...but wait everyone said that about Trump chances. So doesn't that mean whenever someone says anything like that again, they are wrong?
CM said never, my response was some day there can be 58, not that I think it'll happen in the midterms but you can't say never.
With 58 Republican senators, why not?
How about that they don't have 56+? I think that's more fair and it's something I'd be willing to bet on.
Just like a Trumpster twisting your own words to fit your logic. You never said some day. Any logical person would have thought you were talking about the midterms.
So Trumpsters twist their words and you put words into someones mouth, aha. Obviously I was talking about some day.
No I took your words at face value. If you say you meant some day I accept that.
Keep in mind 2020/22 is more difficult, given the number of seats R will have to defend. They have around 2/3 of the seats up for election each of those years.
https://www.axios.com/poll-democrats-2018-midterms-senate-5eb4075f-4325-46aa-bda5-699b814d9dd7.html
imo the reason trump nominated him is not his abortion or aca rulings but his opinion that a president can't be criminally prosecuted.
who's the lady in the sheitel?
he is going to play up his clerking with Kennedy and his ability to be a swing voteimo the reason trump nominated him is not his abortion or aca rulings but his opinion that a president can't be criminally prosecuted.
[tweet]1016488877928927232[/tweet]So I propose that the Democrats offer the following compromise: Each Senate Democrat will pledge either to vote yes for Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation — or, if voting no, to first publicly name at least two clearly better candidates whom a Republican president might realistically have nominated instead (not an easy task). In exchange for this act of good will, Democrats will insist that Judge Kavanaugh answer all fair questions at his confirmation hearing.
Merrick Garland does not count as an answer.
Why not?
Any logical person would have thought you were talking about the midterms.
I'm actually pretty surprised with the pick.Didn't strike down ACA? CheckAnti abortion worked against him? Check"Anti-abortion groups quietly lobbied against Kavanaugh, pushing instead for another jurist on Trump’s shortlist, 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett, ABC News reported in the run-up to Trump’s announcement."But he believes that a president shouldn't be indicted...check check"Kavanaugh's work on the Starr report has been scrutinized by Republicans who have said it could pose trouble for the president as he negotiates with special counsel Robert Mueller over the terms of a possible interview related to Mueller's Russia probe. The 1998 document found that Clinton's multiple refusals to testify to a grand jury in connection with Starr's investigation were grounds for impeachment.In later years, Kavanaugh said that Clinton should not have had to face down an investigation during his presidency. He has said the indictment of a president would not serve the public interest."https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/05/trump-picks-brett-kavanaugh-for-supreme-court.html
