Jump to content
270soft Forum

Amy Coney Barrett is nominated!


Recommended Posts

What a wonderful announcement in the Rose Garden!

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No, maybe it’s just that you’re impossible to discuss politics with without writing in 20 page doctoral dissertation form with references, parenthetical citations, and a full fucking bibliography.

*Sigh*

*Yawn*   Its almost as if one is discussing American politics they’ll be discussing within the context of American politics. What a concept!    Please spare us and jump down off your hig

1 minute ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

What a wonderful announcement in the Rose Garden!

In my opinion she was by far the worst of Trump's presumed short list. Anyone tagged as a member of the Religious Right is too radical. It's an organization that often neglects or perversely seeks to disempower the poor, minorities, foreign born, women, LGBT, indebted students, etc., etc., etc. 

I was tolerant of all the other presumed names, even the Federalist Society names. This pick is just going to energize Democrats more, which might be some consolation, since the Religious Right voters are probably already behind Trump. 

I expect a 54-46 vote if it is held before the election -- all GOP + Manchin. Collins, Murkowski, Romney will all cave even if they pretend like they might vote "no."

I expected her to be named, so I'm not shocked. I also expected Trump to pick the least palatable of all options. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, vcczar said:

In my opinion she was by far the worst of Trump's presumed short list. Anyone tagged as a member of the Religious Right is too radical. It's an organization that often neglects or perversely seeks to disempower the poor, minorities, foreign born, women, LGBT, indebted students, etc., etc., etc. 

I was tolerant of all the other presumed names, even the Federalist Society names. This pick is just going to energize Democrats more, which might be some consolation, since the Religious Right voters are probably already behind Trump. 

I expect a 54-46 vote if it is held before the election -- all GOP + Manchin. Collins, Murkowski, Romney will all cave even if they pretend like they might vote "no."

I expected her to be named, so I'm not shocked. I also expected Trump to pick the least palatable of all options. 

I see. I think she's highly qualified and likeable. I am not sure if I had picked her, I had probably interviewed others like Bill Pryor, Thomas Hardiman, Carlos Muniz or Michael H. Park as well and made my decision afterwards. Still Amy Coney Barrett is a remarkable and inspiring woman and I hoped many take her as a role model. It will be interesting if Joe Manchin and Tim Kaine will still support her nomination like they did when Amy was nominated to the federal bench. I hope they do.

The only thing I am worried about is Coney Barrett not supporting the death penalty. That's an important cornerstone of my own conservative philosophy, despite understanding why people of faith could argue against it. I still hold the view that people who have committed the most heinous crimes have insulted God himself and therefore the death penalty is an acceptable form of punishment because these people don't qualify for any clemency.

On a side note I even got tears in my eyes when Amy talked about Justices Scalia's and Ginsburg's genuine friendship. Truly moving and wonderful! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

I see. I think she's highly qualified and likeable. I am not sure if I had picked her, I had probably interviewed others like Bill Pryor, Thomas Hardiman, Carlos Muniz or Michael H. Park as well and made my decision afterwards. Still Amy Coney Barrett is a remarkable and inspiring woman and I hoped many take her as a role model. It will be interesting if Joe Manchin and Tim Kaine will still support her nomination like they did when Amy was nominated to the federal bench. I hope they do.

The only thing I am worried about Coney Barrett not supporting the death penalty. That's an important cornerstone of my own conservative philosophy, despite understanding why people of faith could argue against it. I still hold the view that people who have committed the most heinous crimes have insulted God himself and therefore the death penalty is an acceptable form of punishment because these people don't qualify for any clemency.

On a side note I even got tears in my eyes when Amy talked about Justices Scalia's and Ginsburg's genuine friendship. Truly moving and wonderful! 

I find it odd that you are worried about her not supporting the death penalty when you don't even live here. Perhaps, it just the way you are phrasing this. 

I'm about 85% sure Manchin will vote for her if the vote is before the election and nothing bad comes out of the hearing. If Dems are just one vote away from blocking her and the vote is after the election, then Manchin might not vote for her. He tends to vote Democrat when his vote is decisive for the Democrats. He pretends to be a GOP if not. 

