'Awesome person': Lindsey Graham praises one of Biden's Supreme Court candidates
Source: Yahoo News
"I can't think of a better person for President Biden to consider for the Supreme Court than Michelle Childs," Graham said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "She has wide support in our state. She is considered to be a fair-minded, highly gifted jurist. She's one of the decent people I've ever met."
Read more: https://news.yahoo.com/lindsey-graham-j-michelle-childs-biden-supreme-court-171545186.html
Lunabell
(5,919 posts)He'll be getting the memo to quit supporting anything the Democrats put forth...or else!
totodeinhere
(13,034 posts)I saw a commentator on MSNBC speculate that the GOP will let this nomination go through without much opposition because whomever he chooses will not change the ideological divide on the court. The GOP appointees will always be able to outvote the Democratic appointees. And then the GOP can use this to show that they actually are for bipartisanship and this might actually help them in the midterms.
totodeinhere
(13,034 posts)N/T
Beachnutt
(7,187 posts)confirmation though...
thats what they do.
sdfernando
(4,896 posts)lindsey will do his master's bidding and vote against confirmation.
question everything
(47,263 posts)sdfernando
(4,896 posts)before he had that fatefull meeting with TDFG. He will vote however TDFG tells him to.
question everything
(47,263 posts)I kinda remember, when Obama submitted his first nominee, Sotomayor, It was Graham who affirmed the right of the President to appoint his preference.
ChazII
(6,198 posts)comments these next few days and weeks.
oldsoftie
(12,409 posts)GB_RN
(2,267 posts)Last edited Sun Jan 30, 2022, 05:21 PM - Edit history (1)
And this with him criticizing Hair Gropin' Furher's statement that he (tRump) would pardon the J6 seditionists? What in the wide, wide, world of fucks has gotten into Lindsey? How did he manage to pry his lips away from Agent Orange's ass long enough to say either one of these things, much less BOTH*? Did someone hit him with a sledgehammer of normalcy, decency and reality?
I am truly astonished!
*I give it until tonight before he's back at Marm-a-Lardo, crawling on his knees, begging for forgiveness. And I'll leave it at that, because those are images I don't want. Someone please pass the eyeball/brain bleach...
Edit to add: Well, that didn't take long. Empty Greene has already jumped on Lindsey for his criticism of Dolt45's statement that he'd pardon the J6 seditionists.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)Child's is 55, turning 56 in March. Fucking Amy Coney Barrett was only 48 when confirmed.
Calista241
(5,584 posts)I wouldn't quibble over an extra 5 years or so. I mean, who knows what's going to happen 25 years from now.
Thomas's youth was really an aberration, as he was only 43. Nobody since this has really come close until Barrett, and she was 48 when confirmed.
I wonder how much Graham and Scott's support will take Child's consideration by the Biden Administration. If they could get 60 or more votes for her, that may sway their decision making.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)Last edited Mon Jan 31, 2022, 04:44 AM - Edit history (1)
It just pisses me off that Republicans mainly care about youth and ultra-conservativism, never mind that they're twisted airheads, like Thomas and Barrett.
We always go for brilliance and experience, so our picks are invariably older, which is unfortunate. Childs is heavy, like Sotomayor and Kagan. I fear they won't live as long a healthy life on the bench as we would like.
But I do prefer Childs over the other contenders, and I think her nomination would be most beneficial for Biden.
Polybius
(15,235 posts)Clarence Thomas was only 41 when confirmed in 1991.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)totodeinhere
(13,034 posts)The GOP might decide to support the president's nominee for several reasons. First, they cannot stop it even if they wanted to.
Secondly, whoever Biden picks will not change the ideological balance on the court. It will remain 6-3.
And they can use this vote to try to claim that they are indeed bipartisan and moderate. Of course that's a lie but they are hoping it will help them in the midterms.
Remember, everything the GOP caucus in the Senate does is calculated. It has nothing to do with what is good for the country. It has to do with what they think will benefit them politically in the long run.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)But a lot of Republicans can't even make themselves pretend to be impressed with a black woman. A bunch of them are claiming she's an "affirmative action pick."
oldsoftie
(12,409 posts)The Judicial Committee is 50/50. I'll take his support.
totodeinhere
(13,034 posts)the Dems could still bring it to the floor of they wanted to. It's happened before.
summer_in_TX
(2,680 posts)Plus, by not having a large opposition to Biden's nominee, the GOP hopes not to rouse more energy from Dems to turn out to vote in the fall.
They're counting on their side's anger and belief, combined with their gerrymandering in many states, in the Big Lie to win them the House and maybe even the Senate.
madinmaryland
(64,920 posts)There is no positive benefit to him trying to stall, especially if Manchin and Sinema are likely to vote for the nominee. Its a battle he is most like to lose and that would not be good for senators going into the midterm elections.
Mr.Bill
(24,103 posts)to have anything to say about the Supreme Court nomination. Nothing.
The Unmitigated Gall
(3,717 posts)ShazamIam
(2,559 posts)unlike St.Ronnie who promised a woman. Because everyone knew in their hearts he would have been fine appointing a Black woman. /s
sakabatou
(42,082 posts)PlutosHeart
(1,232 posts)Minnesota votes.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)He always has another motive, doesnt he?
PlutosHeart
(1,232 posts)Of course he does. They also have no problem of lying. Just like breathing for them.
MissMillie
(38,450 posts)...we pat Graham on the back for being fair? or
...we take a closer look at Judge Childs?
Emile
(21,881 posts)That's what I would do!
Mike Nelson
(9,903 posts)... well, if this is the start of a movement for Republicans to support one of these women, I would look at the others more carefully. Why do people like Lindsey want her? Is it technical experience, or do they think her rulings will be easiest on their agenda?