Will Amy Coney Barrett Cost Republicans the Senate?

[joko104]

The Democratic Party is a collection of fools if their strategy is to be attacking a woman as viciously as possible because she's a Catholic who actually believes Catholic theology.

 

[skeptic llc]

The Democratic Party is a collection of fools if their strategy is to be attacking a woman as viciously as possible because she's a Catholic who actually believes Catholic theology.

Better to say a woman has "blood coming out of her wherever"? Or just grab her by the *****? Please teach us decency; are those sorts of things better than attacking her positions?

 

[Mika-El]

There's virtually nothing in your post that is in agreement with my thinking.

Nice to know. What I agreed with was when you said: "How senators react to the Barrett nomination will effect the outcome ."

I never claimed to speak for . I was clearly stating my opinion.

 

[Mika-El]

The Democratic Party is a collection of fools if their strategy is to be attacking a woman as viciously as possible because she's a Catholic who actually believes Catholic theology.

They do not attack her because she is Catholic. The type of theology she believes in is not the only one Catholics have. This woman has no monopoly on Catholic theology. This woman's views on Catholic theology should NOT be the issue and that also means should not be used to form any legal decision. You want it both ways. You want this woman to be able to justify legal rulings telling others how to behave based on her own religious beliefs, but then claim its unfair to challenge those religious beliefs. Bullcrap. If you want to use religious believe to turn them into legal orders as to how people must behave, you get challenged.

A Judge's personal religious beliefs do not belong in a court room. Its clear you want them to when those religious beliefs are the same as yours. If that was a Muslim wanting to use her Muslim religious beliefs to make a legal decision in the US you would be the first screaming and yelling.

Oh we get it. As long as someone agrees with your religious beliefs they should impose them on others.

Guess what, your double standard is b.s.

 

[iguanaman]

I agree with you that he does have a tricky needle to thread. Politics is always a tricky thread but when you get an open seat on the supreme court, you would be absolutely stupid not filling it.

Most people do not think this way but there are people who will vote like this.

Can not stand Trump so I will vote for Biden. Can not tolerate Biden so I will vote for a REP representative. Let's see if Joe can really work across party lines.

This is what our nation historically does to limit power.

Yes "gridlock" has become the bread and butter of our Govt. and just look what a mess it has made of us. The age of compromise is long gone so it is either we do nothing for another generation or we pull up our britches and get to work. I think we need to do something or we are doomed.

 

[joko104]

They do not attack her because she is Catholic. The type of theology she believes in is not the only one Catholics have. This woman has no monopoly on Catholic theology. This woman's views on Catholic theology should NOT be the issue and that also means should not be used to form any legal decision. You want it both ways. You want this woman to be able to justify legal rulings telling others how to behave based on her own religious beliefs, but then claim its unfair to challenge those religious beliefs. Bullcrap. If you want to use religious believe to turn them into legal orders as to how people must behave, you get challenged.

A Judge's personal religious beliefs do not belong in a court room. Its clear you want them to when those religious beliefs are the same as yours. If that was a Muslim wanting to use her Muslim religious beliefs to make a legal decision in the US you would be the first screaming and yelling.

Oh we get it. As long as someone agrees with your religious beliefs they should impose them on others.

Guess what, your double standard is b.s.

Link to my posting I want her to make decisions based upon her views on Catholic theology. It never happened. I've posted at least over 100 times I'm not a Christian. Your's is an ignorant message.

 

[chuckiechan]

The party that hid behind SCOTUS decisions for over a generation is heading to the fainting couches over Republican values?

Briar patch much?

I’m so happy to see the left finally giving conservative America advice. I guess we should take your advice and nominate the head of Planned Parenthoods legal staff instead.

To say her religion has nothing to do with it is election year bullshit. The left hates religions that don’t take direction from them.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Opinion | Will Amy Coney Barrett Cost Republicans the Senate? (Published 2020)

Mitch McConnell has a tricky needle to thread.

www.nytimes.com

Mitch McConnell has a tricky needle to thread.



I personally think "Moscow" Mitch McConnell, both a politician and a strategist, will hold a Senate SCOTUS confirmation vote asap figuring that this will help more GOP Senators up for reelection (like Lindsey Graham and perhaps Lisa Murkowski) than hurt others who are probably already dead meat (such as Susan Collins and Cory Gardner). I tend to think stacking the Supreme Court with a 6-3 conservative majority and lifetime appointments is more important to McConnell than remaining the Senate Majority Leader for the next four years. By and large, Republicans have given up on attaining party goals via the Congressional-legislative route, and instead now look to the courts to advance their various agenda. It's difficult to say anymore what ideology the GOP still holds dear, since it has cast aside all traditional Republican/conservative values under Donald Trump and Trumpism.

Can't tell for sure and the risk is worth getting her on the court. If the conservatives have the court they can slow some growth of socialism or worse. If democrats decide to go to court packing then it will be a battle "like nobody's ever seen".

