Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I say President Trump appoints a replacement ASAP! I guarantee you that if he doesn't, in 4 to 6 months from now the Demolibs are going to do something that makes us look back and wish we had.
Just look at all the bs the Demolibs have done to President Trump / Republicans since President Trump announced he was running for office. Look at all the bs the bs the Demolibs have done since President Trump won the 2016 election.
The Demolibs are sweating the load big-time right now. They've resorted to reverse psychology in many cases such as commenting that if President Trump appoints the replacement before the election, it's because he doesn't think he will win this November.
I say President Trump needs to appoint a replacement ASAP. Enough of the bs from the Demolibs. They've burned down so many cities, destroyed businesses, etc. etc. all just this last year after the failed impeachment scam went down in flames.
I guarantee you that if President Trump doesn't appoint a replacement before this November, in 4 to 6 months from now, maybe even sooner, the Demolibs are going to do something that will cause us to regret that we didn't take that opportunity.
This poll is bogus.
Who the hell polls on a weekend?
People are busy on weekend with their own lives, and more than likely don't get involved in polls.
This is just some more dem crap in the hopes of swaying voters.
No one so far has answered the question that was the last sentence of the original post.
The answer is why independents like myself are concerned about an expansion or longstanding overly biased representation of any of the 3 branches of government, regardless of it is done by (or largely held by) any political affiliation.
The answer to that question is why statements (and thoughts) like below are very concerning:
President Trump stated today:
"When you have the Senate, when you have the votes, you can sort of do what you want as long as you have it"
There is a reason why what the President and some Republicans are saying they want to do has not been done in 80 years, even though both political affiliations have been in office during that time.
Again I ask the question: After watching the video, what have Republicans said why a Supreme Court justice should not be selected in an election year?
No one so far has answered the question that was the last sentence of the original post.
The answer is why independents like myself are concerned about an expansion or longstanding overly biased representation of any of the 3 branches of government, regardless of it is done by (or largely held by) any political affiliation.
The answer to that question is why statements (and thoughts) like below are very concerning:
President Trump stated today:
"When you have the Senate, when you have the votes, you can sort of do what you want as long as you have it"
There is a reason why what the President and some Republicans are saying they want to do has not been done in 80 years, even though both political affiliations have been in office during that time.
Again I ask the question: After watching the video, what have Republicans said why a Supreme Court justice should not be selected in an election year?
Im not kidding with my answer of because they can. Ive seen lists, but they are pretzel logic.
Next up is the Dems upping the game with packing the SCOTUS.
It’s not really Fake News that Reuter’s did a manipulative Poll AFTER Justice Ginsburg passed away.
It’s not HONEST, but the Leftist Media is rarely HONEST.
This is the Poll you are referring to and it was done BEFORE Justice Ginsburg passed.
It’s not like we all didn’t know this was coming shortly.
A new poll conducted shortly before the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg revealed that an overwhelming majority of U.S. adults of all political stripes supported holding hearings for a nominee if a vacancy opened on the nation's highest bench.
Marquette University released the survey results on Saturday that showed 67% of adults believed the Senate should hold a hearing if a vacancy occurred during 2020's race, with only 32% opposition — and similar strong numbers across Republicans, Democrats, and independents, who supported holding confirmation hearings at 68-31%, 63-37%, and 71-28% respectively. The poll was completed three days before the death of Ginsburg, the 87-year-old liberal icon who was nominated by President Bill Clinton and confirmed in 1993. Ginsburg earned praise from Democrats and Republicans upon news of her death.
Republicans, Democrats and Independents are we’re in favor of a Nomination and Hearings.
And look what Lord trump said back then, directly from your poll:
Back in 2016, Trump said, "I think the next president should make the pick, and I think they shouldn’t go forward, and I believe I’m pretty much in line with what the Republicans are saying."
Putting someone on the SCOTUS bench is more important than any one election. That one seat on the bench will protect the people from the unconstitutional far left agenda for a decade.
There's no way you potentially throw that away to appease anyone. You do your job and you protect the American people no matter what anyone thinks about it. Besides, being weak doesn't encourage people to vote for you as a leader.
Please do tell...............what part of the unconstitutional far left agenda must the high court protect us from? I think you mean to say that the if the seat is filled with a Democratic candidate then they might uphold Roe v Wade, women's rights, LGBTQ rights, coverage for pre-existing conditions, etc? The HORROR!!!!
Please do tell...............what part of the unconstitutional far left agenda must the high court protect us from? I think you mean to say that the if the seat is filled with a Democratic candidate then they might uphold Roe v Wade, women's rights, LGBTQ rights, coverage for pre-existing conditions, etc? The HORROR!!!!
I'm sure they would do those things while shredding the first and second amendment. Constitutional rights are simply more safe with a conservative SCOTUS than with an activist SCOTUS.
So i am to believe that between Friday, and this morning Reuters was able to determine the mind of the majority of Americans?
seriously?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
