Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado, whom I mentioned up thread as possibly being questionable, just announced he is with McConnell.
I also have to mention Alabama Senator Doug Jones. Senator Jones is one of very few Democrat Senators whose reelection in November is in doubt.
If Senator Jones believes he has no chance whatsoever of defeating his opponent, Republican Tommy Tuberville, then he will feel free to vote with the Democrats and oppose whomever Trump nominates.
But if Jones thinks there is any chance at all of defeating Tuberville, then he must vote for Trump’s nominee who will easily be the popular choice of a majority of Alabamans. Alabama is a VERY conservative state.
There is one other Democrat Senator who might vote for Trump’s nominee, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. While I do not expect this, the possibility cannot be ruled out.
Obviously any votes from Democrats will offset possible Republican defectors, like (ugh!) Romney, so far unannounced.
Who’s making it “a partisan manner”? I think I’d consider those who are going to vote against a fully qualified candidate, and it is presumed they’ll do so even before a candidate is named, to be the ones being partisan.
Heck, I doubt cancer-riddled Ginsburg would’ve even still been on the bench when she passed, had she not been trying to outlast the Trump administration. In itself a partisan move that dragged the election into the equation.
Has anyone thought about what Trump’s quote in history will be?
All recent Presidents have one:
“Read my lips, no new taxes.”
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
“Mission accomplished.”
“If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”
But what about Trump? For someone who’s constantly attacked over what he says, he hasn’t been all that quotable in this regard. The above quotes were all pretty straightforward and speak for themselves in context. All Trump’s headline “quotes” are paraphrased, or interpretations of what he said. But there’s gotta be a couple, that I’m not recalling due to all the noise.
Of course, he may still have 4 more years to hit that nail…
What? Trump is a reality tv personality. He’s got more widely known direct quote taglines than probably any prior president. The legacy of his hate for the American people, corruption, and abject failures won’t be forgotten anytime soon.
“We’ve pioneered the death rate.”
“Grab 'em by the ____.”
“Person, woman, man. CameraTV.”
“Mexico will pay for it.”
“Covfefe”
Does anyone have any clue what that’s supposed to mean? That’s a lot of my point - most direct quotes are incomprehensible jibberish that don’t say much of anything tangible. The quotes I listed are pretty clear, definitive statement with little/no room for interpretation; Trump doesn’t have many of those.
Trump, typical of his species, has a BIG mouth and shoots from the lip. His messaging is too often confused, garbled, and riddled with opportunities for his opponents to take potshots at him.
That said, there are ample examples of Trump’s apparent BS actually panning out in the fullness of time against all expectations.
This is why, for me a supporter of Trump, I struggle to ignore the things he says and pay attention instead to what he actually does . . . in many instances against overwhelming odds and in the face of spirited opposition. At the bottom line Trump is a pretty amazing dude . . . with a hopelessly big mouth.
Only if you completely ignore the definition of “pioneer”. I’m fairly certain (ok, 100% positive) that we were not the first to use some sort of “death rate” statistic 6 months ago. It’s been a pretty common calculation that’s been used for decades, if not centuries.
What you say is “pretty straightforward” is just another interpretation of what was said, instead of what was actually said.
I’m sensing an emerging trend among never-Trumpers (like Romney) generally to move nevertheless into the Trump camp . . . . I’m certain without any enthusiasm whatsoever.
But I think the wiser ones are commencing to realize the fate awaiting their country beneath Biden, and shortly thereafter Harris, leadership.
The Democrats are making so many errors at the same time it is difficult to keep up. Suffice it to say they are straying ever farther from the American mainstream. Meanwhile Trump, as he somehow also did back in 2016, knows exactly the right direction to take his campaign.
Things appear to be lining up all in Trump’s favor which leads me to wonder how he can screw this up. Well, he can nominate the wrong woman.
Barrett is the clear favorite for valid reasons. She appears to be “a cut above” in virtually every respect. She is young, but at 48 “not that young”. She has impeccable legal credentials. But she is also the mom of seven kids, two of whom are Haitian children she and her husband adopted. This means they are black. It would appear black lives matter in the Barrett family. Finally, her last born is a special needs child. She knew in advance but chose to bring her baby to term instead of killing it. Remarkable.
I have no clue how any person can accomplish what Barrett has already achieved. It would be FAR, FAR beyond me, I can tell you that. This woman is akin to a superwoman.
So can Trump mess this up? Sure he can. He might choose someone else.
The second half of the video is like a Trump tweet, except it’s clearly marked as satire rather than passing off a lie of modified video clips. Plus it’s hilarious and sad at the same time.
All the focus on the Court is bringing to light a serious problem which Biden has not addressed:
Vice President Biden has not as yet released his list of potential SCOTUS nominees.
Speculation is rampant concerning the “why” behind this failing. The consensus is that Biden’s list likely will include names which could threaten his success at the polls.
Back in 2016 President Trump came clean on this matter, releasing a list early in the campaign. Trump was proud of his list and wanted voters to know those named.
In this matter, and others as well, Biden’s success depends on concealing from millions of voters the real agenda which lies just behind the Democrat curtain of secrecy.
Senator Martha McSally has announced she is standing with McConnell.
So Romney’s vote is off the table, McSally is off the table, Gardner is off the table.
Murkowski and Collins remain defectors, but that is only two votes and not enough to jeopardize President Trump’s nominee. At this rate the Republicans won’t even need the vote of Vice-President Pence!
And there remains the possibility President Trump’s nominee could garner a couple of Democrat votes as well.
If you think again about Alabama Senator Jones now . . . in light of the recent Republican announcements:
He will not harm his own party voting “yes” because Democrats have no chance of defeating President Trump’s nominee regardless how he votes. But he does now have opportunity to help his own reelection cause by voting “yes”. And I’m confident Democrat leadership would understand such a vote and not hold it against Senator Jones.
Ditto too for Senator Manchin and for any other Democrat Senators from states which lean more to the Conservative side. Consider what happened back in 2018:
Four Democrat Senators from more moderate or right leaning states, who voted against confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh, lost their seats in the ensuing election November of 2018.
The press focuses on Democrats having won control of the House in that election. And they did. But what is not often mentioned is that the Republicans retained control of the Senate largely on basis of Democrats losing four Senate seats thanks in large measure to the Kavanaugh vote only a month earlier. Specifically:
(former) Senator Donnelly lost in Indiana
(former) Senator McCaskill lost in Missouri
(former) Senator Heitkamp lost in North Dakota
(former) Senator Nelson lost in Florida
Don’t for a moment think those four losses back in 2018 will not play a role as Democrat Senators soon vote on President Trump’s nominee. Why surrender a Senate seat for the sake of a demonstrably losing cause? Democrats are not in the least politically stupid. You can take that to the bank.
