First, like her or not, one has to respect RBG and what she represented for women empowerment. I disagreed with her politically on many issues, but I respect the hell out of her. Her passing is a hit on America and an icon was lost. May she Rest In Peace.
Now, on to the analysis. We’ll skip over the straw man of how this equates to Merrick Garland. It doesn’t. That talking point doesn’t pass surface level analysis. Don’t even entertain the conversation, anyone trying to use it is a rube.
Should Trump nominate a name? If he doesn’t, and allows the election to determine it, it could turn a lot of previously Biden leaning moderate conservatives towards electing Trump as they will see preservation and or increasing Conservative positions on the bench as a reason to hold their nose and vote for Trump. The obvious risk is getting swept and RBG’s replacement being an extreme liberal like Sotomayor or Kagan. This Situation could not only carry the Presidency, but the Senate for the GOP, and then, we get what we want anyway.
Trump putting forward a name. Obvious risk is that it doesn’t pass, and the GOP is swept. However, this tactic could also benefit Trump. First, we’ve have 3 months of lunacy from the left over the summer. So much so that the left has had to abandon Antifa and BLM because the internal polling on them was killing them. Even Pelosi condemned them. Him putting forward a name is going to cause a firestorm from the left. They’ve already shown an inability to not be crazy. All they had to do was not be crazy and they couldn’t do it. Does anyone think they’ll be able to maintain their shit over this? It’ll make the last 3 months look like a prayer meeting creating an even greater example of what the left really is and why they’re bad for the country. I say, let’s roll the dice and see how crazy they become. Only benefits the right.
Assuming we go forward with a name, the question I asked my friends last night was, do you put forward a woman, a Hispanic, or someone who is black?
Trump is surging with Hispanics and blacks, and has a problem with women. The conservatives already have Clarence Thomas, adding another black man/woman, would continue to cut into the AA vote. Watching the left come unglued on a black person could serve multiple purposes. 1. Further paint the accurate picture that the left cares more about power than caring about POC. They use blacks for props and it has happened in every major election for decades. Attacking the nominee, which they’re going to do, viciously, would at a minimum disenfranchise black voters and cause them to vote Trump at best or at a minimum cause them to stay home.
Nominating a woman like Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lagoa can be very interesting. I’d personally go with Lagoa. Lagoa is Hispanic, and sat on FL Supreme Court. She also sits on the 11th circuit and has already gone through confirmation once, receiving an 85-15 confirmation. Would be damned hard for the left to wheel on this and contest it after supporting her for the 11th so overwhelmingly. Also, triple whammy of her being a woman, Hispanic, and from FL which is a battleground state.
I personally think that even though significant inroads are being made with the AA community, it’s still considerably unreliable. I’d nominate Lagoa. Throw a bone to women voters and Hispanics and capitalize on the FL element for someone who has already gone through confirmation.
Let the left go batshit on a woman and a POC. It only helps the GOP. I have zero confidence the left can keep from acting crazy. Use their unhinged behavior against them. This could very well solidify the WH, Senate, and SCOTUS. At a minimum, securing SCOTUS is more important than anything. I’d gladly sacrifice the Senate and WH for a 6-3 majority, but I believe this could be the issue that actually solidifies a win for the WH and possibly the Senate.
The left can’t not be crazy.
Now, on to the analysis. We’ll skip over the straw man of how this equates to Merrick Garland. It doesn’t. That talking point doesn’t pass surface level analysis. Don’t even entertain the conversation, anyone trying to use it is a rube.
Should Trump nominate a name? If he doesn’t, and allows the election to determine it, it could turn a lot of previously Biden leaning moderate conservatives towards electing Trump as they will see preservation and or increasing Conservative positions on the bench as a reason to hold their nose and vote for Trump. The obvious risk is getting swept and RBG’s replacement being an extreme liberal like Sotomayor or Kagan. This Situation could not only carry the Presidency, but the Senate for the GOP, and then, we get what we want anyway.
Trump putting forward a name. Obvious risk is that it doesn’t pass, and the GOP is swept. However, this tactic could also benefit Trump. First, we’ve have 3 months of lunacy from the left over the summer. So much so that the left has had to abandon Antifa and BLM because the internal polling on them was killing them. Even Pelosi condemned them. Him putting forward a name is going to cause a firestorm from the left. They’ve already shown an inability to not be crazy. All they had to do was not be crazy and they couldn’t do it. Does anyone think they’ll be able to maintain their shit over this? It’ll make the last 3 months look like a prayer meeting creating an even greater example of what the left really is and why they’re bad for the country. I say, let’s roll the dice and see how crazy they become. Only benefits the right.
Assuming we go forward with a name, the question I asked my friends last night was, do you put forward a woman, a Hispanic, or someone who is black?
Trump is surging with Hispanics and blacks, and has a problem with women. The conservatives already have Clarence Thomas, adding another black man/woman, would continue to cut into the AA vote. Watching the left come unglued on a black person could serve multiple purposes. 1. Further paint the accurate picture that the left cares more about power than caring about POC. They use blacks for props and it has happened in every major election for decades. Attacking the nominee, which they’re going to do, viciously, would at a minimum disenfranchise black voters and cause them to vote Trump at best or at a minimum cause them to stay home.
Nominating a woman like Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lagoa can be very interesting. I’d personally go with Lagoa. Lagoa is Hispanic, and sat on FL Supreme Court. She also sits on the 11th circuit and has already gone through confirmation once, receiving an 85-15 confirmation. Would be damned hard for the left to wheel on this and contest it after supporting her for the 11th so overwhelmingly. Also, triple whammy of her being a woman, Hispanic, and from FL which is a battleground state.
I personally think that even though significant inroads are being made with the AA community, it’s still considerably unreliable. I’d nominate Lagoa. Throw a bone to women voters and Hispanics and capitalize on the FL element for someone who has already gone through confirmation.
Let the left go batshit on a woman and a POC. It only helps the GOP. I have zero confidence the left can keep from acting crazy. Use their unhinged behavior against them. This could very well solidify the WH, Senate, and SCOTUS. At a minimum, securing SCOTUS is more important than anything. I’d gladly sacrifice the Senate and WH for a 6-3 majority, but I believe this could be the issue that actually solidifies a win for the WH and possibly the Senate.
The left can’t not be crazy.