Vast majority of Republicans and Independents are on the same page.

Democrats, not so much. I'm sensing a pattern lately.

Quote:Americans want the President to appoint, and the Senate to confirm, a new Supreme Court justice before the 2018 midterm elections — by a staggering 2-to-1 margin, according to a new poll released Tuesday.

According to a new NBC News/SurveyMonkey poll:

More than six in 10 Americans, or 62 percent, said Trump’s nominee, who will be announced on Monday, should be confirmed or rejected before the elections in which control of the House and Senate are at stake. About three in 10, or 33 percent, said the Senate should wait until after the elections, the poll found.

The vast majority of Republicans surveyed, 85 percent, said the Senate’s vote on the nominee should take place before the election. Roughly six in 10 Independents, or 61 percent, agreed. However, more than half of Democrats, 55 percent, believe the voting on a new justice should wait.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government...-midterms/

(07-03-2018 03:14 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Vast majority of Republicans and Independents are on the same page.

Democrats, not so much. I'm sensing a pattern lately.

Quote:Americans want the President to appoint, and the Senate to confirm, a new Supreme Court justice before the 2018 midterm elections — by a staggering 2-to-1 margin, according to a new poll released Tuesday.

According to a new NBC News/SurveyMonkey poll:

More than six in 10 Americans, or 62 percent, said Trump’s nominee, who will be announced on Monday, should be confirmed or rejected before the elections in which control of the House and Senate are at stake. About three in 10, or 33 percent, said the Senate should wait until after the elections, the poll found.

The vast majority of Republicans surveyed, 85 percent, said the Senate’s vote on the nominee should take place before the election. Roughly six in 10 Independents, or 61 percent, agreed. However, more than half of Democrats, 55 percent, believe the voting on a new justice should wait.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government...-midterms/

More Breitbart . And note that they don't even provide a link to the survey question, results or methodology.

Here is the exact question asked:

Quote:When do you think the U.S. Senate should vote to confirm or reject President Trump’s nominee?
Before the November elections or after the November elections?

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_cr...%207.3.pdf

So no, they don't want necessarily want any nominee confirmed before the elections, just voted on.

Regardless of what people think, Turtle already set the precedent and no vote should happen before the election, right guys?

If you have the numbers to put a halt to something you do and when you don't you can't. It's the way it works. All the noise from the mouths are just theater for the masses.

(07-03-2018 03:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no, they don't want necessarily want any nominee confirmed before the elections, just voted on.

LOL, a resident alt-leftist comes out of hiding (from all the L's he has taken in the past week), and has to put words in my mouth to make a point. I never said 62% wanted "any" nominee confirmed. In fact, here is what is says verbatim in my OP:

Quote:More than six in 10 Americans, or 62 percent, said Trump’s nominee, who will be announced on Monday, should be confirmed or rejected before the elections in which control of the House and Senate are at stake. About three in 10, or 33 percent, said the Senate should wait until after the elections, the poll found.

The battle right now is over if the vote should happen or not before the midterms. An OVERWHELMING majority want the vote to happen, and if the vote happens, as we saw with Gorsuch, they will be confirmed. Certain democratic senators in Trump states know better.

WINNING!

(07-03-2018 03:59 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(07-03-2018 03:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So no, they don't want necessarily want any nominee confirmed before the elections, just voted on.

LOL, a resident alt-leftist comes out of hiding (from all the L's he has taken in the past week), and has to put words in my mouth to make a point. I never said 62% wanted "any" nominee confirmed. In fact, here is what is says verbatim in my OP:

Quote:More than six in 10 Americans, or 62 percent, said Trump’s nominee, who will be announced on Monday, should be confirmed or rejected before the elections in which control of the House and Senate are at stake. About three in 10, or 33 percent, said the Senate should wait until after the elections, the poll found.

The battle right now is over if the vote should happen or not before the midterms. An OVERWHELMING majority want the vote to happen, and if the vote happens, as we saw with Gorsuch, they will be confirmed. Certain democratic senators in Trump states know better.

WINNING!

No dimwit, Breitbart did, hence why my post was citing their . And I even bolded if for you!

Try to keep up please.

