Collins of Maine joined Murkowski of AK and released a statement today saying the there should be no SC vote in the Senate before the election.

It's a fairly safe bet that Romney will join these two hacks in their quest to stop the Trump train, but who will be number 4?

Graham
Cory Gardner
Alexander
Roberts
Rubio
Toomy

Collins probably won’t be around to vote.. I’m pretty sure DJT is going to win, the senate will stay republican.

Sleaza has always been an enemy.

It has to be done before the election, a 4-4 SC will be a total disaster with all the scheduled court battles contesting the election.

Looks like Graham is off the traitor list on this one.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katie...f7ac823837210e9d3eaf4&recip=27116010

There's a big difference between, saying there should be no nominee vote for the SCOTUS, compared to a no vote for a SCOTUS nominee. I can't see Collins voting against a woman. A woman has cause a lot men to do things they ordinarily wouldn't.

It doesn’t matter because Trump is gonna win and pick whoever he wants regardless.

...and there you go.

Succinct summary.

I hope.

The replacement of Ginsburg was going to be a total schidtshow meltdown under any circumstances at any time.

It matters because you want a conservative already in place in time for the legal challenges to the electoral process.


And if all else falls to pieces it would be well done to have that seat on the scotus already filled with a conservative instead of being left for a left wing political hack like ruth.

This is where I am at. I truly beleive that "We ain't seen nothing, yet..." As said elsewhere, the Leftists have been working overtime developing a game plan to torpedo each of Trump's potential nominees. I have no doubt that additional riots and anarchy are part of the "plan" to wear out the fence sitters to get them to cave in to the Leftist agenda...

No it doesn’t.

Will never happen.

That attitude will cost collins her election she's as good as gone. To bad she didn't get primered. I hate for us to lose a senate seat.

The issue is how much cheating the Dems do. This election could end up in the SC and it's important to have 5 conservative votes if it does.

the right has been losing every big social issue for 45 years. can anyone tell what victories any "conservatives" won in the SC for the last 50 years?

G.W. Bush vs Gore. The SC stopped illegal recounts in FL.

This says they object to voting before the election. It doesn't say they would vote against whoever Trump nominates. At this point, they're just saying they want it delayed.

This is key!

A 4-4 SC is going to be a disaster with all the legal challenges contesting the election.

The voters in Utah were either duped by Willard or wanted someone to obstruct DJT.

Exactly. This doesn't matter. Put up a nominee, whether they like it or not. And then, makes them explain why the nominee isn't qualified. They can't.

Wikipedia: District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.
It also stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated. It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense or if the right was intended for state militias.

They are not going to explain why the nominee is not qualified, in fact they are prolly going to say something like, "Although XXXX is highly qualified, I cannot in good conscience vote in favor of the nominee in an election year".

Leaving the court in a disastrous 4-4 split.

I'm sure that flake Mittens will join the revolt.
It is really smart for Trump to pick a female and a mommy. Because the Libs have to play identity politics, she is automatically protected from most of the garbage that would be thrown at a man.
I even heard last night on the Judge Jeanine show that they are considering a Florida gal whose parents came over from Cuba. That punches all the right boxes, female and minority. That gal would just about be untouchable according to Liberal thinking.

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), is a landmark[1] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that found that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms," as protected under the Second Amendment, is incorporated by either the Due Process Clause or Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and is thereby enforceable against the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states.

This. Make Collins and the rest vote against a woman, or merely respond present to the roll call which would be tantamount to a no.

It's already started; there were a 100 "protestors" at McConnell's house in Kentucky last night. You have to give this to the anarchist's; they are proactive.

Think this sums it up.

Likely but not a sure thing when the election becomes contested as it most certainly will be.

Get the SCOTUS position filled now............a bird in the hand thought process.

