Report: Justice Antonin Scalia found dead

[rexlunae]

the only one who can beat hillary
so
take your pick

I think he's one of the weakest candidates you have right now. And not just because Donald Trump's attacks usually connect. He's connected to a legacy that's awkward for Republicans, and unpopular for independents, and he's kinda wishy-washy. I think nearly anyone else who is running would be better for your chances.

So please, nominate JEB!

But remember, the general election is a race for independents. So, maybe don't pick someone who still defends a recent war that's pretty unpopular with people outside the Bush-family loyalists. I think your best shot right now is Kaisich, or maybe Rubio if he can get his act together. But if you guys don't consolidate around someone who isn't completely disliked soon, it's gonna be Trump.

And I don't really think he's going to be facing Hillary regardless.

 

[PureX]

It's a whole year before Obama leaves office, and there is no reason other than political bias that Obama should not appoint a replacement. Even Jeb Bush said so.

Obama will appoint the replacement, the question is, how far will republicans in the senate be willing to go to stonewall the appointment? Because that strategy isn't working very well for them these days, and an election is looming. Fighting this could cost them a lot of moderate votes, because people are sick and tired of republicans throwing 'hissy fits' and holding the nation hostage every time they don't get everything their own way.

 

[annabenedetti]

It's a whole year before Obama leaves office, and there is no reason other than political bias that Obama should not appoint a replacement. Even Jeb Bush said so.

Obama will appoint the replacement, the question is, how far will republican be willing to go to stonewall the appointment? Because that strategy isn't working very well for them, and an election is looming.

This is going to be an interesting year.

 

[chrysostom]

So please, nominate JEB!

so why are the democrats crossing over to vote for trump?
and
why does trump spend so much time going after jeb?

the answer is obvious

 

[annabenedetti]

so why are the democrats crossing over to vote for trump?
and
why does trump spend so much time going after jeb?

the answer is obvious

I doubt many democrats are crossing over to vote for Trump.

 

[PureX]

I doubt many democrats are crossing over to vote for Trump.

No one in the middle, either. And even a lot of republican voters aren't going to vote for him.

Trump is a losing candidate for republicans, and they need to get rid of him, … somehow.

 

[PureX]

Sorry, I just couldn't resist! :chuckle:

 

[rexlunae]

so why are the democrats crossing over to vote for trump?

You think that's the reason he's doing so well? I think you haven't been paying much attention to your own party. There's a nasty rabble that loves a big-mouthed clod, the kind who would yell out "he's a Muslim" in reference to then-Presidential candidate Obama at a McCain rally. The kinda that think Sarah Palin seems like a rising star. Trump is that guy in its biggest, loudest form.

and
why does trump spend so much time going after jeb?

the answer is obvious

Why does he go after Rosie O'Donnel so much? Or Megyn Kelly? Whether you like her or not, Trump keeps bringing it up.

He's a bully. He likes to pick on the weak, and if you show him weakness, he'll hit it, and he'll keep hitting it until you stop giving him the satisfaction.

And, truth be told, I enjoy watching Trump go after Bush. He's a horrible candidate.

 

[chrysostom]

Why does he go after Rosie O'Donnel so much? Or Megyn Kelly? Whether you like her or not, Trump keeps bringing it up.

for the same reason he goes after mexicans

they vote democratic

his job is to elect hillary

 

[annabenedetti]

It's a whole year before Obama leaves office, and there is no reason other than political bias that Obama should not appoint a replacement. Even Jeb Bush said so.

Obama will appoint the replacement, the question is, how far will republicans in the senate be willing to go to stonewall the appointment? Because that strategy isn't working very well for them these days, and an election is looming. Fighting this could cost them a lot of moderate votes, because people are sick and tired of republicans throwing 'hissy fits' and holding the nation hostage every time they don't get everything their own way.

They'll stonewall, they're already promising to - but in the meantime, for any case you're interested in, look to the lower court ruling because apparently that decision will stand with a 4-4 Supreme Court split, even without the lower court ruling having precedence.

 

[The Horn]

I know you're not supposed to speak ill of the dead , but Scalia was a right-wing extremist ideologue who was dead wrong on all the issues .
Obama is a "baby killing sodomite ?" How many women has he forced to have abortions ? Zero . Even if he were an anti-choicers abortions would be just as common .
There are accusations of him being gay, but they are just that , accusations, with no proof of any kind . And even if he IS a gay man, which I doubt , so what ? Big deal. Who cares ?

