I can’t even imagine what the meltdown will be if Rs increase their Senate majority and then another vacancy opens up next year. That’s certainly a possibility, given the advanced ages of some of them. Plus there is also the possibility of a sudden death, such as what happened to Scalia.
If the left want to be mad at anyone, maybe it should be Ginsberg and Breyer, ages 85 and 79, for not retiring while Obama was still in office. Ginsberg especially, given her advanced age and having had cancer.
But I guess the left thought Ds would rule forever. Who knows.
And in their hysteria, the left automatically assumes SSM and Roe are immediately going to be back on the table. There isn’t a shred of evidence to support that besides their own over the top hysteria.
If Trump is reelected and he probably will be, he’s all but assured at least one more pick when Ginsburg retires or kicks the bucket and very likely at least one more. We could very easily end up with a 7-2 majority on most decisions for 3-4 decades if not more based on that alone.
It doesn’t even make sense. By what logic should any business or service provider of any sort be compelled to list all of the services they don’t provide? It’s not only insane, it is absolutely anathema to the US Constitution.
Oh yes, if Trump wins another term it’s almost certain he would get a couple of picks. However, getting another Gorsuch or Thomas would be dependent on an R Senate.
I really think Rs are going to increase their majority in the Senate. Many of the red state Ds could be toast, especially if they come out strongly against whoever Trump names.
But in 2020 Rs have a lot of seats to defend, including some swing states like Colorado. That’s one reason why they need every seat they can possibly get this year. And with the D party going increasingly bat ■■■■ crazy, Rs could end up doing very well.
The closer we get to election time the more likely the Republicans will gain rather than lose any seats.
Just like with Reagan’s first term it is going to take 3-4 years to see any major boost in the economy but it is steadily improving. As long as that’s the case the republicans aren’t likely to lose either house and are more likely in fact to make gains.
He could blow it but right now he’s proving to be more bulletproof than even Slick Willy.
Logic? This is the insane CA government we are talking about. There is no logic.
My understanding of the law was not only were they being compelled to state what services they don’t provide, but that abortion is an option. As if any girl over the age of 10 doesn’t already know that, as you already stated.
But according to some on the left, girls and women are too stupid to know that. They need the state to tell them that.
Ds have come a long way since Bill Clinton said abortion should be “safe, legal and rare”. They sure don’t believe in the “Rare” part any more, and even believe pro life people should be compelled to tell others about a procedure everyone already knows is available, and that they (the pro life people) find morally repellent.
I’m always amazed that the same party that keeps preaching how strong, intelligent, and capable women are proves again and again how little they really think of them.
Women in their minds in reality are stupid, frightened, incapable little creatures who are born victims that must be coddled and protected by democrats because they can’t possible care for or made decisions for themselves.
The economy is usually the main issue in elections. It might not be this year though. As the Ds move more and more into insanity, such as calls for getting rid of ICE and so on, they are probably going to repel moderate and swing voters.
Plus, my guess is Trump is going to nominate Amy Barrett. If I am right, it’s a given she will be attacked for her faith (as she already was last year in getting promoted to the circuit court) which will probably mean a backlash.
The Ds are literally writing the campaign ads for Rs this fall. And I believe Trump will campaign in the red states where Rs are trying to flip Senate seats, telling people there they must elect more Rs so they can get his judges through confirmation. And one thing I have always given Trump credit for is he has almost without exception, made excellent choices there.
So he has the ability to totally reshape not on the SC but lower ones as well.
Since our quotes got so screwed up I’m starting over.
I think you’re definitely right. Between the absolutely unhinged positions many of the more mainstream democrats in office are taking they are putting up a considerable number of completely out to lunch far left socialists and both are going to drive millions of sensible middle of the road democrats and independents away like a skunk in church.
I know next to nothing at all about Barrett, what is so objectionable about her religion?
I’m still horribly disappointed in Haley for jumping on the Trump train and derailing Cruz but I think she’s definitely a rising star in the party. I expect her to be the next Secretary of State too.
While I sincerely feel for those women, along with Melania and the Trump Girls, I hope the democrats keep it up and get even more viscous with the attacks between now and election day.
Sorry it is me messing up the quotes, I will try to get it right this time.
I actually find Twitter to be a great source of information. There is a lot of garbage there, but also stuff like this I an glad to know. Such as this tweet by a law professor:
A religious group in which members take an oath of loyalty to each other and are supervised by a male “head” or female “handmaiden.” That looks like a cult. Now she wants a seat on SCOTUS for the sole purpose of overturning Roe v. Wade. The answer is NO.
Now that is just one tweet, but others on the left quickly picked up on it, as David French of National Review goes into more detail in his article
Dragging Amy Barrett for her Christian faith is 1) unconstitutional if used as a religious test for office; 2) ignorant; and 3) often malicious and bigoted. She lives a life very similar to the lives of millions of her fellow citizens:
