Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Susan Collins Will Vote No on Trump SCOTUS Nominee: ‘We’re Simply Too Close to the Election’

Susan Collins Will Vote No on Trump SCOTUS Nominee: ‘We’re Simply Too Close to the Election’

“…and in the interest of being fair to the American people — and consistent, since it was with the Garland nomination.”

https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/1224803602981584903

Sen. Susan Collins already decided to vote no on a floor vote for a SCOTUS nominee.

Now she decided to vote no on the nominee, even though President Donald Trump hasn’t nominated anyone yet.

From The Hill:

“My statement was a model of clarity. … I made it very clear, yes, that I did not think there should be a vote prior to the election. And if there is one, I would oppose the nominee,” Collins told reporters, when asked if she would oppose a nominee before the election.

Collins added that her decision was not based on whomever the nominee is but because of the proximity of the election and the decision by Republicans in 2016 to refuse to move forward with Merrick Garland, then-President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee.

“Not because I might not support that nominee under normal circumstances, but we’re simply too close to the election, and in the interest of being fair to the American people — and consistent, since it was with the Garland nomination,” Collins said.

“The decision was made not to proceed, a decision that I disagreed with, but my position did not prevail. I now think we need to play by the same set of rules,” she added.

Collins met with President Barack Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland in April 2016.

She already wanted to hold a hearing for Garland, but their meeting fully convinced her “that the process should proceed.”

But Collins seems to forget history. It is not consistent as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell explained in 2018 (emphasis mine):

“They don’t know much history,” McConnell said of his detractors during an interview with CBS News’ “Face the Nation.” “You have to go back to 1880 to find the last time a Senate controlled by a different party from the president confirmed a Supreme Court justice to a vacancy created in the middle of a presidential election.”

“They [have] also conveniently forgotten that Joe Biden said in 1992 when he was chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Democrats controlled the Senate, a Republican in the White House, if a vacancy occurred, they wouldn’t fill it,” McConnell told host John Dickerson.

So Collins actually went against the rules and precedent in 2016.

I wonder if this will give other senators some courage. Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she is against a floor vote on the nominee, but has not said if she would vote yes or no on the nominee.

Sens. Mitt Romney and Cory Gardner said they will vote yes on a floor vote.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I’m not going to miss her in the next Congress.

Might as well have a Democrat in the seat, so we can stop pretending. Bye Susan.

    counsel in reply to dystopia. | September 22, 2020 at 4:32 pm

    So if Trump were to nominate you for the seat Susan, you would on principle vote against yourself?

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to counsel. | September 22, 2020 at 7:08 pm

      Why do people like Collins want to be in Congress????

      Oh yeah…..to get million$ without earning it……

        Members of Congress have made insider trading their path to wealth.

          notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to JusticeDelivered. | September 22, 2020 at 10:46 pm

          Yes, even my Senator who is Uber-Conservative (supposedly) and has been in Congress for decades was caught buying Zoom stock or some such this spring before the Wuhan Flu lockups were announced……

          What “inside information” could he possibly have had on the coming lockdowns? There was nothing senators were told that you and I were not. If he guessed correctly that Zoom would boom, good for him. We all had the same information and could have guessed the same.

What else can the president not do, because it’s, ah, too close to the election? This argument has never made sense to me. Does he need to stop signing bills? Stop EOs? Stop being chief executive, period? When does this “closeness” begin? January 1 of every presidential election year? Dec. 31 of the previous year? The day after he’s elected?

The reason Garland wasn’t given a hearing is because the Senate didn’t like the choice. Hello, is this thing on? Had it been a (R) president and a (R) Senate at the time, or a (D) president and (D) Senate, would the same result have happened?

Nope.

Go home, loser. You do the (R) party no good.

    According to Collins’s logic, if the U.S. were attacked by a foreign power, prior to the election, POTUS Trump would lack authority as Commander-in-Chief to direct the U.S.’s response. Her reasoning fails as a matter of basic logic, and, basic Constitutional realities.

Well Senator Collins that was an unwise choice. It isn’t going to help your re-election campaign but it might get you a cushy gig somewhere else after lose.

Reasons Sen Collins is wrong:
1. The Constitution doesn’t have a ‘wait till the election clause’.
2. Judge Garland didn’t get a floor vote, his nomination expired in the Judiciary Committee.
3. The nomination of Garland by a lame duck POTUS before an opposite party Senate Majority is NOT analogous to today.
4. Why not simply vote present?
5. You have likely doomed your re-election chance.

