Since Dems torpedoed Bork in 1987, we’ve had some unanimous picks, and some contentious picks. Thomas (52-48) in 1991. Alito (58-42) in 2005. Gorsuch (54-45) in 2017. What do all these picks have in common? Which party had the presidency in each case? “But Merrick Garland” stfu
-
-
So of the current 8 justices, 4 libs sailed through confirmation w/ bipartisan support, 3 cons were bitterly fought, and the other con (Roberts) was carefully chosen as cucky enough to pass w/o a big fight. (And he was cucky: remember he upheld Obamacare).
Show this thread -
The point of this: yes, Kavanaugh is going to be a particularly close & partisan vote if he’s confirmed. But as I’ve shown, at least since Bork, that is the norm when GOP nominates a non-cuck to fill a spot. Dems always do this. Have for 30 years now. Don’t sweat it.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Is that three Jews, with varying levels of their group's usual ethnocentrism, and a particularly aggressive Puerto Rican? What does the Democratic Party have against White-Christians?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Disgusting that Ginsburg passed through almost unanimously. There is no better example of a partisan and activist judge than Ginsburg. She advocates for the Constitution to say whatever she wants it to say at any given time. Never should have even come close to being confirmed.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Correction: Ginsburg (96-3) in 1893.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The Dems had to let Jenndy thru... they had just thrown everything at Bork... that’s why Scalia was unopposed... they tried to stop Rehnquist from being elevated to Chief and no ammo to fire at Scalia
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.