HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Who Is Worse? Barrett Or...

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:11 PM

Who Is Worse? Barrett Or Lagoa?

I'm sure they're both bad, but it seems like more is known about Barrett's views, and it seems like Health Care, Prayer In Schools & Roe Vs Wade are all pretty much in her sights.

40 replies, 1442 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply Who Is Worse? Barrett Or Lagoa? (Original post)
sfstaxprep Sep 21 OP
NYCButterfinger Sep 21 #1
DonaldsRump Sep 21 #8
LeftInTX Sep 21 #11
radius777 Sep 22 #16
Amishman Sep 21 #2
Celerity Sep 21 #6
Mike 03 Sep 21 #3
gibraltar72 Sep 21 #4
Tennessee Hillbilly Sep 21 #5
sfstaxprep Sep 21 #7
RANDYWILDMAN Sep 21 #9
Solly Mack Sep 21 #10
Le Roi de Pot Sep 21 #12
Amishman Sep 22 #13
radius777 Sep 22 #14
Buckeyeblue Sep 22 #17
PTWB Sep 22 #23
Drunken Irishman Sep 22 #26
Celerity Sep 22 #27
Drunken Irishman Sep 22 #29
Celerity Sep 22 #31
roamer65 Sep 22 #38
malaise Sep 22 #15
Buckeyeblue Sep 22 #18
RhodeIslandOne Sep 22 #30
Buckeyeblue Sep 22 #32
RhodeIslandOne Sep 22 #33
Buckeyeblue Sep 22 #36
GoCubsGo Sep 22 #19
pinkstarburst Sep 22 #20
DeminPennswoods Sep 22 #21
Celerity Sep 22 #28
RhodeIslandOne Sep 22 #34
Celerity Sep 22 #35
DeminPennswoods Sep 22 #40
LeftInTX Sep 22 #25
Celerity Sep 22 #37
Eid Ma Clack Shaw Sep 22 #22
DeminPennswoods Sep 22 #39
DFW Sep 22 #24

Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:13 PM

1. Lagoa---undecided voters/LIV voters will like her

 

She's a white Latina

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to NYCButterfinger (Reply #1)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:04 PM

11. She looks white now, but previously she looked latina.



I don't know what she did to herself, besides bleach her hair. She looked better before, or maybe she looked better because it was an old picture and she was younger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYCButterfinger (Reply #1)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 06:35 AM

16. Other Latinos don't necessarily like Cubans

who tend to be right wing and nationalist.

White moderate voters (ie soccer moms) tend to be pro-choice and won't want some anti-choice stepford who isn't worthy of sitting in RBG's seat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:14 PM

2. About tied

The worst one on the list that is circulating is Britt Grant.

She's the youngest and one of the most conservative

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #2)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:26 PM

6. there is one even younger and very conservative, the 38yo Allison Jones Rushing, who is in the

top 3 favourites atm.

Three Conservative Female Judges at Top of Trump’s Supreme Court List

https://www.voanews.com/usa/three-conservative-female-judges-top-trumps-supreme-court-list

WASHINGTON - U.S. President Donald Trump appointed Amy Coney Barrett, Barbara Lagoa and Allison Jones Rushing, three conservatives, to federal appellate court judgeships in recent years and now could pick one of them as his nominee for a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court. They appear to be at the top of the U.S. leader’s list of choices to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the liberal icon who served on the court for 27 years before her death Friday, a month and a half before the November 3 reelection contest between Trump and Democrat Joe Biden.

Any of the three women — Barrett, 48, Lagoa, 52, and Rushing, 38 — would draw immediate support from Republican lawmakers in the Republican-controlled Senate. And their decisions could ensure a string of philosophically conservative decisions for a generation to come. Any of the three would likely draw vocal opposition from Democrats, even though Lagoa won appellate court confirmation on a bipartisan 80-15 vote.

snip

Allison Jones Rushing won her appellate court confirmation last year with party-line Republican support over Democratic opposition, on a 53-44 vote. Democrats, civil rights, and gay and lesbian groups opposed her nomination. They cited her internship with Alliance Defending Freedom, an Arizona-based conservative, Christian legal nonprofit that defended a Colorado baker in a Supreme Court case who fought for the right not to bake a cake for a gay wedding and in another instance that allowed companies to opt out of providing insurance for contraceptives for employees because of the owners’ religious beliefs.

In addition, Rushing defended the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Rushing said she supported the four conservative justices who dissented when the Supreme Court struck down the ruling in 2015. Tim Chandler, the senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, defended Rushing, saying, “The Senate confirmed not only a highly qualified lawyer, but a woman of integrity, professional competence, and judicial demeanor.

snip


Trump's newly confirmed federal judge has ties to anti-gay 'hate group'

https://www.democraticunderground.com/113751915

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:20 PM

3. I'll defer to others, but one point about Lagoa...

She is really going to owe Trump favors, because she's been moved up the ranks very quickly and been positioned to rule favorably on a lawsuit against one of Trump's campaign advisors, so I see her as the most likely to do whatever is expected of her by Trump. Barrett has a long history and her name has been tossed around for years and years. I wish I could remember when I started hearing conservatives floating her name, but seriously, she's been floated for ages. Barrett might be more mature and fully developed as a jurist and have at least an ounce of self-respect and concern about matters of her legacy.

