The dems have a lot of work to do. Not sure they can actually recover if those are your parameters.
Ask Lindsay…he’s the one that has to answer for it. Not me.
1 Like
Ahh well. That sounds more reasonable than
My deck is always a party after 5. 
1 Like
Lindsay isn’t the President nor is he the Senate.
Doesn’t matter. He’s still gonna be the poster child for this fight.
If you say so 
independents know LG is a waffler
theres much more that democrats put out there that sets the precedent. such as harry “this war is lost” pukehead Reid rules coming back to haunt him
if any independents (all of the both of them) go toward twilight biden over trump taking the decisive action he should take, they were going to go biden anyway
If people want a liberal in the court. You are looking at it from your perspective.
He will be, but there won’t be anyone who changes their mind about voting for him based on him going back on his word.
Jeff Sessions agreeing to recuse himself and hand the DOJ to anti Trump factions because Democrats wanted him to, comes to mind. That colored the first three years of the Trump Presidency.
The early polls are coming in and it’s not the dems that will be hurt by this fight.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-ginsburg-poll-idUSKCN26B0TN
“The poll found that 62% of American adults agreed the vacancy should be filled by the winner of the Nov. 3 matchup between Trump and Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden, while 23% disagreed and the rest said they were not sure.”
62% is a pretty big rebuke of the current direction.
Party like its 1899 on the day he was born.
Every gun control bill ever passed.
2 Likes
I think it’d be a brilliant move since the left is still upset over what they thought was a stolen SCOTUS appointment. Besides, Garland is supposed to be a moderate. So ya, it’d be a good olive branch.
I don’t think his supporters would be too much against it since they consider everything he does 11 dimension chess; they’d probably crow how he’s triggering the libs by nominating exactly who the libs wanted.
Nominating Garland would not be caving; caving would be waiting till after the election; that’s what the left is asking for.
Garland is not moderate, he is a liberal. Trump would be turning his back on his supporters by nominating him. He committed to a list of people he was to nominate. So no.
Jeff Sessions didn’t recuse himself because the Democrats wanted him to. I have read the opinions of legal experts (both conservative and liberal) and they all agree that Sessions did the proper thing.
1 Like
I see Trump wanting McConnell to move on this right away. And from what the experts have been saying today, by not waiting until after the election could cause the Senate to flip (although it might anyway). And I would think that if McConnell is super worried of losing his majority he will wait. And if Biden is elected and McConnell has the votes he would be able to get a confirmation by the end of the year. However it would mean that the Senate would not get it’s normal holiday break. And then we really don’t know what Schumer might do to stall until January. Film at eleven.
Were those being polled told that Biden has 600 lawyers ready to challenge the election if he loses, and it might go to the Supreme Court and if there are only 8 justices, there may be no way of resolving the issue if it goes 4-4? You think 62% were told that? Shouldn’t those being polled be told that before being asked that question?
