Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died.

[PDH]

[snip}...so most just take their money and drink heavily to salve their consciences.

But I drink heavily because of their choices, and nobody is giving me money.  I think I might be getting screwed...

[OttoVonBismarck]

Some old judge lady dies and people are ready to burn half the country. But sure, tell me more about how America is a shining city on a hill.

Did you post this from 2003? No one says that about America anymore.

The Democrats spend a lot of time talking about America's (genuine) structural inequalities. The Republicans, or at least Trump, repeatedly have described Americas as a hellscape that "only they can fix" (please disregard they are calling it a hellscape in spite of having controlled it for the last 3.5 years.)

[merithyn]

[snip}...so most just take their money and drink heavily to salve their consciences.

But I drink heavily because of their choices, and nobody is giving me money.  I think I might be getting screwed...

Yeah, me too. I think we're doing it wrong.

[Valmy]

Nobody thought Mitch and his senate allies were being honest and genuine with the 'principles' they said they were adopting in 2016. Everybody knew the only precedent they were setting was disregarding unwritten rules around USSC nominations. I am a little suprised the lie got so dramatically exposed so soon.

There are really only two ways then Democrats can respond: either do the post-FDR running for President four times thing where you make the previously unwritten rule a written one OR you just rip off the gloves and get dirty as well. Well I guess the third way is to just turn the other cheek and take it but that doesn't seem likely. So if the Democrats manage to win this election will they try to pass laws established new rules for USSC nominations or just move forward ready to match dirty tricks with dirty tricks so long as the letter of the law is upheld? I sure hope I get to find out as that means we won.

[FunkMonk]

On Earth-2 right now, President Hillary Clinton and the Democrats are still fuming about not being able to fill Scala's seat more than 4 years after his death.

[Admiral Yi]

Murkowski and Collins have said they'll vote against confirmation.

[Berkut]

Murkowski and Collins have said they'll vote against confirmation.

Against confirmation before the election, or before the new President?

[Admiral Yi]

"I would not vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee. We are 50 some days away from an election," [Murkowski] said.

[Maximus]

I have zero confidence those two will stick to that principle.

[Barrister]

I have zero confidence those two will stick to that principle.

Well Collins is headed for sure certain defeat.  Before the election, she can use this as an attempt to appear more moderate and independent.  After the election if she's defeated she has nothing to lose by standing by principle.

Murkowski is less dependent on overall GOP support - remember she was as a write in candidate in 2010 after losing the GOP primary.

[merithyn]

I have zero confidence those two will stick to that principle.

Well Collins is headed for sure certain defeat.  Before the election, she can use this as an attempt to appear more moderate and independent.  After the election if she's defeated she has nothing to lose by standing by principle.

Murkowski is less dependent on overall GOP support - remember she was as a write in candidate in 2010 after losing the GOP primary.

Murkowski is also not up for re-election. She's not doing this as an election stunt, so there's no reason to guess that she'd change her stance if Biden wins. I may not disagree with her ideology, but I respect her integrity. She's never been anything but above-board on things.

[Barrister]

I have zero confidence those two will stick to that principle.

Well Collins is headed for sure certain defeat.  Before the election, she can use this as an attempt to appear more moderate and independent.  After the election if she's defeated she has nothing to lose by standing by principle.

Murkowski is less dependent on overall GOP support - remember she was as a write in candidate in 2010 after losing the GOP primary.

Murkowski is also not up for re-election. She's not doing this as an election stunt, so there's no reason to guess that she'd change her stance if Biden wins. I may not disagree with her ideology, but I respect her integrity. She's never been anything but above-board on things.

Both of course voted against impeachment as well however.

[Sheilbh]

I have zero confidence those two will stick to that principle.

Well Collins is headed for sure certain defeat.  Before the election, she can use this as an attempt to appear more moderate and independent.  After the election if she's defeated she has nothing to lose by standing by principle.

Murkowski is less dependent on overall GOP support - remember she was as a write in candidate in 2010 after losing the GOP primary.

Also the GOP can afford to lose two-three votes and still get a nomination. So they have their own reasons and Collins is politically vulnerable, so they can take this view without it threatening the nomination. There'll be far more pressure on the rest.

[Barrister]

Anyways it's widely reported that Trump is likely to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat - Trump was quoted as saying he was "saving her" for RGB's seat.

Dems have strong arguments to make on the procedural fairness issue - in particular if done during a lame duck session (why do they even have these?).  But I've all ready seen some stuff on Twitter that makes me fear Dems will go after Judge Coney Barrett for her religious faith (she's a practicing Catholic), which would be quite damaging and could drive some voters into Trump's arms.

[Zoupa]

Dems and left-wing people in general don't give a shit about other people's faith, BB. That's a tired old horse you're flogging.

They care about statements like "life begins at conception" which have zilch to do with faith.