I like Gowdy as Attorney General, but would hate to lose him from his current position.

Is it fair to assume that you opposed every one of the SCOTUS appointments made by Obama and Bill Clinton because of their radical views on the Constitution?

Yes.

For those fretting Cabinet or SCOTUS Appointments, Trump could just borrow a quote directly from his predecessor when President Obama said,"elections have consequences" and "I won."

Yes.

In that case, I respect your opinion, but vigorously disagree.

 

Ted Cruz was a very successful constitutional lawyer and clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist before he entered politics. Every Supreme Court appointee has his or her political opinion, but in most cases they manage to hide them from the Senate Judiciary long enough to win confirmation. I don't think serving as a U.S. Senator should disqualify an otherwise well qualified candidate for the SCOTUS. I like spirited debate and I would prefer that members of the Supreme Court argue legal precedents and the intent of the U.S. Constitution, as amended, than be composed of political advocates.

 

IMO, Cruz's political career has been driven by his commitment to the Constitution, which is also the reason that he is so unpopular among the RINOs and Democrats in Congress. The Senate has historically been an institution where compromise and political horse trading have been prized attributes, and Cruz's unwillingness to compromise on core values is exactly what appeals to me and leads me to believe that he would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice.

For those fretting Cabinet or SCOTUS Appointments, Trump could just borrow a quote directly from his predecessor when President Obama said,"elections have consequences" and "I won."

I agree and I hope that Trump supporters noticed that when his margin in the Texas polls narrowed, Cruz hit the campaign trail for Trump. After Trump's vicious attacks during the primaries, I don't think that I could have supported him myself. Cruz could have held a grudge and stayed home but he didn't. It would be a mistake for Trump to hold a grudge and not utilize Cruz's talents.

For those fretting Cabinet or SCOTUS Appointments, Trump could just borrow a quote directly from his predecessor when President Obama said,"elections have consequences" and "I won."

 

This is the post of the 2016 Election.

I agree and I hope that Trump supporters noticed that when his margin in the Texas polls narrowed, Cruz hit the campaign trail for Trump. After Trump's vicious attacks during the primaries, I don't think that I could have supported him myself. Cruz could have held a grudge and stayed home but he didn't. It would be a mistake for Trump to hold a grudge and not utilize Cruz's talents.

 

I'm not a fan of Cruz, I don't care if he uses him or not...I won't care either way.

In that case, I respect your opinion, but vigorously disagree.

 

Ted Cruz was a very successful constitutional lawyer and clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist before he entered politics. Every Supreme Court appointee has his or her political opinion, but in most cases they manage to hide them from the Senate Judiciary long enough to win confirmation. I don't think serving as a U.S. Senator should disqualify an otherwise well qualified candidate for the SCOTUS. I like spirited debate and I would prefer that members of the Supreme Court argue legal precedents and the intent of the U.S. Constitution, as amended, than be composed of political advocates.

 

IMO, Cruz's political career has been driven by his commitment to the Constitution, which is also the reason that he is so unpopular among the RINOs and Democrats in Congress. The Senate has historically been an institution where compromise and political horse trading have been prized attributes, and Cruz's unwillingness to compromise on core values is exactly what appeals to me and leads me to believe that he would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice.

 

So forget the views of both Republicans and Democrats, Ted Cruz is right!

 

I want judges that are impartial. There is nothing impartial about Cruz. He has a narrow view that is supported only by the far right.

 

Ted Cruz has no chance of being confirmed. It would be an embarrassment to Trump to nominate him and then have him denied the seat.

So forget the views of both Republicans and Democrats, Ted Cruz is right!

 

I want judges that are impartial. There is nothing impartial about Cruz. He has a narrow view that is supported only by the far right.

 

Ted Cruz has no chance of being confirmed. It would be an embarrassment to Trump to nominate him and then have him denied the seat.

There is a long history and tradition of the U.S. Senate confirming their own members for cabinet positions and positions on the Supreme Court. Trump won the election and if he wanted to appoint Ted Cruz to the Court, the Republican Senate would confirm him. Besides, RINOs like McConnell, McCain, and Lindsey Graham would be glad to see him gone.

There is a long history and tradition of the U.S. Senate confirming their own members for cabinet positions and positions on the Supreme Court. Trump won the election and if he wanted to appoint Ted Cruz to the Court, the Republican Senate would confirm him. Besides, RINOs like McConnell, McCain, and Lindsey Graham would be glad to see him gone.

 

Sure, confirming a Senator they respect and like. That is not Cruz. No way they reward him with a Supreme Court seat to get rid of him.

Sure, confirming a Senator they respect and like. That is not Cruz. No way they reward him with a Supreme Court seat to get rid of him.

We may never know. Trump seems to be the type that holds a grudge. Cruz is still a relatively young man, so if Trump passes on the opportunity to appoint Cruz to his cabinet or the SCOTUS, maybe Trump's successor will do so in a few years.

In that case, I respect your opinion, but vigorously disagree.

 

Ted Cruz was a very successful constitutional lawyer and clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist before he entered politics. Every Supreme Court appointee has his or her political opinion, but in most cases they manage to hide them from the Senate Judiciary long enough to win confirmation. I don't think serving as a U.S. Senator should disqualify an otherwise well qualified candidate for the SCOTUS. I like spirited debate and I would prefer that members of the Supreme Court argue legal precedents and the intent of the U.S. Constitution, as amended, than be composed of political advocates.

 

IMO, Cruz's political career has been driven by his commitment to the Constitution, which is also the reason that he is so unpopular among the RINOs and Democrats in Congress. The Senate has historically been an institution where compromise and political horse trading have been prized attributes, and Cruz's unwillingness to compromise on core values is exactly what appeals to me and leads me to believe that he would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice.

I understand why you think Cruz would be a great justice, and I totally understand why Trump would want him on the SCOTUS. But I was just speaking from my personal ideas on what the qualifications for the SCOTUS should be. I'm not naive enough to think Trump, Clinton, or anyone for that matter would nominate someone who meets my strictest qualifications. I do commend Obama for nominating a justice who would be close to meeting my qualifications in Merrick Garland. Basically I want someone on the SCOTUS that I have to fight hard to believe in the things I do, but I want my opponents to have to fight equally as hard. I know what I'm describing is a Supreme Court utopia, but that doesn't mean I can't wish for it.

I don't care how he is as an attorney. Ted Cruz's view of the constitution is WAY to extreme. The Supreme Court is supposed to be nonpartisan. Cruz just ran for president on an extreme right wing platform, that should disqualify him right away. I don't care if you put someone on the Supreme Court who agrees with every view I have, I want someone on the Supreme Court who will view each and every case with as little pre conceived biases as possible. Obama failed because he was incapable of reaching across the aisle, Trump will fail if he chooses to do the same.

 

And you don't think Sotomayor and Ginsburg don't already view the court from the opposite spectrum as Cruz would?

Pence will lead the transition team.

And you don't think Sotomayor and Ginsburg don't already view the court from the opposite spectrum as Cruz would?

No they obviously they do. I'm just describing my qualifications for a justice, not any one elses.