What little I know about Lagoa, I think she was grabbed up off a trash heap by DeSantis just for the purpose of voting how others tell her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:21 PM

4. yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:22 PM

5. Nominating Lagos might

improve trump's chances of winning Florida.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:27 PM

7. Here Is Why He Might Pick Lagoa

He doesn't care about anything other than that which benefits HIMSELF.

Sure, Barrett might make the Conservative party happy, and perhaps the base. But like has been mentioned, Lagoa is Latino and from Florida.

It's all about HIM. Lagoa helps HIM in Florida. And without Florida, he's cooked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:27 PM

9. Coney Barrett is an Originalist

In my Conservative's for Dummies book. That's a judge who wants things from the good old days, when rich white land owning men ruled and could have slaves and wife were possessions like the brown people.

But in her fantasy, she gets to call balls and strikes just the founding fathers would have even though she would have never got in that room.

It is a total joke to say originalist. small minded people for sure.

She is also is a group People for Praise, sound like a cult to me.

they are 48 and 52 years old. we should just change the rules, Supreme court is 20 years max.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 06:43 PM

10. Anyone chosen will be like the whole of America finding out they have tertiary syphilis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:08 PM

12. Won't matter to one bit .. we will expand the supreme court to 13

 

Threaten it now .. and follow up on it when Biden is elected

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Roi de Pot (Reply #12)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 06:14 AM

13. Still a terrible short sighted idea

And given our likely narrow margin in taking the Senate, one we might not be able to pass. This would be difficult to sell for Manchin, Tester, and Cunningham.

It also isn't popular with voters overall
https://fixthecourt.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/PSB-term-limits-poll-for-FTC-June-2019.pdf
probably polls a bit higher now but I doubt we are even over 50% support.

It might feel good, but it's a bad idea and a long shot.

What we really need are term limits and a better way to screen out extremist court nominations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #13)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 06:28 AM

14. Repubs will never go for term limits once they have a 6-3 lock

on the court, and any new rule likely wouldn't apply to the existing court anyway.

The issue here is we have to fight fire with fire, and show the GOP how it's going to be - then they may 'learn' and start to be rational and work toward reform (like term limits). But until then it has to be warfare.

We can't pack the court now (some Dems won't go along) but if we build a better majorities in the future we will be able to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #13)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 07:00 AM

17. Changing the lifetime appointment would take a constitutional amendment

Expanding the court would take a law. I think Biden could make a case for it by starting an investigation into the 2016 election. If he said that it's possible that Trump was an illegitimate president based on evidence that votes were changed, he could claim that the only remedy is adding justices from a legitimately elected president.

I think we also argue that given the size of the US, 9 justices has not been the appropriate number for a long time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #13)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 09:11 AM

23. So add 5 new heavily Democratic states while we are at it.

Nothing should be off the table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #23)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 10:38 AM

26. There's no 5 heavily Democratic states to add.

The closest would be DC. Puerto Rico is not a heavily Democratic state and Democrats are going to be in for a surprise if they think they have a lock on those two potential senate seats. Hell, currently PR is represented by a Trump supporting Republican as a non-voting member of the House.

It's not a slam dunk the Dems get both those seats.

Especially since Puerto Ricans on the island tend to be more conservative than those on the mainland.

Other potential states are a pipedream right now, as places like Guam haven't gone near the lengths Puerto Rico has gone to become even a commonwealth, let alone a state. Even still, again it's presumptuous to assume a place like Guam would be a Democratic stronghold.

Their current governor is a Democrat, but their last governor was a Trump supporting Republican. So, it's not like they're necessarily adding Massachusetts or California here.

But again, you can't just add them as states. They need to vote on it. Puerto Rico seems the most likely option, but Guam isn't there yet.

The rest? Unlikely to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #26)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 10:46 AM

27. Split California into 2, SoCal and NoCal, and add DC and PR

I will take my chances with the PR Rethugs. At worst that gives us 5 new Dem Senators, and I think 6 in most cases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #27)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 10:56 AM

29. You can't just split California into two.

They'd have to agree to that. I'm sure they're not itching at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #29)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:06 AM

31. Never said it would be easy. It may become needed though.

I am a big picture person and also can be ruthless.

I saw the SCOTUS nightmare coming for ages (it is an integral part of my 'dissolution of the union by 2040 or sooner' theory). I have also been pushing expansion of the House to at least 1,501 and the adding of DC, PR, and NoCal/SoCal for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #29)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:30 AM

38. California would become an independent republic before it ever would be split.

If Dump steals the election, I would support CA secession, along with states like NY and the New England states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 06:29 AM

15. Lagoa was part of the capture Elian Gonzalez

RW posse

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 07:14 AM

18. I can't imagine a any intelligent woman wanting to be the vote to overturn Roe

I think history would be unfavorable to them. Roe has become more than about abortion. It's the symbol for women's rights. If a woman doesn't have the right to make decisions about her body, what other right does she have?

