Here's the reason. Until recent years, the policy was to appoint elderly judges because they presumably were very experienced and wise, etc. With the presidents of more recent years, the tendency is to nominate younger and younger judges so that they could remain on the bench longer. It had nothing to do with their children.
I’m sorry but, who is this person and why should anyone care to defend their opinion here? It’s obvious the Senate is going to force ACB through to a lifetime appointment in record time, regardless of any objections from the other side, valid or not so why do you care so much what some random person on Twitter might think about her?
Anyone would be when the Senate is under the gun to put them through before the American public decides for them what they really want. Senate leadership can’t risk leaving it to the people to make these kinds decisions for themselves like they did in 16.
The people elected a republican senate on 2016 and expanded it in 2018. This is what many of the American public want.
Many, yes. Most? Probably not. That’s why the McConnell rule from 16 no longer applies. They simply can’t take the risk of leaving it to the American public to decide. How do we know there won’t be a mandate against the Senate this election?
What do you even mean, letting the American public decide? That's not how justices are chosen.
Correct. That was McConnell’s lame argument in 2016 for why they weren’t going to vote on Obama’s SCOTUS pick. There was no valid reason to not have a vote on Merrick Garland when that vacancy came up. Now the senators are seeing the writing on the wall that it’s not such a guarantee they’ll have a choice in this after the election so they have to take up a vote ASAP.
I don't see a reason for them not to have voted in 2016, but McConnell basically said he did have a reason. Whether that actually was a good reason or not, I don't know. I do know the Democrats would do the exact same thing if they were in the Republicans shoes, so you guys can't really call the Republicans hypocrites on this issue.
Actually we can because hypocrisy doesn’t depend on whether someone else is hypocrite or not. It depends on whether the action taken serves a double standard or not. The Republican Senate has shown an obvious double standard with denying Obama a vote on a court vacancy while just a few years later rushing though Trump’s pick in record time, against their own rule they created for themselves to follow and they aren’t even ashamed of it because they know most of their voters don’t care if they support hypocrisy as long as it serves a specific purpose. I hope it costs more than a few senators their re-election but like them, I also don’t have much faith in the American public.
I don't know. Like I said, McConnell had a reason; something about in 2016 it was a republican senate but democrat president, and this year both are republican.