And still trying to make the alt-left a thing I see...and still failing at it.

And not sure why you think I've been "in hiding." I took a vacation for a week and worked several days doing missionary work in Detroit, so kindly go eff yourself.

It was a quote from your op, the sentence before the one you just used. He didn't put any words in your mouth.

(07-03-2018 04:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And not sure why you think I've been "in hiding." I took a vacation for a week and worked several days doing missionary work in Detroit

Congratulations and welcome back. Judging by your demeanor, you needed it. If you would like to be caught up on all the L's you've taken, let me know.

(07-03-2018 04:16 PM)Paul M Wrote:  It was a quote from your op, the sentence before the one you just used. He didn't put any words in your mouth.

He said any.

I never said any. Breitbart never said any. He put words in both of own mouths. Please retract and disavow.

Once again, no.

Fair enough, you're fake news.

Whatever you say, Alex.

(07-03-2018 04:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I took a vacation for a week and worked several days doing missionary work in Detroit, so kindly go eff yourself.

Missionary work? For whom?

(07-03-2018 03:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Here is the exact question asked:

Quote:When do you think the U.S. Senate should vote to confirm or reject President Trump’s nominee?
Before the November elections or after the November elections?

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/i/today/z_cr...%207.3.pdf

So no, they don't want necessarily want any nominee confirmed before the elections, just voted on.

That’s fair.

Quote:Regardless of what people think, Turtle already set the precedent and no vote should happen before the election, right guys?

Turtle set the precedent that the Senate should take no action on a Supreme Court nomination in the final year of a lame-duck (i.e., second-term) presidency.

(07-03-2018 05:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-03-2018 04:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I took a vacation for a week and worked several days doing missionary work in Detroit, so kindly go eff yourself.

Missionary work? For whom?

Spoken like a good missionary of God's word. I wonder where in the Bible that EFF word is?

(07-03-2018 03:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Regardless of what people think, Turtle already set the precedent and no vote should happen before the election, right guys?

Nope.

By the way, I reviewed te poll questions and here is ow I would have responded.

Jobs and the economy
Somewhat approve
Libertarian party candidate (not sure where tat answer fits among choices given)
Somewhat favorable
Too much power
Somewhat important
Borderline between moderate and conservative, if forced conservative
Minor factor
Before November elections
All should have prior experience
Too partisan (probably the one I feel strongest about)
Don't really care

Wasn't that the original unabridged version of For God so loved the world... so eff off?

(07-03-2018 05:23 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Wasn't that the original unabridged version of For God so loved the world... so eff off?

EH?

It went over my head, sorry.

Some recent history that seemed on-point to me... note in particular that the nominations of Breyer and Kagan took place in a senate/congressional election year...

Ruth Bader Ginsburg:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 14 June 1993.
2. Nomination Confirmed by US Senate on 03 August 1993.
3. Opposing party (GOP) supported nomination by vote of 41-3.

Stephen Breyer:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 17 May 1994.
2. Nomination Confirmed by US Senate on 29 July 1994.
3. Opposing party (GOP) supported nomination by vote of 33-9.

John Roberts:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 19 July 2005.
2. Nomination Confirmed by US Senate on 29 September 2005.
3. Opposing party (DEM) split evenly on the nomination by vote of 22-22.

Samuel Alito:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 31 October 2005.
2. Nomination Confirmed by US Senate on 31 January 2006.
3. Opposing party (DEM) opposed nomination by vote of 40-4.

Sonia Sotomayor:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 26 May 2009.
2. Nomination Confirmed by US Senate on 06 August 2009.
3. Opposing party (GOP) opposed nomination by vote of 31-9.

Elena Kagan:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 10 May 2010.
2. Nomination Confirmed by US Senate on 05 August 2010.
3. Opposing party (GOP) opposed nomination by vote of 36-5.

Merrick Garland:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 16 March 2016.
2. Nomination not considered by US Senate.

Neil Gorsuch:
1. Nominated to Supreme Court on 31 January 2017.
2. Nomination Confirmed by US Senate on 07 April 2017.
3. Opposing party (DEM) opposed nomination by vote of 45-3.

November 2018 is going to be the Democratic Party's Waterloo.