Posted on 09/21/2020 10:36:59 AM PDT by bitt
BFYTW
Guy Benson made a very good case this morning on Fox and Friends. I would embed the video but I have no idea how, lol.
Actually, this is a really good point and on this we can agree. We have to respect the vote. The people voted in 2016 for Donald Trump to serve a four-year term. Because Donald Trump is still President, his duty as POTUS is to nominate Supreme Court justices when an opening comes.
Sorry I hit send too soon.
The point was that the election of 2016 is the only poll that matters and SCOTUS appointments were a big factor in the election of President Trump as well as the majority Senate.
Then in 2018, the Republicans gained seats in the Senate in large part because 4 Senators lost seats due to the Kavanaugh hearings. This signals strong support by the voters for President Trump to appoint justices.
I would add that the electorate chose to give the majority to the Republicans for the last two years of Obama’s term because of his potential nominees to the court and objections to his agenda.
I think this is the most compelling argument for the president and the Senate to move forward with the nomination and confirmation before the election.
another good take on this.
Actually, the argument against Trump is totally baseless. Obama NOMINATED Garland in 2016. EVERY PRESIDENT has nominated to fill a vacancy — it is their JOB to do so. Anybody who thinks Trump is violating the norms by nominating someone does not speak truth nor deserve to be listened to.
The only question is whether the Senate should confirm. And an unbiased media would point out that in the 19 times this has happened, 17 of them were confirmed, 1 was confirmed the day after the new session, and ONE that was rejected did not have majority approval, and would have lost no matter what year he was nominated.
Compared to 2016, in THAT circumstance, 9 previous times it had happened, only 2 justices were confirmed, and those two were bargains with the opposing party.
And there was not a single time in our entire history that a lame duck president was allowed to nominate and confirm a supreme court justice before the election.
There have been times when a lame duck president has gotten judges confirmed AFTER the election during the lame duck session.
Simple. The same party controls the WH and the senate
bkmk
We elected Donald Trump to select Supreme Court Justices. RBG shouldn’t have believed the polls that Hillary would win and let Obama pick her replacement when it was an option.
Elections have consequences.
LOL. Besides, she allegedly said to wait until a new president is elected—Well hecky durn, we cain’t wait 4yrs and 4 months to name a replacement. SMH
Gee whiz, there’s no pleasing the cry-baby left. Four years ago, they didn’t like the way Garland’s nomination got handled. THIS nomination is going the way they wanted it to have gone, and now they don’t like it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.