 

[OpportunityCost]

I’m so happy to see the left finally giving conservative America advice. I guess we should take your advice and nominate the head of Planned Parenthoods legal staff instead.

To say her religion has nothing to do with it is election year bullshit. The left hates religions that don’t take direction from them.

I think you misunderstand my point. I am saying that Democrat concerns that Barrett will cost the Senate is a completely tribal calculation, and her religion certainly shouldn't figure into that. I am for Barrett 100%, I believe the carping over her pick is completely phony from the Democrats.

 

[SMTA]

Opinion | Will Amy Coney Barrett Cost Republicans the Senate? (Published 2020)

Mitch McConnell has a tricky needle to thread.

www.nytimes.com

Mitch McConnell has a tricky needle to thread.



I personally think "Moscow" Mitch McConnell, both a politician and a strategist, will hold a Senate SCOTUS confirmation vote asap figuring that this will help more GOP Senators up for reelection (like Lindsey Graham and perhaps Lisa Murkowski) than hurt others who are probably already dead meat (such as Susan Collins and Cory Gardner). I tend to think stacking the Supreme Court with a 6-3 conservative majority and lifetime appointments is more important to McConnell than remaining the Senate Majority Leader for the next four years. By and large, Republicans have given up on attaining party goals via the Congressional-legislative route, and instead now look to the courts to advance their various agenda. It's difficult to say anymore what ideology the GOP still holds dear, since it has cast aside all traditional Republican/conservative values under Donald Trump and Trumpism.

That fact that Republicans are prioritizing getting her confirmed rather than passing a COVID 19 relief package for Americans is what will cost them the Senate majority.

 

[Parrish]

That fact that Republicans are prioritizing getting her confirmed rather than passing a COVID 19 relief package for Americans is what will cost them the Senate majority.

Getting confirmed to overturn Roe during a pandemic might be a bad idea since using aborted fetuses appears to have help saved the life of POTUS.

 

[bearpoker]

The Democratic Party is a collection of fools if their strategy is to be attacking a woman as viciously as possible because she's a Catholic who actually believes Catholic theology.

You mean it won't work for Democrats but will work when Republicans attack Kamala Harris? Why is that?

 

[upsideguy]

How senators react to the Barrett nomination will effect the outcome. Particularly, Susan Collins, will lose big if her vote is the one that keeps the judge of the court.

Disagree. The fate of the Senate is pretty much tied to the fate of Trump. As the Republicans in the Senate tethered themselves to Trump, his sinking is what is bringing them down. The Senate is already lost, there is very little that the Senators can do to change that outcome. I suppose there may be an opportunity for a Senator on the fence or slightly over on the side of maybe being re-elected, where their fate might change, but for the most part, the Barrett hearings are moot.

The Democratic Party is a collection of fools if their strategy is to be attacking a woman as viciously as possible because she's a Catholic who actually believes Catholic theology.

Barring something coming up on Barrett that is truly troubling (see Kavanaugh), Barrett is going to be affirmed with minimal resistance. The Democratic remedy will be to expand the court next year.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

I think the senate was already lost. This could make it worse. There is nothing more Trump can do for conservatives. They got all their judges and don't have control of the House.

It's way past time for change.

It is not official until November 4, but all signs point toward the Senate turning blue. What will be interesting to see is when - not if - Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed because that date is the beginning of a lame duck session for Republicans in the Senate. This should be the end of Mitch McConnell's career as the Senate Majority Leader even if he is re-elected. No, they don't have all their judges, because all Republicans care about is putting very conservative justices on the bench.

 

[ClaraD]

Opinion | Will Amy Coney Barrett Cost Republicans the Senate? (Published 2020)

Mitch McConnell has a tricky needle to thread.

www.nytimes.com

Mitch McConnell has a tricky needle to thread.



I personally think "Moscow" Mitch McConnell, both a politician and a strategist, will hold a Senate SCOTUS confirmation vote asap figuring that this will help more GOP Senators up for reelection (like Lindsey Graham and perhaps Lisa Murkowski) than hurt others who are probably already dead meat (such as Susan Collins and Cory Gardner). I tend to think stacking the Supreme Court with a 6-3 conservative majority and lifetime appointments is more important to McConnell than remaining the Senate Majority Leader for the next four years. By and large, Republicans have given up on attaining party goals via the Congressional-legislative route, and instead now look to the courts to advance their various agenda. It's difficult to say anymore what ideology the GOP still holds dear, since it has cast aside all traditional Republican/conservative values under Donald Trump and Trumpism.

He probably did think that before realizing that a democratic majority may mean a court that is increased in size. That is something they didn't count on. They really are so out of touch they think they won't lose the Senate regardless of what they do and they are so certain Trump will win that it worries me what trick they have up their sleeve.

