quote:

Originally posted by DrewR:
Ken Lee from the 9th seems like a good place to start.

Only if the WH has an immediate replacement in the "ready room" for his seat on the 9th Circus.

quote:

Originally posted by TSE:
Take it off the table as an election issue.

I think this is probably the best bet.

quote:

Originally posted by k5blazer:
Romney, Collins, and Murkowski might pose a problem. Wonder how McConnell will ride herd on them?

Grassley too. I believe he is on record opposing a SCOTUS confirmation close to the election.

GOP has 53 senators, so we need at least 1 of those 4.

Update: McConnell tonight: "President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate."

quote:

Originally posted by DrewR:
Ken Lee from the 9th seems like a good place to start.

I like Lee, however he might be well positioned in the 9th as a conservative bulwark, given he was one of the justices that was in favor of over-turning the magazine ban.

I raise a glass of Ardbeg tonight.

Also, my opinion, make the god damn democrats go on record and vote against a woman nominee before the election. Heads will explode in one of their key demographics.

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
I believe he is on record opposing a SCOTUS confirmation close to the election.

No he has not. Stop it with this fallacy. That alone has never been his position.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
I believe he is on record opposing a SCOTUS confirmation close to the election.

No he has not. Stop it with this fallacy. That alone has never been his position.

"If Republican President Donald Trump nominates a replacement, U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley said in a call with Iowa reporters in July that he would not recommend holding a hearing on that candidate."

That's his latest statement on the matter. Not dispositive, but troubling.

Link

And here's the latest from Mittens:

This just in/Newsflash: It was revealed today that Romney is not a Republican. ..

Thanks ChicagoSigMan I had heard the same. I was just going to check the net. Will be interesting.

update :

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
I believe he is on record opposing a SCOTUS confirmation close to the election.

No he has not. Stop it with this fallacy. That alone has never been his position.

"If Republican President Donald Trump nominates a replacement, U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley said in a call with Iowa reporters in July that he would not recommend holding a hearing on that candidate."

That's his latest statement on the matter. Not dispositive, but troubling.

I was talking about Mitch.

And Grassley is no longer the chairman so he no longer concerns me in that regard. He'll vote for the nominee, I'm sure of it.

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
GOP has 53 senators, so we need at least 1 of those 4.

Collins has reportedly been on the ropes against her Dem challenger. If things look bad enough, she may just be willing to throw the President her vote as a Parthian shot.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
GOP has 53 senators, so we need at least 1 of those 4.

Collins has reportedly been on the ropes against her Dem challenger. If things look bad enough, she may just be willing to throw the President her vote as a Parthian shot.

Agreed. And nice (correct) usage of the term most call the parting shot.

quote:

Originally posted by TSE:
No replacing her immediately would be a mistake. Leaving the seat open for the election would actually energize the Democratic base where sleepy Joe isn’t.
Take it off the table as an election issue.

How does not filling the seat take it off the table as an issue? “You HAVE to elect Joe and the Ho! We can’t let evil Orange Man Bad have another SCOTUS appointment. It is vital that a scumbag GDC nominate the replacement for RBG!”

At that point the political assumption will be that the Repubs have installed a functional conservative majority on the Supreme Court. If the seat's open during the election, they could still (theoretically) drag out a confirmation process long enough to (theoretically) let a President Biden withdraw the nomination and submit a more liberal nominee.

You people don’t actually look at the Lounge page before banging out a post, right?
I mean, instead of bookmarking the forum or a subset you come to this thread first and just start hammering away?

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by TSE:
No replacing her immediately would be a mistake. Leaving the seat open for the election would actually energize the Democratic base where sleepy Joe isn’t.
Take it off the table as an election issue.

How does not filling the seat take it off the table as an issue? “You HAVE to elect Joe and the Ho! We can’t let evil Orange Man Bad have another SCOTUS appointment. It is vital that a scumbag GDC nominate the replacement for RBG!”

Yes that is precisely what I said. Filling the seat immediately removes it as an election issue. If it is left open the GDC will use the issue to energize their base to vote. If it gets filled quickly all they have is more complaining that most people are now ignoring.
Edited to add that I can see the typo makes this unclear. It should read ´not’ v. No

Yes, legally fill the position with urgency...the news cycle will be about a day.