BREAKING NEWS Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is recovering in the hospital after fracturing three ribs in a fall at her office at the Supreme Court. Thursday, November 8, 2018 9:26 AM EST Justice Ginsburg, 85, went home after her fall, but experienced discomfort overnight. She was admitted to George Washington University Hospital, where doctors found three broken ribs on her left side, a Supreme Court spokeswoman said. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/08/...aking-news&nlid=54641335ing-news&ref=headline How soon till Trump gets another Supreme Court replacement?
This is no small thing. The twitter universe is lit up with concerned lefties, many saying she should have retired under Obama. Wasn't like she was a spring chicken back then. She's old, she's frail, and her health only gets worse from here. If she can hang on until the year 2020 the left has an argument to delay any appointment until after the election. Whether or not they win that argument is another story, but they do have an argument. If she retires or dies in 2019, it's a whole different game. If you thought the Kavanaugh appointment and hearings were a circus, that my friends will be a walk in the park compared to the hysteria the left will put up for another replacement by a Trump administration. This is just another example of why we should be putting some kind of age limit on those that serve in government, be they appointees or elected.
Good luck to the left with that argument. If a justice leaves the bench in 2020, Trump will appoint and a republican majority senate will ram that nomination through so fast people's head will spin. McConnel was able to do that under Obama because the republicans held the majority and could delay the nomination until a republican president came in. The pubs still have the majority but no need to hold off because they already have a republican president. They are good to go. The only way the dems could delay a nomination would be to accuse the nominee of rape or something absurd like that, but I think they used up that trick last time and the pubs are prepared to move through future tricks more rapidly rather than worrying about all the politically correct dances. Plus turncoats like mccain, flake, corker, etc are gone too so you dont have to play their games. Having said that. A couple senate seat recounts look dicey to me. The pubs will still have a good majority, but might lose one in the recount. OR NOT. Just sayin it is within the scope of possibility. Arizona might be settled by the end of the day.
A lot can happen to someone like her at her age with this injury. Of course she'll have the absolute best of care but broken ribs are no picnic. They make it hard to breath deep. Pneumonia is a killer and it could set in. That said, I'll bet money if given the opportunity for a third pick, Trump goes with a centrist judge. Maybe even a teeny tiny hint of left. There's lots of reasons why. Trump's smart.
I don't know. I will take the other side of that trade just for argument purposes. I would have agreed with that two years ago, but not now. I have either evolved or deteriorated from that view, depending on how you look at it. My reasoning is suchly and thusly: 1) Two years ago I would have taken the view that Trump is a closet quasi-democrat and will toss bones out to the dems to pick up some of their votes on critical items, such as court judges. We know now that the dems vote as a block and will not vote for anyone who is appointed by Trump unless they need to do it to survive with the voters at home in Trump country. It would be a big mistake for Trump to appoint some centrist who would cause him to lose freedom caucus (or whatever the senate version is called) type votes in his own party just to try to bring in some dem votes. He ain't getting any dem votes and they will try to cut the balls or ovaries off of any perfectly honorable and qualified centrist he appoints. So why bother. 2) Trump is sort of big consumer of Supreme Court "services". I mean, before it is all over he will have racked up some serious frequent flier miles before the court. So he needs to have judges who will side with him to the extent possible, and cannot risk appointing a centrist flip-flopper just to please the dems who cannot be pleased anyway. The damn conservative judges are unpredictable enough without willingly putting a known fence-straddler on the bench. 3) Trump has gotten his last two nominees off of the pre-approved list prepared by the Heritage Foundation, and realistically, that has worked very well. It is one of the few areas where he has actually taken advice from someone who was not someone he watches on Fox and it has tamped down his immediate tendency to want to appoint Judge Judy, or Judge Jeanine. I dont see any reason why he would go off the reservation there and follow another process. In addition, he now finally knows that McConnell is the one who has to do a lot of the heavy lifting and that trump and mcconnell working together have been appointing and confirming a massive number of appellate and lower court judges. And I dont see McConnell ever thinking that he needs to throw a centrist judge into the mix now that he finally has the votes to just appoint who they want as long as personal dirt doesnt come up on the nominee. Mitch would be worried about having the far right conservatives hold out if democrat-appeasing judge was nominated when they knew the had the votes for a conservative. I dont think Trump was there on that a couple years ago. I think it was another area where he just thought he could flop his person out and everyone would love him and the hell with the senate political hacks tell him. But trump knows now that mitch worked his arse off on both delaying the merrick garland nomination and in getting kavanaugh through. So the Odd Couple have sort of worked out a little tag team routine there that is working on judicial appointments and he will listen to mitch in regard to what he can get through the senate. Anyone pre-approved by the Heritage Foundation gets him 90% of the way there anyway. So, my thinking is like dat. Might have to revise a couple comments if some of these recounts change the picture. I think the pubs still have a majority if all of the recounts shit the bed for the republicans. But, if the pubs have just a seat majority that's pretty dicey and you are back to making sure that Susan Collins doesnt go off the reservation.
If Nadler and the Democratic Party henchmen are two feet of arm up his ass and making his son, his daughter, and his son-in-law's lives a shambles I don't see him making nice with a Supreme Court pick. Given how well the Kavanaugh trainwreck mobilized otherwise passive Republicans in Red States and minimized the 2018 electoral damage my guess is he would go with Amy Coney Barrett. She'll be publicly ostracized and flogged for being a devout practicing Catholic and that will not sit well with Northeast and MidWest Catholics who typically vote Democrat - especially women (just in time for the '20 or '22 election cycle).
The other dynamic that comes into play is that there is already a conservative/conservative-lite majority on the court. So, if the dems want to play the game that they flirted with last time by saying that they may just conspire to leave the seat vacant until 2020, then by all means go for it, assuming that it is Ruthie who retires/leaves first. Obviously you want to fill it before the next election but if the dems want to dick around and not work to fill Ruthies position right off if she leaves soon, then fine. Not a problem.