 

[ClaraD]

The Democratic Party is a collection of fools if their strategy is to be attacking a woman as viciously as possible because she's a Catholic who actually believes Catholic theology.

I am Catholic, her Catholic belief is not the issue. Her membership in that weird group she belongs to, is.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

All true, but it will be Trump that costs them the Senate, when trump goes down they will be drug down with him. I will not miss any of them.

This is only true in purple states. Republicans in dark red states such as Alabama will vote for their party down ticket.

I will not miss any of them either, but will be closely watching Lindsey Graham's seat.

 

[btthegreat]

The flaws are in how the democrats treat the hearings. The only reason they are holding them at all is to force the media to put “ Prez in Waiting Harris on camera.

Well I guess you must have this long list of occasions when Democrats did not want hearings on Republican court nominees because Harris was not seeking the VP position and was not on camera. Can you show that list which would prove your point?

 

[Patriotic Voter]

I agree with Eriech .

The Barrett choice is an attemt to try preserve Christian evangelical voting support but may not be enough given what Trump has said and done in the last 4 years.

Many of that Christian evangelical base may not come out to vote this time because they can not overlook what Trump has done, does and says. T

Trump is the epitome of someone who engages in profanity in its purest sense. He ridicules how precious and fragile life is and that has been seen in his Covid 19 behaviour and his disrespect for the lives of soldiers. To be so callous and reckless about the death of soldiers or human safety and then in the next breathy try cloak himself as a saviour of the unborn is as disconnected as any other message Trump gives out. The fat man calling people fat, the man speaking in disjointed, fractured babble calling Biden demented, a man who coughs and weezes while claiming he is immune to Covid, the man calling out neo nazis to stand by, now posing as a religious man not resonate as a Christian messiah, just another Satanic demon.

If anyone who is not a terrorist can be called the antichrist, that man is Donald John Trump Sr.

In my mind and heart, holding a Bible the upside down for a photograph opportunity is totally disrespecting God's Word. It should be insulting to evangelical Christians.

 

[Dayton3]

You people forget the obvious. Chances are the Democrats will only control the Senate for two years given the average losses the party of the president takes in the first off year elections.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

I’m so happy to see the left finally giving conservative America advice. I guess we should take your advice and nominate the head of Planned Parenthood's legal staff instead.

To say her religion has nothing to do with it is election year bullshit. The left hates religions that don’t take direction from them.

Who told you Democrats are religious bigots? Everyone who is educated about Donald Trump knows he is a religious bigot and Republican. Therefore, only Republicans who are stupid enough to like him can be religious bigots. Everywhere you look, Democrats are the people who welcome members of other religions, not Republicans. It is one reason I am a Democrat.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Barring something coming up on Barrett that is truly troubling (see Kavanaugh), Barrett is going to be affirmed with minimal resistance. The Democratic remedy will be to expand the court next year.

I would rather shrink it to seven judges so we can get rid of Brett Kavanaugh, who had absolutely no reason to be nominated for the position. He failed to meet the criteria to be a SCOTUS justice and Democrats were very clear about that.

 

[skeptic llc]

You people forget the obvious. Chances are the Democrats will only control the Senate for two years given the average losses the party of the president takes in the first off year elections.

Not sure it matters anymore. Control for a couple of years means pushing through a million judges, using the machinery of government to make return of the Rs a huge uphill battle, etc. With the gloves off, each party -- when in power -- gets to dream up every possible way to make the next elections unfair in their favor.

 

[Mika-El]

Link to my posting I want her to make decisions based upon her views on Catholic theology. It never happened. I've posted at least over 100 times I'm not a Christian. Your's is an ignorant message.

I could not care what you claim your religion is. Your previous and continuing statements make it clear you are a white supremacist so please do not play that shtick with me that you are not Christian but want her as a Judge to use her position to impose what you think is her Catholic theology on people. The point is and remains no Judge should use the law to impose their religious views on others. That was the point.

The only ignorant message is your continuing references to non white countries or non white majorities.

This tune you play that you aint Christian but you want a Catholic to use their position as a Judge to impose Catholic ideology, try that shtick on someone else. I know where people in pointed hats stand on Catholics. This has nothing to do with Catholics or Catholic ideology. It has to do with individuals who believe they can impose their religious views on others through the legal system. Law should be neutral to all religions in application, period.

 

[Mika-El]

If anyone who is not a terrorist can be called the antichrist, that man is Donald John Trump Sr.

In my mind and heart, holding a Bible the upside down for a photograph opportunity is totally disrespecting God's Word. It should be insulting to evangelical Christians.

He's a dim wit. Calling him an anti-Christ gives him powers he never had or will have. He is sadly a drunk which is a sad thing because it appears to run in his family and his Uncle and grandfather were consumed by it and it seems to be impacting on him as well. His late night tweet calling out imagined people to fight a mail conspiracy was a pathetic drunken tirade. He was drunk. His father needs to look at his own son before attacking Biden's son.