Whatever slim odds Senator Collins had for a Cabinet appointment or cushy Ambassador appointment in the event of her defeat are gone. She will likely lose her re-election bid and most likely would not win a race for Governor. She has effectively ended her political career.

I have taken up for her in the past. Not now. One can only expect a certain degree of ‘conservative’ from Maine. The voter composition and party strength isn’t Texas. We should be able to count on every r Senator to vote to approve confirmation of every SCOTUS nomination by a r POTUS.

“Sens. Mitt Romney and Cory Gardner said they will vote yes on a floor vote.”

Not exactly. They said they would vote for a qualified candidate. Not that they’d vote yes. This leaves them an out. It’s more Kabuki Theater. When the time comes they’ll demur and say the candidate wasn’t qualified. Especially if there is no hearing – more fuel to the candidate isn’t qualified because I couldn’t personally vet them in a hearing.

Let’s wait to see who Trump nominates, then we’ll see if they start waffling.

    rocky71 in reply to barnesto. | September 22, 2020 at 5:10 pm

    “Yes” on the floor vote simply means they’ll agree to the nominee being considered by the full Senate. The statement means nothing regarding the vote on the actual appointee…

    GatorGuy in reply to barnesto. | September 23, 2020 at 5:25 am

    Rocky71 fixed it for ya, below.

      GatorGuy in reply to GatorGuy. | September 23, 2020 at 9:43 am

      As the “yes on the floor vote” sounds like senate shop-talk, your minor point didn’t need fixing at all; besides, Rocky71’s comment wasn’t on-point, but an aside.

      No big deal either way. Their affirmatives meant, the nomination proceeds to a hearing; and barring any wild accusations or other shocking “revelations” the MTM would run with, corroboration or no, a later, almost certain floor vote is now worth the risk of a nomination.

      Anyway, your main point is the first I’ve seen that raises a fascinating possibility of a fail-safe feint.

      That would be way too treacherous on Romney’s and Gardner’s respective parts indeed, too sly, underhanded, and embarrassingly misleading for Leader McConnell to tolerate, I’d imagine.

      However intriguing, I’d still bet it wouldn’t happen. They’d gamble on home-support and reelection and vote “yea” to confirm the president’s nominee. We need more reliable decision power-in-place, seated at the High Court, to repel the barbarians at the gate.

The Friendly Grizzly | September 22, 2020 at 5:00 pm

Flighty, emotional, selfish. I’d expect no different from a…

Democrat.

See how easy it is to avoid leadership?

So a President’s term isn’t really 4 years, it’s now 3 years 8 months?

She seems unaware that Obama’s party didn’t control the Senate in 2016, but Trump’s does in 2020.

Comes of being one of them collegial, bipartisan-type Republicans what can’t even learn from their own mistakes, let alone anyone else’s, I reckon.

She is obviously NOT a Republican, so why is she allowed to call herself one, campaign as one, or receive funding and/or support from the GOP?
Why can’t she be expelled?

    Milhouse in reply to Exiliado. | September 22, 2020 at 7:49 pm

    She can be expelled from the caucus, but in practice caucuses almost never expel anyone, because they need their votes on who should be the majority.

    She gets to run as a Republican because she won the nomination, and there’s nothing the party can do about that even if it wants to. Primaries are controlled by state law, not by the party.

So, the nominee’s qualifications don’t matter to you Senator? Only so the press and Democrats (BIRM) don’t say anything mean about you, right? Murkowski will be next.

Should we assume that McConnell has counted votes and knows we don’t need hers?

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in Maine, though. She was the critical vote for Kavanaugh, which will alienate the left, and now she’s voting against this candidate sight unseen, which could alienate the right. I would have thought she’d be better off abstaining, with an excuse about not having time to vet a candidate while campaigning back home. But then she probably knows her constituents better than I do.

nice addition to you resume, votes against a qualified female to replace a deceased female justice
She can order the moving van now for her permanent move back to Maine

Despite her virtue signalling, odds are she’ll be history.

Democrats are already calling for post election lawsuits to ensure recounts elect Biden. Currently there are 4 left leaning and 4 right leaning supreme court judges. Without the 9the judge to decide the issues, it becomes a constitutional crisis. Collins, the democrats, and everyone else who wants a tied supreme court is hoping the US burns to the ground if Trump looks like he is winning.