 

[chrysostom]

we don't want anymore liberal judges legislating from the bench
abortion
same sex marriage
religious freedom
health care
this will be the first presidential election
where this will be properly discussed
while watching a war in the senate over obama's appointment

 

[jgarden]

so why are the democrats crossing over to vote for trump?
and
why does trump spend so much time going after jeb?

the answer is obvious

US Primaries 2016

March 1st - Super Tuesday
***************************************
Alabama 60 D, 50 R Open
Alaska caucus (R) 28 Closed
American Samoa caucus (D) 10 Open
Arkansas 37 D, 40 R Open
Colorado caucus 79 D, 37 R Closed
Georgia 116 D, 76 R Open
Massachusetts 116 D, 42 R Mixed
Minnesota caucus 93 D, 38 R Open
North Dakota caucus (R) 28 Closed
Oklahoma 42 D, 43 R Closed
Tennessee 76 D, 58 R Open
Texas 252 D, 155 R Open
Vermont 26 D, 16 R Open
Virginia 110 D, 49 R Open
Wyoming caucus (R) 29 Closed

Up until recently, Jeb had been the only candidate criticizing Trump - and we all know how unforgiving "the Donald" can be when it comes to criticism!

The reality is that unless the Republican moderate presidential hopefuls unite behind one candidate before Match 1st (Super Tuesday), Trump could effectively steamroll his way through creating enough momentum to make him unstoppable!

 

[jgarden]

we don't want anymore liberal judges legislating from the bench
abortion
same sex marriage
religious freedom
health care
this will be the first presidential election
where this will be properly discussed
while watching a war in the senate over obama's appointment

Wouldn't it be interesting if the Republicans stonewalled Obama's nominee in the Senate and the Democrats went on in 2016 not only to retain the White House, but for the new president to bring along enough Democratic senators on his/her "coattails" to regain the balance of power in that chamber!

If Trump or Cruz were to become the Republican presidential nomination, that would send a message to the many moderate Republicans who strongly oppose those candidates to stay home!

Conversely, if a Republican "establishment" candidate gets the nomination, the many conservatives who supported Cruz and Trump and feel betrayed by the GOP could also register their protest by staying home.

 

[kmoney]

I hope for the sake of equal justice for all in this country (which few here seems to care about) that the next appointee is neither a liberal nor a conservative, but is simply a very knowledgable and capable unbiased jurist.

That would be good. I question the possibility of it though.

 

[drbrumley]

Obama’s Choice To Succeed Scalia?

By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

February 14, 2016

He may be mentioned just for effect, but Padmanabhan Srikanth Srinivasan seems to check all the boxes: immigrant, social leftist, crony corporatist, Ivy Leaguist, state lover, et al. Can Mitch McConnell be counted on to block such a PC nominee? Of course not. But it may all be a trick for a planned “compromise”: surely all can agree on Comrade David Barron (in the same article).

 

[kmoney]

I philosophically disagree with originalism. I don't think that it works. Simple as that, really.

What are a couple cases where his originalism doesn't work?

 

[PureX]

That would be good. I question the possibility of it though.

Obama is so moderate he's nearly a conservative, AND he's a constitutional scholar, so I actually think it's likely that he will NOT choose a hard liberal, and will instead choose a highly qualified non-partisan. Though I fully expect the republicans will label whomever he chooses a rabid liberal communist demon-spawn.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Obama is so moderate he's nearly a conservative, AND he's a constitutional scholar, ...

PureX once again proves that liberalism is a mental disorder.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Obama’s Choice To Succeed Scalia?

By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

February 14, 2016

He may be mentioned just for effect, but Padmanabhan Srikanth Srinivasan seems to check all the boxes: immigrant, social leftist, crony corporatist, Ivy Leaguist, state lover, et al. Can Mitch McConnell be counted on to block such a PC nominee? Of course not. But it may all be a trick for a planned “compromise”: surely all can agree on Comrade David Barron (in the same article).

There must be a baby murdering, sodomite loving Marxist out there with a simple name like "Joe Smith" that B. Hussein could nominate?

Ted Cruz promises a filibuster. (No wonder he's not liked by the establishment).
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4624006&postcount=1758