Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DriverNerd" data-source="post: 4625784" data-attributes="member: 61439">I&#039;m not sure what I feel about this woman.&nbsp; I am not a conservative, but she says she will vote according to the constitution - which would be great.&nbsp; Both Kavanaugh and Gorsuch have surprised me on their votes in the past.&nbsp; They don&#039;t care about liberal vs conservative and just vote on what is written.&nbsp; I always like RBG for her ability to stand up and protect women&#039;s rights, but at the same time many of her opinions came across as how she feels about an issue and not how it is written as law.&nbsp; More so in the past 10 years.I still think the only reason the Republicans didn&#039;t want to vote on a Supreme Court justice in 2016 is they didn&#039;t want to have to &#039;No&#039; to confirm someone who was very qualified and liked by both sides.&nbsp; Then they&#039;d be questioned why they didn&#039;t confirm someone who was obviously a good choice, hurting their reputations.&nbsp; It&#039;s still hypocritical for the Republicans to do this now, but they obviously don&#039;t care.&nbsp; The Republicans would have all voted no on Garland right before the election, just as all the Democrats will vote no for Barrett without this &quot;no voting this close to an election year&quot; BS.&nbsp; But just turning down a potential justice just because he/she was chosen by a President that is a different party is stupid.&nbsp; You need to vote based on their answers to their questions.&nbsp; And no attacking like they did with Kavanaugh - ask adult questions and actually listen to the answers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DriverNerd, post: 4625784, member: 61439"] I'm not sure what I feel about this woman. I am not a conservative, but she says she will vote according to the constitution - which would be great. Both Kavanaugh and Gorsuch have surprised me on their votes in the past. They don't care about liberal vs conservative and just vote on what is written. I always like RBG for her ability to stand up and protect women's rights, but at the same time many of her opinions came across as how she feels about an issue and not how it is written as law. More so in the past 10 years. I still think the only reason the Republicans didn't want to vote on a Supreme Court justice in 2016 is they didn't want to have to 'No' to confirm someone who was very qualified and liked by both sides. Then they'd be questioned why they didn't confirm someone who was obviously a good choice, hurting their reputations. It's still hypocritical for the Republicans to do this now, but they obviously don't care. The Republicans would have all voted no on Garland right before the election, just as all the Democrats will vote no for Barrett without this "no voting this close to an election year" BS. But just turning down a potential justice just because he/she was chosen by a President that is a different party is stupid. You need to vote based on their answers to their questions. And no attacking like they did with Kavanaugh - ask adult questions and actually listen to the answers. [/QUOTE]

Verification