This serems to contradict her previous statement that she didn’t think there should be a nominee, but that she would vote for her.

I wonder if McConnell knows he has the votes and let her roam off the ranch to her her get reelected? Wasn’t there a GOP meeting today?

It seems to me the person that put us here was RGB. She was gravely ill and stayed on the bench to play politics. It didn’t have to be that way she could have left under Obama. I don’t think she really did much in the last term. She was always “out”.

Susie

Vote yes vote no. Doesn’t matter to you are toast. I am sure that a couple of voters will be impressed by a wishy way spineless RINO. Seems that is a losing stand i a day when everyone is tired of lukewarm cowards as leaders. Your problem is President Trump has demonstrated what a winner looks like and how to fight.

Disappointing.. she could have abstained

Idiot

“Fair”… to whom? “If the shoe was on the other foot”.. would Dems delay for the election? NO… but the road to serfdom is eased by being “fair” to an opponent who isn’t “fair”.

This is illogical absurdity. Presidential powers and prerogatives granted by the U.S. Constitution do not cease to be valid, prior to an election.

Also, where is Collins’s backbone? If she’s going to lose her race, why not go out giving the middle finger to the vicious, totalitarian jackboots who threatened her in the most despicable ways, because of the undeniable courage she showed during the Kavanaugh farce?

What a fool. Sucking up to people who would NEVER vote for.

“…and in the interest of being fair to the American people ”

she doesn’t give a damn about the American people–the most disgusting thing about traitors is their lack of loyalty to anyone but themselves

they have no character, no conscience and their word, hence their oath(s), means nothing

hope the constituents in her part of the world flush her into oblivion

Collins is so ineffective as a leader they now have ranked choice voting in Maine. She couldn’t lead a group to get enough signatures to contest it in court
https://apnews.com/b5ddd0854037e9687e952cd79e1526df

Put into its simplest terms, the President has an obligation to select a candidate and the Senate has an obligation to put that to a vote. So you see Suzie, it’s not about whether YOU think it’s too soon. It’s about the qualifications the candidate brings to the table!

    Milhouse in reply to TRF. | September 22, 2020 at 7:54 pm

    If that were true then holding up the Garland nomination for most of a year would have been wrong. But it’s not true at all. The President has no obligation to nominate anyone, and the senate certainly has absolutely no obligation to put anything to a vote if it doesn’t feel like it. It’s entirely the senate’s choice. Which is why the senate had the right not to consider Garland, and to consider whomever the President nominates this week.

      According to The “Appointments Clause” (Article II, Section 2, clause 2) it states that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court.”

      That sounds like an obligation. If not it is certainly his job.

      Ironclaw in reply to Milhouse. | September 22, 2020 at 11:00 pm

      There you’re wrong. With Garland the process played out fully. The Senate advised Obama not to even bother sending a nominee, he nominated and then the Senate withheld their consent.

      Not perhaps the nicest process, but still far preferrable to how democrats treat republican nominees. Nobody threatened Garland, nobody defamed him and nobody tried to destroy his life and his reputation.

        Milhouse in reply to Ironclaw. | September 23, 2020 at 2:35 am

        You are wrong. There was no process at all with Garland. The senate did not advise 0bama anything. No vote was ever held on the matter. The majority leader, who by the senate’s consent controls its agenda, simply announced that no nomination would be considered.

        Which would have been wrong, had the senate been obliged to advise the president on his nominations. But it isn’t. The president can’t appoint his nominees without the senate’s advice and consent; the senate has no duty to do a damn thing.

        As for the president, I don’t buy your claim that “shall nominate” is an obligation. I think the clear meaning is that he has the power to nominate, but no obligation to do so. Obviously the vacancy can’t be left forever, but he can take his sweet time about filling it.

          “Obviously the vacancy can’t be left forever…”

          Which means he is obligated by the wording “shall”. Shall is not may.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | September 24, 2020 at 2:01 am

          I disagree. “Shall” in this context simply means that this is how it’s done. It doesn’t impose an obligation to do it. It’s obvious that a seat can’t go unfilled forever, because someone has to do the job. And when the president wishes to fill the seat he shall nominate someone for it.

Putting aside the actual merits of the arguments for or against, this is an utterly IDIOTIC political move by Collins.

She is in a close race. The Republican base OVERWHELMINGLY wants the seat filled. She is not going to convince Democrats to vote for her because she personally didn’t vote for it.

