2016 Postmortem

wt1531

(424 posts) Wed Aug 3, 2016, 12:20 AM Aug 2016

Eric Holder for Superme Court

He is young, experienced in the law, would make lots of hate radio fans heads explode.

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Eric Holder for Superme Court (Original Post) wt1531 Aug 2016 OP

uh, no. KT2000 Aug 2016 #1

No. Very lackluster Attorney General. The Second Stone Aug 2016 #2

Nope. TDale313 Aug 2016 #3

No..no...no... PoiBoy Aug 2016 #4

I'd have to hear a much more compelling case. Until then, no. aikoaiko Aug 2016 #5

Uh, no! How about Sri Srinivasan? longship Aug 2016 #6

OMG, "some" people would lose their shit. denbot Aug 2016 #11

On the last go-round there was an Asian Indian short-listed, but I can't remember his name. Hekate Aug 2016 #13

You mean Eric "Lost" Holder? He could take over the Clarence Thomas seat. NBachers Aug 2016 #7

Need someone about 15 years younger. Gidney N Cloyd Aug 2016 #8

NO! NO! NO! & NO! Lottie5 Aug 2016 #9

Well, as long is it's the Superme Court and not the Supreme Court pinboy3niner Aug 2016 #10

I thought Hillary wanted demwing Aug 2016 #12

Does anyone know if President Obama can block Garland's nomination if the Republicans pull OnDoutside Aug 2016 #14

I'd prefer someone not so deeply ingrained with the idea that the government has the right to stick Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #15

Hahaha! ... No. Thanks but No thanks. DetlefK Aug 2016 #16

Add me to the NO column unc70 Aug 2016 #17

KT2000

(20,584 posts)

1. uh, no.

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 12:28 AM

Aug 2016

The Second Stone

(2,900 posts)

2. No. Very lackluster Attorney General.

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 12:30 AM

Aug 2016

Lynch would be better.

TDale313

(7,820 posts)

3. Nope.

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 12:39 AM

Aug 2016

PoiBoy

(1,542 posts)

4. No..no...no...

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 12:48 AM

Aug 2016

we don't need another corporatist on the Supreme Court...

aikoaiko

(34,172 posts)

5. I'd have to hear a much more compelling case. Until then, no.

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 12:50 AM

Aug 2016

longship

(40,416 posts)

6. Uh, no! How about Sri Srinivasan?

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 01:22 AM

Aug 2016

Sri Srinivasan

denbot

(9,900 posts)

11. OMG, "some" people would lose their shit.

Reply to longship (Reply #6)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 04:07 AM

Aug 2016

If The President thinks he's qualified for the SC so be it. My only reservation would be that this guy is someone that Obama feels will be somehow acceptable by a hostile Senate.

If we get the White House, I'm pretty sure we got the Senate too. Why not a smart, young, liberal, SC Nominee, someone we might not get a better chance to confirm before the next election cycle.

Hekate

(90,714 posts)

13. On the last go-round there was an Asian Indian short-listed, but I can't remember his name.

Reply to longship (Reply #6)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 04:38 AM

Aug 2016

Obama has come up with some good potentials -- I'm sure Hillary will have yet more.

NBachers

(17,122 posts)

7. You mean Eric "Lost" Holder? He could take over the Clarence Thomas seat.

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 02:59 AM

Aug 2016

Gidney N Cloyd

(19,841 posts)

8. Need someone about 15 years younger.

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 02:59 AM

Aug 2016

Lottie5

(12 posts)

9. NO! NO! NO! & NO!

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 03:19 AM

Aug 2016

pinboy3niner

(53,339 posts)

10. Well, as long is it's the Superme Court and not the Supreme Court

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 03:31 AM

Aug 2016

demwing

(16,916 posts)

12. I thought Hillary wanted

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 04:19 AM

Aug 2016

to overturn Citizens United? Based on his time in Justice, I don't think Holder wants any part of that...

OnDoutside

(19,962 posts)

14. Does anyone know if President Obama can block Garland's nomination if the Republicans pull

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 04:48 AM

Aug 2016

a fast one and try to nominate him during the Lame Duck Period, rather than a much more liberal choice under Hillary ? I think he would let him go through anyway but just wondering.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)

15. I'd prefer someone not so deeply ingrained with the idea that the government has the right to stick

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 04:51 AM

Aug 2016

people in prison for putting 'forbidden' chemicals into their own bodies, thanks.

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)

16. Hahaha! ... No. Thanks but No thanks.

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 05:15 AM

Aug 2016

Putting a Wall Street lackey up there would be a horrible idea.

unc70

(6,115 posts)

17. Add me to the NO column

Reply to wt1531 (Original post)

Wed Aug 3, 2016, 06:31 AM

Aug 2016

Holder and the DOJ let North Carolina down on repeated issues. I would call him spineless except occasionally he found his spine, just at the wrong time regarding the wrong issues.

Reply to this discussion