Orangeburst
Attention all Planets of the Solar Federation
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Messages
- 46,194
- Likes
- 105,007
It will go past November 3rd... and per the precedent set with Merrick Garland in 2016 after the death of Scalia, the Senate doesn't take up a vote for a Supreme Court Justice nominee from a lame duck president.
Sure. But, she was confident of a Clinton victory. The prospect of having the first ever female president appoint her seat replacement was the perfect crowning jewel.Don't you think though that every justice needs to think about retirement around age 75 whenever there's a palatable administration in office? It's common sense.
No. You need 51. The majority has to be over those voting "present" with those voting "no". Now, the VP (Pence) can get you to 51, if you are stuck on 50 to break the tie... but the nominee wouldn't be confirmed with a 49-47 vote... and 4 "present" votes.What if all four vote present? Wouldn’t Trumps nominee still be confirmed?
Sure. But, she was confident of a Clinton victory. The prospect of having the first ever female president appoint her seat replacement was the perfect crowning jewel.
She carried the weight of that miscalculation to her grave. One more layer of what makes it all so incredibly sad.
That’s a huge character flaw of her if that indeed is accurateSure. But, she was confident of a Clinton victory. The prospect of having the first ever female president appoint her seat replacement was the perfect crowning jewel.
She carried the weight of that miscalculation to her grave. One more layer of what makes it all so incredibly sad.