Fair play to keep the whole focus on Trump and his failures instead of making headlines about it and scaring away moderates who are going to vote Biden.
Last edited:
is your vote dependant on his answer? if not, it's not as simple as playing all his cardsi usually like to know what i person will do before i elect them
Sounds like it to me. If he has no intention to pack the courts he has no reason to just not come out and say that. If I had to place a bet right now I'd say he'll pack the court if the Republicans force their nominee through.So he won't commit to it before he wins in case it affects votes, but he's totally behind it and will make sure it happens once he's in the White House?
So he won't commit to it before he wins in case it affects votes, but he's totally behind it and will make sure it happens once he's in the White House?
What percentage of people do you think are voting for Biden but don't want a more balanced Supreme Court?
He's pulling in a lot of independent supporters and even some repubs that are reluctant to make these moves. If the election is a blowout, he has a lot more clout to make the case that the supreme court is so wildly out of balance with the will of the people that he could probably get away with it and not destroy the party.Not even mad. Who cares?
lol exactly
Who is he going to scare away by admitting to this?
Sounds like it to me. If he has no intention to pack the courts he has no reason to just not come out and say that. If I had to place a bet right now I'd say he'll pack the court if the Republicans force their nominee through.
Yes, SCOTUS size hasn't always been 9. In fact, it's been at 10 briefly before. And that's through legislation. No amendments needed.so basically he's for it if they manage to confirm her in he's just not going to say it.
also is it even really up to him? Doesnt the Senate just decide? So if we win the Senate they can be like yo we're gonna do this?
I mean, it's obvious he's not going to pack the courts, so how would that turn them off?"I'm ahead, but let me give potential moderates and conservatives who are already committed to voting for me a reason to think otherwise!".
I mean, it's obvious he's not going to pack the courts, so how would that turn them off?
Right, it's initiated by Congress and it's approved by the President. The president can then nominate the judges.so basically he's for it if they manage to confirm her in he's just not going to say it.
also is it even really up to him? Doesnt the Senate just decide? So if we win the Senate they can be like yo we're gonna do this?
It's a bit better than giving a platform then changing it when in office, but not by much.
Why take the risk a month out, y'know? Give them as little ammo as possible to misconstrue and falsify into some bigger issue.I wish they'd just say they're going to do it. I don't think they'd lose any votes.
He's said that repeatedly and media still asks nonstop about it.There's a really easy answer for this he can give that still allows him to deflect... He should just say that the Supreme Court should reflect the voice of the majority of Americans. Democrats have won 6 out of 7 last Presidency popular votes yet has little to show for it. Messaging should reflect that instead of something like "packing".
I mean, it's obvious he's not going to pack the courts, so how would that turn them off?
is your vote dependant on his answer? if not, it's not as simple as playing all his cards
Is that obvious?I mean, it's obvious he's not going to pack the courts, so how would that turn them off?
I'm so convinced of it, I'm willing to do an avatar bet with you over it.
He doesn't need to address it because the average American doesn't care and with Scalia and RBG dead probably couldn't even name a single one.
this board is not filled with average Americans.