6 in 10 Say Yes to SCOTUS Nominee Vote Before November Elections - Granite Grok

6 in 10 Say Yes to SCOTUS Nominee Vote Before November Elections

polling, pencil, checkboxA recent NBC poll reports that 62% of Americans believe the vote on Mr. Trump’s next nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court should happen before the November Election.

The vast majority of Republicans surveyed, 85 percent, said the Senate’s vote on the nominee should take place before the election. Roughly six in 10 Independents, or 61 percent, agreed. However, more than half of Democrats, 55 percent, believe the voting on a new justice should wait.

The majority of independents, 63 percent, and Democrats, 53 percent, said the next justice should be moderate, while 65 percent of Republicans want a conservative on the bench. However, 61 percent of Americans said, regardless of party affiliation, that they wanted a justice who would uphold Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark court case that legalized abortion. Only three in 10 said they wanted a justice who would cast a vote to overturn the decision.

A few observations.

First, 45% of Democrats think the vote should come before November. That seems a bit high if you happen to be steeped in the tantrum-politics of the far-left.

Second, in the context of wanting a “moderate” justice, the Democrat number makes a bit more sense but again, compare that to the people who both run the party and the noise machine. Very different.

Third, the question on Roe is misleading.

Thinking about the U.S. Supreme Court, do you want the next justice to be someone who will vote to uphold Roe vs. Wade, the decision that legalized abortion, or vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade?

Saying Roe legalized abortion suggests that overturning it will make it illegal and that’s simply not true.

What happens if the light of day shines so bright that the shadows of the penumbras are not as visible as they were forty-plus years ago? What if SCOTUS can’t find the right to terminate a pregnancy in the constitution?

Whatever the current law is in your state right now will continue to be the current law in your state. Nothing changes Roe v. Wade is tossed in the dustbin of history.

Dozens of states had laws on abortion before Roe, and every state has them now. They are all different. And not one of them will be changed by overturning Roe. But the perception created and perpetuated by Big Abortion and parroted by Democrats and the media is the opposite.

This one issue, in my opinion, probably tilts the playing field on the topic of what defines moderation, which, in my mind, puts that poll results into a gray area as well.

What is moderation?

The Coffee Party, NHRebellion, Main Street Republicans, and any other number of groups pretending to be moderate or a-political advocacy groups always advocate for left-wing policy prescriptions. Always.

Their goal is to move Overton’s window leftward and with it the concept of the center.

I can’t separate the ignorance over Roe from that debate.

Most of the smart people I know while capable of understanding these issues have long shied away from them or just lack the depth of knowledge to understand things like why John McCain is such a horrible Republican or what Roe is really all about.

Roe is about a court creating a law to subjugate the states to their will, something Democrats think they found in the JANUS ruling.

The difference is that in Janus the first amendment includes actual words that say the government can’t create laws abridging free speech or free association. State Employee unions with biased political priorities demanding money in exchange for employment to support the leaders who choose those priorities is compelled speech.

As I have noted elsewhere is Koch industries demanded as a condition of employment that employees donated $40.00 a month to them (from which they may or may not finance political advocacy activities) the left would LOSE THEIR MINDS. There’s be more lawsuits than you could shake a stick at.

Unions do it; it’s a protected right.

But it’s not. It’s compelled speech if either of them requires it.

In Roe, the Court decided that the Constitution protected a woman’s right to one medical procedure. Just one. Why not any other?

Because there are no such constitutional rights. And yet there are taxing powers handed out by Congress that allow the government to prohibit medical procedures through bureaucratic rulemaking.

Some significant percentage of Amerian’s polled by NBC may not know this. They may never know it. They also won’t (likely) know that the Democrats created the Nuclear option that go Gorsuch appointed or that the Senate appointed Elena Kagen to the Supreme Court in August before a midterm election.

How many people in New Hampshire know that Republican Senator Judd Gregg voted for Obama’s the liberal nominee. Not many.

How many people in New Hampshire know that neither Democrat Sen. from New Hampshire will vote for any nominee Trump nominates. Probably a lot more.

How many will understand the meaning of that?

H/T HotAir!