GiddyGap

It's going to be the exact same with the election. He'll say he won regardless of the results.

That's what the loser of the debate would say. But Trump says he was the clear winner of the debate, so I'm confused.

Where did I "admit" that? I said maybe, maybe not. Campaigning on the issues will lock judges into their biases. It will never work well.

You can impeach all of them, including Supreme Court justices, within the framework of the law that has been set by elected representatives.

Yes, I disagree. I already stated why.

Maybe, maybe not. But blatantly giving up on neutrality by electing judges based on their political views does not help promote justice.

There's already a system in place to hold politicians accountable.

I want judges who base their rulings on the law and not their political views. In theory, laws adjust to the popular view over time. Judges should not be part of that adjustment.

Trump is to blame. When someone who half of the country blindly follows starts spewing slanderous venom, his followers will do the same. He's been doing it for years on other random issues. They follow every time. And he knows it.

Yet, millions of women will still go vote for him in November. Go figure.

So, the judges will have to campaign on the issues? Doesn't seem like the best idea if you want neutral and unbiased judges.

Because his voters don't believe any of the points you make about him. Trump is able to dismiss any criticism of him as "fake news." You can make any legitimate point about him and they will never believe it.