So why the hell would she announce that she’s going to refuse to vote for them?

Even Mitt Romney was smarter than that, he walked back the leak from his staff unbelievably fast, and is now BSing about ‘deserves a vote on the floor of the Senate’ (notice he DID NOT say he will vote for them).

She didn’t have to register a position, she could have simply said that she recommends that Trump not put forth a nominee, but that she will wait and see if/when/who Trump nominates somebody before registering a decision. If she gets lucky then then nominee never makes it to the floor at all.

There, I’m a better politician than she is.

Outright announcing you’re going to vote against them is UNBELIEVABLY idiotic.

    artichoke in reply to Olinser. | September 22, 2020 at 8:08 pm

    I wouldn’t presume to say I am smarter about politics than a Republican who has managed to have a long career as a senator from a Democrat-majority state — but it’s getting worse as it’s islamified. The other senator Angus King isn’t a Dem only because he’s too far left (for the old Dems anyway).

    Surely the deals are being made now behind the scenes. She was threatened with something or received something in return for this promise of a no vote, personally at least.

One can never take away from Collins what she did to get Kavanaugh over the line. That was heroic, and it likely cost her the seat this time.

Now I don’t know what the deals are behind the scenes, but I sure hope the R’s can win this one.

This thread. Good gried.

If you’re a republican cheering a potential Collins’ defeat, you’re either dumb as a box of rocks or have the emotional IQ of a middleschool girl.

Collins cannot be replaced by a more conservative option. Her seat won’t be regained in the next cycle. We ain’t talking about a squish Lisa Murkowski or Mitt Romney, two Benedicts who represent conservative voters. We are talking about a Senator from freaking Maine who stuck her neck out to for Justice Kavanaugh.

Grow up, and smarten up, people.

    artichoke in reply to Scalito. | September 22, 2020 at 8:10 pm

    I agree. But I think part of the bewilderment is that people can’t understand why she would do it, it seems that it would only hurt her reelection.

    We don’t know why, and we may never know what deals were involved, but she certainly does know.

    guyjones in reply to Scalito. | September 22, 2020 at 8:20 pm

    I don’t think folks want Collins to fail. I think people’s frustration stems from the fact that Collins’s decision makes no sense whatsoever, either politically, or, tactically. The Maine Democrats who hate her because of her Kavanaugh vote aren’t going to be convinced to support her by her opposition to filling this vacancy. And, the Republican voters are going to be pissed at her for not voting. So, it’s a move that fails as strategy, and, as smart politics. And, that’s not even addressing the nonsensical notion that a President’s Constitutional authority somehow allegedly wanes/disappears, prior to an election.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to guyjones. | September 22, 2020 at 10:48 pm

      Haven’t heard anyone ever claiming that these Congress Critters were bright……..

      Olinser in reply to guyjones. | September 23, 2020 at 12:42 am

      I agree, it’s pretty much what I said above.

      Putting aside any discussion of the actual merits, the purely election political calculus says that this instant premature announcement by Collins was an IDIOTIC move. She could PRIVATELY told McConnell she wouldn’t vote for them, and then publicly done any number of things, waited a bit to see if Trump actually nominated them and if they actually came out of committee, and found some fig leaf excuse for why she couldn’t vote for them (most likely what Mitch ‘The Bitch’ Romney is going to do, and say that gee shucks they were just too hasty and he can’t in good conscience vote in such a short period).

      Instead she immediately announced she simply won’t vote for them. This earns her ZERO Democrat votes, they’re going to go apeshit when the nominee goes through anyway, and it royally pisses off her actual base – polls are saying over 70% of Republicans want them confirmed.

      We’re not necessarily ‘wishing’ she’s going to lose.

      We’re predicting that this boneheaded move is the last nail in the coffin for her.

    Ironclaw in reply to Scalito. | September 22, 2020 at 11:05 pm

    So I wonder. What did this gain her? She’ll never get the communists to vote for her, they’ve got a democrat on the ballot. With this she also guarantees a lot of republicans will either stay at home or leave that line on the ballot blank. So it’s a double loss for her.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Scalito. | September 23, 2020 at 12:39 am

    She only stuck her neck out by being a squish in the first place.

    If she voted on principle and party without the grandstanding, she wouldn’t have a Dem target on her back now.

    Milhouse in reply to Scalito. | September 23, 2020 at 2:39 am

    I understand your point, but I disagree. There has to be a line drawn somewhere, and I think this is the place to draw it.

