Barrett was picked because she's a she, and the republican party wanted to polish up it's image with women voters by appointing a she. Trump was coerced into picking her. She was not a merit based pick, and Trump himself is quoted as stating (prior to announcing Barret) that he wasn't sure who his next SCOTUS pick would be, but "it's going to be woman." Party image over merit- this is what we earn for having the traitorous "republican" party as allies.
It's perfectly possible to pick a meritorious woman for the role. The fact Trump didn't suggests that wasn't his goal, or that he actually fucked up. Take your pick.
Picking a candidate based on identity only becomes a problem when merit isn't considered at all, as the left does it, or when there actually isn't a good person to pick at all because the identity criteria are too strict, as the left also does it (i.e. black trans woman that's gay and is married to an Asian man).
There is nothing asinine about stating facts. I do understand how one could [wrongly] assume such a statement to be so, if they do not understand the role of congress in what we errantly refer to as "presidential appointments," and the US senate confirmation process.
Too many people wrongly assume that these appointments are all a presidents doing, but they are not. It is technically a political misnomer to call any appointments made by a president a "presidential appointment," if that appointment requires senate confirmation. <~~~The US senate has the ultimate authority for who actually gets appointed, not the president.
It is very important to understand that all president's have one hand tied behind their back by the senate confirmation process before they ever even announce a nomination. A president cannot "pick" anyone who the senate will not confirm; the senate has as much say in the "pick" process as the president.
All of those SCOTUS turds that Trump "appointed" were in fact confirmed by Mitch McConnell and the senate establishment, and they hold at least an equal share of the credit for those "presidential" appointments as the president does.
TL;DR A president cannot, and does not "pick" a candidate without the US senate approving of that pick, before it is even made.
Barrett was picked because she's a she, and the republican party wanted to polish up it's image with women voters by appointing a she. Trump was coerced into picking her. She was not a merit based pick, and Trump himself is quoted as stating (prior to announcing Barret) that he wasn't sure who his next SCOTUS pick would be, but "it's going to be woman." Party image over merit- this is what we earn for having the traitorous "republican" party as allies.
It's perfectly possible to pick a meritorious woman for the role. The fact Trump didn't suggests that wasn't his goal, or that he actually fucked up. Take your pick.
Picking a candidate based on identity only becomes a problem when merit isn't considered at all, as the left does it, or when there actually isn't a good person to pick at all because the identity criteria are too strict, as the left also does it (i.e. black trans woman that's gay and is married to an Asian man).
cue misheard lyric: "Secret Aaaasian man, secret Aaaasian man..." Your description in parentheses is spot on fren!!!
She was picked for her stance on Roe v Wade.
Im gonna wait until this plays out before I make assinine assertions like Trump was coerced.
There is nothing asinine about stating facts. I do understand how one could [wrongly] assume such a statement to be so, if they do not understand the role of congress in what we errantly refer to as "presidential appointments," and the US senate confirmation process.
Too many people wrongly assume that these appointments are all a presidents doing, but they are not. It is technically a political misnomer to call any appointments made by a president a "presidential appointment," if that appointment requires senate confirmation. <~~~The US senate has the ultimate authority for who actually gets appointed, not the president.
It is very important to understand that all president's have one hand tied behind their back by the senate confirmation process before they ever even announce a nomination. A president cannot "pick" anyone who the senate will not confirm; the senate has as much say in the "pick" process as the president.
All of those SCOTUS turds that Trump "appointed" were in fact confirmed by Mitch McConnell and the senate establishment, and they hold at least an equal share of the credit for those "presidential" appointments as the president does.
TL;DR A president cannot, and does not "pick" a candidate without the US senate approving of that pick, before it is even made.