Can you answer or not? All that matters is actions. Not political statements. Were the nominees all women? If so, it’s sexist. Period. Same for race. Is this one of those “whataboutisim” you speak of?
Biden is fighting the war on 2 fronts: the gop and the aoc… the question is does he go uber left or more mainstream with his nominee.. does the gop want to vote against a black woman with this bound to be a wedge issue in the midterms? Biden is floundering everywhere… he needs a home run but not sure he can get one without manchin, who has been cast as the Antichrist by his own party… I predict he goes farther left with his nominee than suspected and makes manchin decide if he is to be the outlier again….
We will see. Here is what I know for sure: regardless of who he picks the Republicans will say she is a wild eyed liberal and the real wild eyed liberals will say she is Republican-lite.
Did you read the article? Reagan made the promise to nominate a woman during the 1980 campaign so I have a hard time believing he had men on the list. President's of both parties have made nominations based upon race, sex and religion to make the court more reflective of the demographics of our country. If the individual is qualified then I see no reason why this is wrong.
You genuinely just don't get it, do you? The article was the answer to your question. I did that on purpose. I don't want you taking my word for it. I do my research before I post so my answers are informed. Further, you are asking me to answer questions that you are perfectly capable of answering for yourself. If you want to know if Reagan considered anyone else go find out for yourself and come back and report what you find but stop asking me to do your homework. Especially when I've already answered your petty question twice with articles on the subject. That's just lazy.
Next time just say you refuse to answer. I asked about his actions. Not his words. If you are not comfortable in your knowledge to answer, just say so.
I answered you. You don't like my answer but I most definitely answered you. See I understand your little game and it's so childish...if I had given you an answer without a link you would have said that it is only my opinion. I gave you a link so you wouldn't have to take my word for it and now you claim that I didn't answer you even though I have no answered you three times. You don't like the answer even thought it is true yet now you want to pretend that somehow his words and actions are different things. He did what he said he was going to do: nominate a woman to the supreme court. It's that simple yet you want to twist it as though it isn't. I'm perfectly comfortable with my answers...evidently you are the one who isn't. If you cannot debate on a substantive level then I'll just address the ones who do. It's no skin off my back either way dude...I'm never here for a long time anyway.