These other laws limiting abortion or putting constraints on it are not about Roe. Not directly. They are about states wanting to put up road blocks, mostly symbolic road blocks to give the anti-choice crowd something to cheer about.

Also, there is a slippery slope to overturning Roe. I'm not a big fan of the slippery slope argument but I think this one has teeth. Once Roe is overturned, Congress could pass a law saying personhood starts at conception. That would on it's face eliminate all abortion and perhaps some birth control. Every miscarriage would potentially be a homicide investigation.

I can't imagine being the thinking woman that would want to set that in motion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buckeyeblue (Reply #18)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:00 AM

30. You are fooling yourself.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RhodeIslandOne (Reply #30)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:06 AM

32. I'm not saying we don't fight

I'm saying that I can't imagine an intelligent woman voting against her self interest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buckeyeblue (Reply #32)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:16 AM

33. Your imagination is entirely based on your personal belief system.

 

And the women you know....

It's debatable whether these judges are "intelligent", first off.

They are "true believers", at least Barrett is. She does not care about the real world problems banning abortion to most women in this country would cause. Or banning birth control either. She is a Jesus freak. She believes any woman who would abort her child deserves everything that's coming to her. From the justice system, to her medical suffering, to God's judgment. She is fucking nuts.

I'm glad you have this nice vision that Barrett or Lagoa or whomever the fuck Stepford Wife President Syphilis would simply have a moment of clarity at the time of ruling. What you BETTER hope is that they don't try to broaden their ruling by declaring abortion murder and therefore ban it in all fifty states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RhodeIslandOne (Reply #33)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:26 AM

36. I don't doubt they'll do it

And I use the word imagine loosely. Of course they will probably overturn Roe. In the context of what a majority of citizens want (which is a clear majority support reproductive rights) and historical context, the group that overturns Roe will be reversing course or an enormous human right. It would put us out of step with the rest of the industrial world. And states that pass draconian abortion laws will suffer economically as corporations will relocate (young workers will not want to live in backwards states).

But I get it. If you are a true believer, you might see all that as a badge of honor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 07:19 AM

19. Is shit worse than feces?

A stinking, putrid turd is a stinking, putrid turd, is a stinking, putrid turd...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)


Response to pinkstarburst (Reply #20)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 08:44 AM

21. Agree

Trump wants, probably needs it more, though, FL. He'll think Lagoa will help him pick up more of FL's Cuban vote. Trump only thinks about himself and not some long term legacy of the Supreme Court. Lagoa was also confirmed 80-15, so it was a pretty strong bi-partisan vote.

Barrett's membership in People of Praise wasn't known or well-known during her first confirmation hearing. This would be problematic for her now as it's well-known.

The other judge is just too young at 38 to be on the USSC.

I could see the Indian-American judge who's a McConnell protege' sneaking up on the women. Dems would have a problem opposing him given their VP candidate is also of Indian heritage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #21)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 10:54 AM

28. Too young at 38 assumes there are norms left. There are not. Also,

we would have ZERO problems opposing an Indian American simply because Harris is half East Indian. How utterly racially reductionist and silly. That is like saying we woukd have a hard time opposing Clarence Thomas or Nikki Haley for anything.

SMDH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #28)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:18 AM

34. Is the 38 y/o a hot blonde?

 

Trump will pick her.

"You remind me of my daughter"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RhodeIslandOne (Reply #34)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:23 AM

35. Nope, neither hot nor a blonde, lolol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #28)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 12:27 PM

40. Sure, Dems would oppose her,

there's just a price to be paid when negative ads by Rs call out the hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinkstarburst (Reply #20)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 10:22 AM

25. Lagoa's bleached hair and botox does not help her....

Also I've never heard the name Lagoa.

It could be Italian for all I know.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftInTX (Reply #25)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 11:28 AM

37. Lagoa in Portugal (in the Algarve) comes to mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 09:06 AM

22. Barrett is insane, so her

It seems like most GOPers, including McConnell and Pence, are pushing Barrett partially out of concern that Lagoa might not be enough of a wing-nut. With that said, others supposedly believe she would provide more a boost to Trump’s faltering campaign, particularly in Florida.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/trump-supreme-court-barrett-lagoa-ginsburg/2020/09/21/5e8208c2-fc16-11ea-b555-4d71a9254f4b_story.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eid Ma Clack Shaw (Reply #22)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 12:25 PM

39. Trump's a short term thinker, focused only on himself

Right now, the short term goal is winning re-election. Despite DeSantis and all the other machinations FL Rs are doing to depress Dem turnout, Trump's not running away with FL. He needs to consolidate the Cuban vote. Lagoa might do that for him, thus she'd be his choice.

Don't make the mistake of thinking Trump's going to change who he is or how he operates. He's not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sfstaxprep (Original post)

Tue Sep 22, 2020, 10:15 AM

24. What is worse, hanging, strangulation, or electrocution?

None of them end up with a positive result for the person on the receiving end, and as far as the SCOTUS goes, we're ALL on the receiving end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread