Trump: SCOTUS nominee "Will be a woman"

[Oompa Loompa]

But will she be 'woman enough' for progressive women?

Trump's Supreme Court court pick likely to be Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lagoa: reports

Two names have been emerging from the list of Supreme Court contenders President Trump is said to be considering following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, according to reports.


Judges Amy Coney Barrett in Chicago and Barbara Lagoa in Atlanta are said to top the list.

Trump told a North Carolina rally crowd Saturday night that he intended to nominate a woman to succeed Ginsburg, who died Friday at age 87 after a battle with pancreatic cancer.

"It will be a woman -- a very talented, very brilliant woman," Trump said of his potential choice. "I think it should be a woman. I actually like women much more than I like men.”

 

[durangodawood]

I thought "conservatives" strongly reject this sort of identity criteria and prefer a merits-only process.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

I thought "conservatives" strongly reject this sort of identity criteria and prefer a merits-only process.

We do.

 

[durangodawood]

We do.

I dont think we'll hear any of them speak out against this Trump proposal, unless pressed.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

I dont think we'll hear any of them speak out against this Trump proposal, unless pressed.

It depends on who you listen to. Personally, I'm against it.

 

[Rachel20]

It depends on who you listen to. Personally, I'm against it.

You must know who she is if you've already judged her on her "merits"?

 

[durangodawood]

It depends on who you listen to. Personally, I'm against it.

Probably most conservatives realize the political expediency of this announcement and are ok with it on that account. I dont blame them.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

You must know who she is if you've already judged her on her "merits"?

No, I'm against the principle of using sex as a determining characteristic for being hired for a job. I also thought that sort of thing was illegal, but I guess the rules are different for high political office.

 

[Sanoy]

Start praying for a peaceful solution to this empty seat, because it could easily rip this country apart and set it on fire. It is very dire.

 

[Rachel20]

No, I'm against the principle of using sex as a determining characteristic for being hired for a job.

I can agree with you there. But why assume they used sex as a determining characteristic? Would you have made the same assumption if it were not a woman?

 

[com7fy8]

Well, my first reaction is that might help Donald to get votes. It might make him look more reasonable and not look anti-women.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I thought "conservatives" strongly reject this sort of identity criteria and prefer a merits-only process.

Sure, that's definitely how you get Clarence Thomas to fill Thurgood Marshall's spot. Ow, my optic nerve!

 

[Aussie Pete]

I thought "conservatives" strongly reject this sort of identity criteria and prefer a merits-only process.

Mr Trump is a realist. He is not an ideologue. Appointing a woman will win over a few of his critics and give them one less stick to beat him with.
Isaiah 1:12
Youths oppress My people, and women rule over them. O My people, your guides mislead you; they turn you from your paths.
Western society is being manipulated and controlled by women. Mr Trump is no exception.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

Well, my first reaction is that might help Donald to get votes. It might make him look more reasonable and not look anti-women.

Yeah, it would totally offset his lifetime behavior concerning women and totally not look like last gasp effort to get few more votes.

 

[Rachel20]

Isaiah 1:12
Youths oppress My people, and women rule over them. O My people, your guides mislead you; they turn you from your paths.
Western society is being manipulated and controlled by women. Mr Trump is no exception.

I think you meant Isaiah 3:12

 

[com7fy8]

Mr Trump is a realist. He is not an ideologue. Appointing a woman will win over a few of his critics and give them one less stick to beat him with.
Isaiah 3:12 [< edited from saying Isaiah 1:12; thank you, Rachel, for pointing out the correct scripture reference ]
Youths oppress My people, and women rule over them. O My people, your guides mislead you; they turn you from your paths.
Western society is being manipulated and controlled by women. Mr Trump is no exception.

Well, for one thing, it does not say only women are involved, but also "Youths" are included in taking things over in a bad way.

I would say this does not mean that any and all women would be bad for ruling. It means the ones who are are bad > for example, Jezebel.

On the other hand, Abigail in a way ruled David > she overruled what he was getting ready to do. It is very good for him, how she did that > 1 Samuel 25.

And is it not true how women can be the ones who first bring up children? They can be determining how those children will become later . . . including as different sorts of rulers. So, in case a ruler is a good one, possibly this is because of the mother who had the most to do with bringing up that ruler. So, in a way she a woman is ruling through her son whom she brought up well. And that would not be bad.

So, I don't think God means any and all women are bad, to have ruling people.

But, even so . . . if things have become bad so wrong women are ruling, why weren't there any women bringing up men to be good rulers??

And, by the way . . . men are ruled by women, even though the men might be at the top. Their eyes can be ruled, their attention ruled by what women look like and how they behave > "lust of the eyes" is not the way to let myself be ruled!! There can be women ruling the men who are viewed to be rulers.

How have her children become, after how she brought them up?? This could be a consideration.

 

[Albion]

But will she be 'woman enough' for progressive women?

Heck no! Despite the usual posturing about being pro-woman, pro-minorities, pro-everything that's good and needy, that party is well stocked, in Congress, with individuals who have a record of viciousness towards women (except their own, of course) that stretches back years.

Expect to see it all played out once again in the hearings if either of these women is nominated.

 

[wing2000]

Start praying for a peaceful solution to this empty seat, because it could easily rip this country apart and set it on fire. It is very dire.

Each one of us has a choice in how we respond.....

 

[Fantine]

Start praying for a peaceful solution to this empty seat, because it could easily rip this country apart and set it on fire. It is very dire.

I agree with you that if Republicans reverse their 2016 policy in an act if blatant opportunism and hypocrisy, it will backfire.

There are Republucans who are socially progressive libertarians. Appointing a Phyllis Schlafly styled anti-feminist to the Court will threaten the rights of gay and feminist Republicans. Their only opportunity to maintain those rights will be expanding the members of the court, and only a democratic administration will do that.. Consider if you will a socially progresive person who is economically conservative. What good is all that money if you can't live the life you choose with the one you love?

 

[usexpat97]

Each one of us has a choice in how we respond.....

You have a choice not to respond at all, too.

I say that is the wrong choice