General Discussion

FBaggins

(26,727 posts)

60. A good decade left in her?

Tue Apr 18, 2017, 03:26 PM

Apr 2017

From your lips...

The oldest ever sitting justice was 90. When you have a chance to be replaced with a like mind (because of a progressive president and senate majority), you have to account for the possibility that the next president will be from the other party and will last for eight years. At 82 it would not have been reasonable for her to think that she had "a good decade in her".

82 isn't "prematurely" - it's already one of the oldest ever.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

69 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ginsburg needed to retire under Obama [View all] Calculating Apr 2017 OP

Good question, I've wondered that myself chia Apr 2017 #1

I got reamed here for saying that at the time. Squinch Apr 2017 #2

You think McConnell would have passed through a judge replacing Ginsburg? MiniMe Apr 2017 #3

Game, set, match gratuitous Apr 2017 #6

Nope FBaggins Apr 2017 #12

well that's quite a bit of 20-20 hindsight vision there. unblock Apr 2017 #19

She didn't need to predict anything FBaggins Apr 2017 #22

until mcturtle pulled his stunt, having the other party in the senate wasn't the problem it is now. unblock Apr 2017 #34

It wasn't "the problem that it is now" FBaggins Apr 2017 #51

i agree, of course, that control of the senate has long been relevant unblock Apr 2017 #55

A good decade left in her? FBaggins Apr 2017 #60

Filibuster Bradical79 Apr 2017 #26

Of course FBaggins Apr 2017 #49

Just 43 out of 48 non sequential months. What was the longest sequential period? bettyellen Apr 2017 #27

Democrats controlled the Senate from just before Obama took office... FBaggins Apr 2017 #48

I think there was a break in there, someone died and we lost the majority.... bettyellen Apr 2017 #52

Nope - there was Kennedy and then Franken and the lawsuit messing shit up... bettyellen Apr 2017 #53

Only the Senate gets a say on nominations FBaggins Apr 2017 #58

Nope- Franken and Kennedy are senators and their inability to vote created a stalemate .... bettyellen Apr 2017 #59

What fantasy world are you living in? FBaggins Apr 2017 #62

exactly. Justice Ginsberg is a hero. 2018 is where we need to focus on. Not what coulda or still_one Apr 2017 #37

He wasn't majority leader until 2015 dsc Apr 2017 #45

Yes, in the first term. We would have gotten someone like Sotomayor or Kagan. pnwmom Apr 2017 #61

If she had, there'd have been another Judge Garland situation The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2017 #4

How the hell does McConnell get away rainy Apr 2017 #7

Because nobody has the stones to step up to him... Blue_Tires Apr 2017 #17

Evil prospers when good people do nothing Calculating Apr 2017 #21

I don't know, but he needs to be destroyed in his reelection bid. Initech Apr 2017 #42

Not if she had retired before 2014. NYC Liberal Apr 2017 #8

Not if she had done so before 2015 dsc Apr 2017 #46

Your post is an insult to an honorable Ginsburg. riversedge Apr 2017 #5

Totally Me. Apr 2017 #10

I COMPLETELY Agree!! malchickiwick Apr 2017 #13

You can be in the right, and still lose the game Calculating Apr 2017 #15

Oh I don't know FBaggins Apr 2017 #16

We need the Senate exboyfil Apr 2017 #9

We would have won the White House and the Senate had it not been for James Comey. StevieM Apr 2017 #28

He is a part of it exboyfil Apr 2017 #32

Please don't make it so simplistic... Baconator Apr 2017 #44

Underestimate RBG at your own peril. I predict she outlasts this dismal administration. malchickiwick Apr 2017 #11

Any potential contenders for 2020 you can "look at" and determine they can't make.... NCTraveler Apr 2017 #14

I'm just sayin Calculating Apr 2017 #20

Are You Putting A Death Wish On Her Me. Apr 2017 #23

Yet you leave my question unanswered. NCTraveler Apr 2017 #24

I am placing my bet on the Notorious one (plus... coulda, shoulda, woulda is pointless) demmiblue Apr 2017 #18

Thanks so much for this, demmiblue! elleng Apr 2017 #31

Bullshit. nt LexVegas Apr 2017 #25

Thanks, Lex. elleng Apr 2017 #30

because obviously President Obama would have had an easy time filling her spot, elleng Apr 2017 #29

Sotomayor and Kagan were easily confirmed Shrek Apr 2017 #39

I hope all those "But Hillary is too flawed and too unpopular!!111" folks realize Blue_Tires Apr 2017 #33

They would have Merrick'd her... Wounded Bear Apr 2017 #35

Not if she retired while Obama had the senate Calculating Apr 2017 #38

Wow they would have had to time it carefully then.... bettyellen Apr 2017 #54

He got Kagan and Sotomayor approved. Anyone he appointed would have been pnwmom Apr 2017 #63

Hindsight is always 20/20 Proud Liberal Dem Apr 2017 #36

Gee, I guess those self-identified progressives that refused to vote for Hillary didn't care about still_one Apr 2017 #40

Is There Any Hope OldSchoolLiberal Apr 2017 #41

depends on your meaning of survive dsc Apr 2017 #47

He spent that small window of time with Dems in majority working on health care SticksnStones Apr 2017 #43

She could fool you...and I say she does. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #50

And watch the Dems flail tazkcmo Apr 2017 #56

So we'd be two down? There's no way the Repubs would have approved one OR two. n/t woodsprite Apr 2017 #57

IMO, Roberts and Thomas will retire at the end of summer. nt CK_John Apr 2017 #64

Not a chance on Roberts... almost none on Thomas FBaggins Apr 2017 #66

"Just looking at her" JHan Apr 2017 #65

Agree, perhaps also Breyer. radius777 Apr 2017 #67

Hindsight. moondust Apr 2017 #68

Yep, we certainly fucked ourselves over in November. This last POTUS election was ALL about the beaglelover Apr 2017 #69