I'm also about 85% sure Kaine won't vote for her. Democrats (minus Manchin) are probably all going to vote against her. All eyes are on if anything comes out that makes Collins, Murkowski, or Romney not support her. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's Manchin @Conservative Elector 2

Sen. Joe Manchin, lone Democrat to vote for Justices Gorsuch & Kavanaugh: "I will not vote to confirm Judge Coney Barrett or any Supreme Court nominee before Election Day on November 3rd. I urge my Republican friends to slow down ... and give their constituents a chance to vote.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I find it odd that you are worried about her not supporting the death penalty when you don't even live here. Perhaps, it just the way you are phrasing this. 

I'm about 85% sure Manchin will vote for her if the vote is before the election and nothing bad comes out of the hearing. If Dems are just one vote away from blocking her and the vote is after the election, then Manchin might not vote for her. He tends to vote Democrat when his vote is decisive for the Democrats. He pretends to be a GOP if not. 

I'm also about 85% sure Kaine won't vote for her. Democrats (minus Manchin) are probably all going to vote against her. All eyes are on if anything comes out that makes Collins, Murkowski, or Romney not support her. 

True. The phrasing could have been better, but when talking about politics I mostly try to say things from the point of view like if I lived there - it's easier that way instead of saying each time, "remember I don't live where you live, please consider this". But I'd also back the reintroduction of the death penalty in Austria and elsewhere, so if it's abolished in your country it would send a wrong message to areas I should be (technically) more concerned of. Actually I am willing to improve all countries if I worked as a political consultant, so I would not care about sharing my views on improving society with other countries in an advising position. I am pretty flexible on that.

Fair enough. Thanks for coming up with Manchin's quote. It's understandable he argues on the basis of the date instead of her credentials as a jurist. It would be awkward for him to say she's unqualified for the position, but three years ago she was certainly qualified for another judgeship, even approved by him.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

True. The phrasing could have been better, but when talking about politics I mostly try to say things from the point of view like if I lived there - it's easier that way instead of saying each time, "remember I don't live where you live, please consider this". But I'd also back the reintroduction of the death penalty in Austria and elsewhere, so if it's abolished in your country it would send a wrong message to areas I should be (technically) more concerned of. Actually I am willing to improve all countries if I worked as a political consultant, so I would not care about sharing my views on improving society with other countries in an advising position. I am pretty flexible on that.

Fair enough. Thanks for coming up with Manchin's quote. It's understandable he argues on the basis of the date instead of her credentials as a jurist. It would be awkward for him to say she's unqualified for the position, but three years ago she was certainly qualified for another judgeship, even approved by him.

 

I doubt any will say she is unqualified.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

True. The phrasing could have been better, but when talking about politics I mostly try to say things from the point of view like if I lived there - it's easier that way instead of saying each time, "remember I don't live where you live, please consider this". But I'd also back the reintroduction of the death penalty in Austria and elsewhere, so if it's abolished in your country it would send a wrong message to areas I should be (technically) more concerned of. Actually I am willing to improve all countries if I worked as a political consultant, so I would not care about sharing my views on improving society with other countries in an advising position. I am pretty flexible on that.

Fair enough. Thanks for coming up with Manchin's quote. It's understandable he argues on the basis of the date instead of her credentials as a jurist. It would be awkward for him to say she's unqualified for the position, but three years ago she was certainly qualified for another judgeship, even approved by him.

 

It would probably be better to just not say anything that makes it sound like you live here. You sort of have the luxury to desire us to have appalling judges and candidates while not having to live under their rule. What if it were 1938 and an American said, "The only thing I'm worried about is that Wilhelm Miklas won't accept Anschluss." ?

A better phrasing would be. "If I lived in America I'd be concerned with her position on the death penalty." Your statement would be alright unchanged if you had plans to live here sometime soon.

This is a pet peeve of mine. It also bothers me when Admin or Patine talk like they live here and no what is good or bad for us.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

I will literally fall out of my chair if she gets nominated. No possible chance.

How do you think the confirmation will be blocked?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope her strong stand on civil liberties will result in her helping get rid of the Death Penalty among other things.

