Who Won the Week (20 September 2020)

I always liked Fandango’s Who Won the Week post, and like to join in with some quirky stories from my own newsfeeds. All from our unique vantage points, the idea is to pick something (a person, organisation, anything) which “won” the week.

But this week, I’m treading on Fandango’s home turf. And going to write about US politics, to boot.

It’s unusual that, in death, somebody could “win” the week, but in all seriousness, I think RBG won the week. It was not a name I had ever heard of until maybe Friday, but on this side of the Atlantic, why would I? But today I looked up a few numbers – in that respect, thank goodness for the internet because all of these numbers were quite easy to obtain just by looking through the records from the U.S. Senate itself.

Let me throw those numbers out there. Don’t worry, there aren’t many.

In 1993, Bill Clinton had just been elected president. The Democrats were on a high. They controlled the Senate, at the start of the session 58:42, and even at the end, by 53:47.

So you would expect that, roughly, votes would go along those lines, wouldn’t you?

1993 was also the year that Ginsberg was appointed. In the confirmation hearing, 3 August, the Senate confirmed her appointment by 96:3, with 1 non-voter.

Think about that for a moment. Despite “party lines”, she was approved almost unanimously. 40-odd senators, despite disagreeing with her politics, voted for her anyway.

Now, ask yourself, could that kind of thing happen in 2020? Now, ask yourself why not. Were ahose Republican senators back then “wet”, for supporting a Democrat appointment? All except for three of them?

Ruth Ginsberg won the week because even in death, she leaves us with these observations.


  1. There is no way these days that any Supreme Court nominee could receive 90+ votes in the U.S. Senate. Votes are now almost entirely along party lines and have nothing to do with the competence (or incompetence) of the nominee for the position. But maybe RBG’s legacy could be the winner of the week.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hopefully it will spark a thought process in anybody who reads it. Anybody elected to the supreme court should be unanimous, surely? On merit? If somebody thinks that, they might well ask “why aren’t they?”

      Liked by 1 person

  2. RBG was a national treasure and her legacy is a positive part of U.S. history. That they rush to replace her with any ne’er-do-well, glad-handing toady is offensive and disrespectful to everything she worked for and the country’s democratic health.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s