Everyone: be aware the blog is crashing:

Error 521 Ray ID: 5d706153e996eaf4 • 2020-09-23 01:09:25 UTC
Web server is down

500 Internal Server Error
nginx

She wanted an election year hearing in 2016 but in 2020?

Like an ignorant hoe like her would know. What a rino. Swear to god somebody ought to do something. She’s an embarrassment. Effing political delatant. She’d look good being drug behind a pickup truck. Hint, hint.

Meh, she’s toast now. Might be squeaked by if she’d decided to vote present, but people on the right will remember that, and dems are going to vote against her anyway. Too bad. Senate control is going to be close. Potential for pick ups in MI and MN, but potential for losing another 2-3 as well.

    Ghostrider in reply to Othniel. | September 23, 2020 at 9:59 am

    Susan Collins is the perfect example of why term limits for all members of Congress and the Judiciary, too, are needed.

      artichoke in reply to Ghostrider. | September 23, 2020 at 2:23 pm

      Then we wouldn’t have McConnell or Grassley who are very hard for the Dems to deal with. On the other hand we wouldn’t have Schumer or Sanders or Leahy.

      I dunno. Are those any more corrupt than the average? I don’t agree with the Dems’ politics, but they might be less corrupt than an average senator.

Ignorance is a sure cure for intelligence; speaking ensures ignorance is displayed;

better to be thought a fool, than to open ignorant mouth and prove it.

Susan Collins, not smart, bless her little heart.

Dithering and Cowardliness has been the cause of left wing attempts to terrorize her and her family…and now it finally works.
She never understood she brings this on herself with her cowardliness and playing for headlines.

Hmmm. It seems that women in either House tend to wear red when they’re scheduled to announce anything particularly outrageous to the press.

Just at a guess, they wear something a man simply can’t when they’re playing their I’m a woman so the ZeitGeist says you have to pay attention to me card.

Lots of teeth gnashing from the left about how this Presudent shouldn’t be making decisions the next one will have to follow. Funny how these people all supported Barry’s peace deal and nuclear agreements with Iran though isnt it ?

Is Maine electoral politics as complex, ambivalent, and downright weird as Sen Collins’ terrible and tortured Republican existence suggests?

Must she be such an absurdly principled obstacle, an irrational annoyance, a near-calamitous cause in her declared party’s critical efforts to challenge and defeat the greatest, organized threat to our republic since the Democrats’ preparation for an attack on Fort Sumter, in 1861, in order to survive her electorate’s purported wrath — or is it an affliction endemic to the country’s remote, upper right corner because its residents might eat too much lobster and far too many blueberries at any one sitting?

What, pray tell, is the cause of Sen Collins’ uniquely plagued political plight, just what is it?

Her call for a more consistent and even-sided application of judicial appointment protocol is not only factually/historically impoverished, as her Leader points out; more importantly and pragmatically, it’s highly inscrutable in terms of a sensible cohesion of party members to accomplish the party’s goals and objectives in the service of the party’s membership at-large and, certainly no less, the country’s overall success.

Why is Sen Collins even in the Senate as a Republican? The answer seems entirely elusive to most, except, ironically (or otherwise …?), the Democrats. To not do for the (Republican) one is, in our (increasingly cut-throat) competitive, essentially two-party system, to do for the (Democrat) other. What’ll it be, Senator?

She should either reverse her statement and instead, along with her 49 Republican senate colleagues, pledge her likely support for the president’s upcoming judicial nomination, or, barring that, announce her decision to suspend, ie, terminate, her candidacy for reelection in November. For, right now, she appears to be a farce and a travesty, at best; a dangerous nuisance — or even an irrelevant, dismissible, most curiously unreliably and useless Republican senator — at worst.

    GatorGuy in reply to GatorGuy. | September 23, 2020 at 5:01 am

    Trivially, I know (sadly or otherwise, I have the trait), correct “49” to 51; and, at bottom, “unreliably” to unreliable. Could be worse, and better.

    artichoke in reply to GatorGuy. | September 23, 2020 at 2:26 pm

    Sometimes they come back around, at least if Romney does as he’s appearing to do and help this time. Politics is about alliances and numbers. Friendship has nothing to do with it, which is why the senators call each other “friend” so much.