The left will of course try to smear her, but she’ll get through and prove them wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

I will literally fall out of my chair if she gets nominated. No possible chance.

Then fall

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, vcczar said:

It would probably be better to just not say anything that makes it sound like you live here. You sort of have the luxury to desire us to have appalling judges and candidates while not having to live under their rule. What if it were 1938 and an American said, "The only thing I'm worried about is that Wilhelm Miklas won't accept Anschluss." ?

A better phrasing would be. "If I lived in America I'd be concerned with her position on the death penalty." Your statement would be alright unchanged if you had plans to live here sometime soon.

This is a pet peeve of mine. It also bothers me when Admin or Patine talk like they live here and no what is good or bad for us.

This episode on CE converts vcczar to nationalism.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

This episode on CE converts vcczar to nationalism.

No. I've made this statement several times in the forum since 2012. I'll admit it is a hand towards nationalism, but in most ways I'm not nationalistic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

My bad that's what I meant lol.

The only way she wins is by a tie break vote.

I'm predicting 51-49.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

My bad that's what I meant lol.

The only way she wins is by a tie break vote.

Mike Pence is a religious man, he believes God has a higher purpose for him. Casting the tie breaking vote to place ACB on the Supreme Court and have it be conservative for decades to come would be the pinnacle.

 

(Mild satire comment)

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

I'm predicting 51-49.

Who votes no?

I think Collins, Murkowski, and Romney all cave if a vote reaches the floor. I'm glad Manchin intends to vote no. This makes for a 53-47 likely vote. 

She's probably less controversial than Kavanaugh, and he got 52 votes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Who votes no?

I think Collins, Murkowski, and Romney all cave if a vote reaches the floor. I'm glad Manchin intends to vote no. This makes for a 53-47 likely vote. 

She's probably less controversial than Kavanaugh, and he got 52 votes. 

Murkowski is going to vote no because she’s a pain. Collins is going to try to save herself and it will fail. Romney will vote yes because he’s a conservative. Manchin votes no not because of ACB but because the circumstances and it being the Ginsburg seat.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reagan04 said:

I hope her strong stand on civil liberties will result in her helping get rid of the Death Penalty among other things.

The left will of course try to smear her, but she’ll get through and prove them wrong.

What "left," does everyone here (and on other forums) keep referring to as real, potent force in American politics, if I may ask? The Green Party USA? The Pirate Party USA? The Peace and Justice Party? The Party of Socialism and Justice? The Socialist Equality Party? The Social Labor Party? The Social Workers' Party? The Communist Party of the USA? The Socialist Party of America? The Progressive Party (the fourth national iteration of that party name, founded in 2015)? The Queer Nation Party? The direct supporters of Bernie Sanders without strong partisan attachment? Or are you, for some reason, referring to the Democratic Party of the United States, whose great and majority bulk of ideologues and leadership are Centrist to Centre-Right? I'm confused here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

What "left," does everyone here (and on other forums) keep referring to as real, potent force in American politics, if I may ask? The Green Party USA? The Pirate Party USA? The Peace and Justice Party? The Party of Socialism and Justice? The Socialist Equality Party? The Social Labor Party? The Social Workers' Party? The Communist Party of the USA? The Socialist Party of America? The Progressive Party (the fourth national iteration of that party name, founded in 2015)? The Queer Nation Party? The direct supporters of Bernie Sanders without strong partisan attachment? Or are you, for some reason, referring to the Democratic Party of the United States, whose great and majority bulk of ideologues and leadership are Centrist to Centre-Right? I'm confused here.

*Sigh*

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

*Sigh*

Yes, I know, calling out long-standing political myths and misnomers often causes sudden and inexplicable fatigue in those presented with them - especially if they have no rational counter-answer to defend their long-held and comforting illusions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patine said:

Yes, I know, calling out long-standing political myths and misnomers often causes sudden and inexplicable fatigue in those presented with them - especially if they have no rational counter-answer to defend their long-held and comforting illusions.

No, maybe it’s just that you’re impossible to discuss politics with without writing in 20 page doctoral dissertation form with references, parenthetical citations, and a full fucking bibliography.

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...