[SmokingJoe]

There is no precedent in our nation’s history for the Senate holding a confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court nominee this close, just 27 days, before a presidential election where people are already voting in more than half the states.”

Someone has not read their history books or is flat out lying.
There are 27 precedents. Some as late as the incumbent sending in his SCOTUS nomination AFTER the election, before the new president was sworn in.

[jjotto]

He’s technically correct about HEARINGS, but only because of the timing of previous vacancies, not because it was thought to be improper.