0
0

[–] BarbaricHamSammy ago 

Unless they’ve already got someone that was already vetted through a confirmation process....like Coney-Barret?

0
0

[–] soccer17 ago 

Stephanie Davis was approved work a verbal vote last year and looks like a good nominee. It will be interesting to see who POTUS nominates

0
0

[–] test_pattern ago  (edited ago)

math is racist!

0
0

[–] NiggadermCQ ago  (edited ago)

42 days is fast?

Odds are I have 27,000 days to be alive.

0
0

[–] Pointyball ago 

It would honor her legacy.

0
1

[–] Christosgnosis 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

well, supposedly (based on precedence) if POTUS goes with a nominee to SCOTUS from the Senate then can forego all the tedious confirmation hearings and just go straight to a Senate vote on the nominee

0
1

[–] PhilKDick 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Thanks, Tom Fitton, for pointing that out

0
1

[–] Leveraction 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

This needs to be repeated over and over and over!!!!

0
1

[–] Bushtaco321 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Not to shit on the parade but Ruth voted against citizens united. That was a good vote in my opinion. Does anyone have any examples of the positive votes she cast. Maybe direct me to a website that breaks it down. Everything I have read on here is con dam nation of her. Maybe there was some positives? Or maybe I should shut my goat mouth?

0
0

[–] jack-in-the-crack ago 

Condemnation* lol

load more comments ▼ (3 remaining)