said. “And maybe our members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be.”

So, it seems like their own opinion varies depending upon the circumstances.

strogg wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:49 pm Let's not forget that the dems can stack the supreme court if they win.

This event cannot have happened at a worse time politically. I am still unswayed with taking the high road, though. It is seemingly the best political move as well as the more scrupulous route. It seems like it's not going to happen, though, based on the words of McConnell and Trump. I hope this won't turn ugly come November.

Sorry, too late.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/ruth-ba ... enny-nance

Consider also that McSally could loose her seat in Arizona to Mark Kelly on November 3, he could be sworn in by November 30th and vote on the nominee if that is still up in the air at that time.

I am also very poor at politics and don't know which way would be better politically.

Flightmare made a point, though, that if the GOP gets this done before the election it may very well take the wind out of their sails for the election itself and many may just stay home and not vote because they wouldn't see a reason to vote after already having lost another supreme seat.

Which would be better in the long run? Another 4 years of Trump, that still isn't a given? Or a 6-3 majority in the Supreme Court for quite a while longer? Or since we can't much count on Roberts this would make it 5-4.

I'm not sure there is a high or low road when it comes to politics anymore. There's just politics. Thank you Dingy Harry.

It's just business. It's not personal.

The differences now being that Trump can serve another term if elected. In 2016 the dems did not control the Senate. If they had, there is no doubt in my mind at all that they would have confirmed Garland prior to the election or at least prior to Trump being sworn in since HRC lost. No doubt!

So, of course, the dems want to wait. They are not in control of the Senate and don't look to regain that control. It also looks as if their chances of putting Joe "sniffy" Biden or Harris in the Oval Office are fading. It's like the caged or trapped wild animal that knows he's gonna die and will still go down fighting.

Flightmare wrote: ↑Fri Sep 18, 2020 7:38 pm

C-dub wrote: ↑Fri Sep 18, 2020 6:56 pm With a Republican Senate, get ready for the left to lose their minds. What does everyone think the odds of the next SCOTUS Justice being confirmed before November 3?

Not very high. Even if a nomination were to be made before then, the democrats would stall until after the November election. Just my opinion.

My thoughts also, but since a simple majority is all that is needed to confirm and Mitch McConnell is basically in charge, it could get done pretty quick. Wouldn't that be a hoot?

I wonder if they really want to take the chance of not getting it done before election day, but I suppose they can still get it done afterward even if the senate gets flipped.

BTW, are you gonna be at breakfast at Rudy's tomorrow?

With a Republican Senate, get ready for the left to lose their minds. What does everyone think the odds of the next SCOTUS Justice being confirmed before November 3?

No link yet. Just announced on the news.