Good riddance. You cannot go into battle having to watch your enemy in front of you AND your “allies” behind you.
Collins and “Mr. Ed” Murkowski are worse than Democrats – they give Democrats the false cover of “bi-partisanship”…

I disagree total about your assessment of Collins. I have been watching the Maine race for awhile and it is a very complex mess. The state is messed up with the upper east coast liberals everywhere.

I may not agree with her handling of things but she did an excellent speech on Kavanaugh.

Over $100 M in the Maine Senate race to push Sara Gideon. Sara is a conservative nightmare, so beat up on Susan. Dumb move. We need her more than Sara.

Her decision is calculated. She is not going to loss conservative votes over this and might be protecting some of her base. Sara Gideon is not good for business and that is a strong point for Susan.

Watch this debate. Max Linn is a total deranged nut case and Lisa Savage is a full blown tree hugger that actually sounds semi-brain dead. Max is very entertaining. Sara is the slick paid for liberal.

I am pretty sure Susan is not going to be the deciding vote on this. She will do the right thing. I am guessing that this will be her last term.

I was in West Virginia in July and it is a solid Trump state. Shelley Capito should be an easy win. I am guessing Joe Manchin will vote with Trump. I am hoping he will switch parties, too. He would be rewarded well if the Senate gains seats.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?475617-1/maine-us-senate-debate

For those that have forgotten, here is her speech at the Kavanaugh vote.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4753790/senator-susan-collins-vote-confirm-judge-brett-kavanaugh

    artichoke in reply to MarkSmith. | September 23, 2020 at 2:46 pm

    At about 12:15 in the Maine Senate debate, Ms. Savage says there is ranked choice voting.

    How does that play into Collins’ calculation? If there were no other candidates in the race besides her and Ms. Gideon, the voting method would not matter. But with two additional candidates, there are other votes that will put the other candidates above her and Gideon, and on those ballots she wants to be ranked higher than Gideon. She wants to be their 2nd choice if Gideon is their 3rd choice.

    Perhaps that explains Collins’ run to the middle of the road.

    Max Linn is entertaining, but that’s about all, from what I’ve heard so far.

What is really strange is if I go to cspan and type in Susan Collins or Collins Maine Senate debate 2020, it does not come up in the search. CPAN is now selective filtering.

If I search Sara Gideon, all her 2020 stuff comes up on CSpan search.

Wow, though cspan would be an little more honest.

    Milhouse in reply to MarkSmith. | September 23, 2020 at 11:00 am

    What are you talking about? If you put in Susan Collins dozens of links come up.

      MarkSmith in reply to Milhouse. | September 23, 2020 at 12:34 pm

      Duh, did you look at the links?

      In the link I previously posted maine-us-senate-debate that occurred on Sept. 11 2020! It does not even come up in the first 9 posting that it shows when you search it! Same with Susan Collins hits. It is all old stuff. They are burying negative stuff about Sara Gideon. They are pushing positive stuff about her and burying current stuff about Collins.

      “Results for maine us senate debate”

      Oct 30, 2018 … Angus King (I-ME) debates his Repbuplican challenger Eric Brakey and
      Democratic challenger Zak Ringelstein in Maine’s U.S. Senate race.

      Maine Senatorial Debate

      Oct 18, 2000 … Explain why the timing is on that that was a lot of the talk on Capitol … And a deb
      ate between the candidates for United States Senate from the state of … We
      welcome you to this debate coming to you live in Maine P.B.S. and …

      Indiana 5th District U.S. House Debate

      18 hours ago … … Christina Hale (D) and Victoria Spartz (R) participate in a televised debate.
      WFYI-TV and Indiana Town Hall are sponsoring the event.

      They are filtering you information. I thought CSPAN was better than that. Duckgogo is doing it too.

If Mitch needs the vote, Lindsey should talk to her.

You’re being paranoid. Nobody’s suppressing anything. If you look at that video you will see that you can’t filter it by speaker, because it has no speakers listed. Presumably they haven’t yet done the work to create a speakers list and mark where each person spoke, so none of the participants’ names are in the search and it doesn’t come up when you bring up all videos for a given speaker. But if you search for “maine us senate debate” the third link is “WCSH-TV, Portland ME”, and that brings it up as the first video.

Senator Collins, you were elected. The President was elected. DO YOUR JOB or resign.

That’s ok.
The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the Electoral College.
Trump will be forced to stay in office until all the legal challenges have been ruled on.
Of course, we will have a full quorum in the Supreme court long before then.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend