I’m not sure where you think the GOP was confident in a Trump win in 2016. After Billy Bush, I resigned myself to the fact Hillary would be President. Even on Election Night, I was convinced until about 9:30 he would lose.

Ted Cruz said he would hold the seat open for four years if Hillary won.

Okay just my two cents here but how could people trust Biden on a Supreme Court pick/or future picks if he doesn't plan on releasing names of candidates. For me personally I would like to see names before I would even consider voting for Biden.

I’m not sure where you think the GOP was confident in a Trump win in 2016. After Billy Bush, I resigned myself to the fact Hillary would be President. Even on Election Night, I was convinced until about 9:30 he would lose. More like they were confident Hillary would screw it up

What do my fellow republicans/conservatives think? Trump has the right to nominate someone. Senate has the right to do what it wants. McConnell has proven himself relatively good at herding cats but Trump's interests and McConnell's interests + 53 individual Senators' interests are not all aligned here. I expect Trump will nominate one of the female candidates. (Barrett or the one from Florida) McConnell will start the process but there will not be a vote before the election. They will hold hearing(s) before the election and attempt to induce some of the Dem senators to lose their shit for the camera on the nominee to help in Senate races like it did with Kavanaugh. But the vote will occur after the election. If Trump wins or Trump loses but the GOP holds the senate than nominee will be confirmed in the lame duck and they will let Biden, the Dems, and the media scream. If Trump and the GOP senate both lose than it would not surprise me to see a handful of GOP senators try to cut some sort of deal with Biden to allow everyone to back down rather than blow everything up. It is not news that both parties and everybody involved are hypocrites. That's been court fights for 40 years now. If the situation were reversed, everyone would be arguing the opposite of what they are now. (Oh that's called 2016)

It is not news that both parties and everybody involved are hypocrites. Mitch McConnell is in his own league on this one. Nobody else is so willing to be obviously craven in pursuit of power.

There was a time - especially in the Senate - when the quest for raw power was there but constrained by societal and institutional norms and checks and balances. McConnell and Trump have obliterated them completely.

The GOP isn't even trying, not that I expect them to. It's literally just that the last guy was a Democrat and this guy is a Republican. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/517331-gop-brushes-back-charges-of-hypocrisy-in-supreme-court-fight Conservatives/republicans here don't need to obfuscate or pretend both parities are hypocritical to justify it. Just own that you want more activist "conservatives" on the court and fewer judges appointed by Democratic presidents. No one outside the average Fox viewer buys nothing else.

https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1308124887018541057

Evidently GOP is preparing for Amy Barrett to be chosen. Per NBC, announcement expected Saturday at the Rose Garden

its officially barrett.

https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1309969668480708608

I wonder what Joe Manchin will do.

Depends on who he thinks will win in Nov. The way folks in Government are reacting is 100% based on their confidence in their party's nom. In 2016 the GOP was confident in a Trump win so they forced the Sen to wait, now they are forcing a vote ASAP. Any reason why 🤔🤔🤔

ACB's introduction was a slam dunk. Pre-Bork, she would be be confirmed nearly unanimously.

ACB's introduction was a slam dunk. Pre-Bork, she would be be confirmed nearly unanimously. Mhmm. And pre-McConnell the Senate followed norms and precedents, but this is all Kennedy’s and the Democrats’ fault.

ACB's introduction was a slam dunk. Pre-Bork, she would be be confirmed nearly unanimously. Mhmm. And pre-McConnell the Senate followed norms and precedents, but this is all Kennedy’s and the Democrats’ fault. The Bork confirmation started the partisan charade surrounding Supreme Court nominatjons in the modern era. But, that doesn't absolve Republicans of all they have done to exacerbate the politicizing of the court.

Haynesworth, Carswell, Fortas for chief. Contentious nominations aren’t new. What Mitch did is new.

ACB's introduction was a slam dunk. Pre-Bork, she would be be confirmed nearly unanimously. Mhmm. And pre-McConnell the Senate followed norms and precedents, but this is all Kennedy’s and the Democrats’ fault. The Bork confirmation started the partisan charade surrounding Supreme Court nominatjons in the modern era. But, that doesn't absolve Republicans of all they have done to exacerbate the politicizing of the court. Bullseye, Kyle.

For those wondering what Manchin is thinking. He will vote with Dems against ACB because its too close to the election to be choosing a lifetime appointment. But will also be opposed to packing the court if the Dems win the Senate and the Presidency in November. https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1310215956732534786

Mike Lee, who is now feeling sick and has tested positive met with her on Tuesday, so she could still be in danger even though she tested negative since it can take a few days to be detectable.

https://twitter.com/jackmjenkins/status/1312069997745836032

ACB's introduction was a slam dunk. Pre-Bork, she would be be confirmed nearly unanimously. With the benefit of hindsight, I would not call the introduction a "slam dunk." 😂