MM

Quick Poll:

Do Senators have?:

A) Two balls

B) One ball

C) Zero balls

* substitute ovaries for balls as gender warrants

No praises for collins at all but she did come through at the last hour on Kavanaugh. She just wanted everyone to point the cameras at her.

Could be playing the same game, to let her own 50% welfarite constituency in maine know who she is.

Apparently Graham has a set on this issue, but his are covered in his boyfriends poop.

I think they will cave. They're all high and mighty now. Put a candidate in front of them and make them vote no because of timing when the person in front of them is fully qualified. I think instead of your quote above, they will break down and say something like "although I don't agree with the timing of these proceedings, this candidate is nominated and fully qualified..." Once the nominee is on the Senate floor, their issues with the timing are moot.

I predict Rand Paul will be the one of pee on the campfire. Hope I’m wrong.

The democrates have 47, and the republicans have 53

If Collins, Murkowski and Romney all refuse to vote yes and are afraid to vote no, so they vote "Present", it's still 50 to 47.

Is that not a win ?

Even if they all vote no, it's 50/50 and the V.P. breaks the tie, 51 to 50, we win.

george "magog bush is a liberal democrat warmonger. Bill Clinton who I detested was 1000 times more conservative. gw bush voted for hillary clinton so the left won again when bush was installed in the white house

means nothing. the states do what they want and ban mags semi autos buying ammo thru the mail background check for ammo etc. another "win" for the right

I haven't seen much evidence that Collins has an IQ above 25.

Ever LISTEN to her talk ?

Collins sounds like she went non compos mentis with the Alzheimers about 3 years ago.

Am I the ONLY one who sees the "Heller" decision for the horrible crap that it is??? With their emphasis on "in the home"... and that continued regulation was just fine and dandy?

Abstaining, if Collins does, is the same as NO.

Murkowski had no problem doing a kill shot right out of the box.

No pun intended?

Vote will be immediately after the election.

Collins will vote yes because she will have nothing to lose.

Present is not a no. It's half a no.
We only need a simple majority, in other words, 46 votes since the democrat's hold 45 seats, providing no Republicans actually vote NO, but just vote present, or abstain from voting.

Yep. It was going to be a giant temper tantrum either way.

The vote needs to be before the election. It will force Collins to vote yes because if she doesn't every republican in Maine will refuse to vote for her and she'll be tossed out on her butt. If you wait until after the election she won't need their votes.

Sniper, would that also make it half a yes?
Grins

As a “Republican” an abstain is the same as a No.
Jmo.

Nope.

It matters not how many Republicans or how many Democrats make up the Senate.

A Simple Majority is based on the total number of Senators, 100.

That means a simple majority is 51 Senators must vote, YES.

If there is a tie, 50-50 then the VP cast the deciding tie breaker.

Voting "present" does not count as a "Yes" vote. So if 4 (R) Senators vote "present" then the confirmation fails as the 51 "yes" votes was not achived.

Im disinthused by the thought of the Ds running around before the election screaming about how a Trump win will result in the loss of the right for women to kill their unborn.

Will the Republicans retain control the Senate?

Actually, it's a simple majority of votes for confirmation, but 51 to break the filibuster.

He's just scrambling to make up ground after the flogging Lou Dobbs has been handing out. He'll be right back in the swamp as soon as he's out of the spotlight. Glad he's voting right on this one but he needs to go ASAP.

Their posturing and saying that there should be no vote before the election does not at all mean that they would not vote to approve a nominee. This IS a political process whether intended or not.

Nope

Confirmation requires a simple majority of the Senate quorum.

A "present" vote adds to the quorum.

If all 100 Senators are available to vote it requires 51 yes votes to confirm.

There is no Filibuster during the confirmation process. The Cloture Rule (filibuster) required 60 votes to stop the filibuster. McConnell did away with that during the Gorsuch confirmation.

The Democrats cannot filibuster as it goes to a floor vote and requires 51 YES votes. A "present" vote is not a "yes" vote and it adds to the quorum. Same as a "No".