on this vote, the ayes are 54. the nays are 45. the nomination of neil m. gorsuch of colorado to be an associate justice of the supreme court of the united states is confirmed. the supreme court seat stolen from president obama with 14 months left in his term was awarded to donald trump s nominee, neil gorsuch, on friday. after mitch mcconnell and senate republicans responded to the democrat s filibuster by invoking the so-called nuclear option. gorsuch will be sworn in on monday. and joining me now, sherrilyn ifill, co-counsel sill of the naacp legal defense fund which opposed his nomination. david frump and jason johnson, politics editor at the root.com. big picture, what does it mean that the republicans chose to fill the supreme court seat in this way?
rhetoric has gone too far. listen, i m a big fan of donald trump s, but i m not a fan of government registries of american citizens. the first amendment protects religious liberty. you talk about closing mosques, you talk about registering people, and that s just wrong. i don t care about campaigns. it s manipulating people s angst and their fears. that s not strength. that s weakness. joining me now, david frump, senior editor at the atlantic and former george w. bush economic speech writer and msnbc political analyst joan walsh. david, let me start with you, because donald trump has certainly within this campaign tapped into the psyche. first it was the feeling of anti-washington and now the fear of people coming over from abroad. there is a bloomberg poll showing 53% of people are against allowing syrian refugees into this country. what do you make of donald trump in all this? well, donald trump s rivals
a madness where there s solutions in search of a problem. there are real problems out there, but the bills being proposed and the idea of a database i mean, poor donald trump, my goodness, a reporter tricked him into saying something he really didn t mean? that s not very presidential of him. what does he mean? what does he want to create? he needs to be clear about that. so, i think this is going to get worse before it gets better. i never thought i would say i miss george w. bush, but i do a little bit in this moment, because he really was a leader after 9/11 in saying that we are not at war with islam and muslims are not our enemy, and we need more voices like that, including more democrats, to be honest. do you think, david, that this election, which has been so confounding to so many people who have been following politics for decades, will eventually, as many people believe, sort of settle in? or is this going to be sort of the new normal, and the things that we used to look
alcohol. we should make a real effort to keep pretty kid. the only harm this drug does to anybody is to developing adolescent brain. right now it is easy to get. a really good regulatory machine for legal marijuana will keep kid safe. lets me bring in cnn political commentator david frump. do you think kids will be targeted? i agree completely with what hill harper just said about the importance of keeping people out of prison. but of course the emerging marijuana industry, and it will be an industry, will of course target children the same way that the cigarette industry did for many years and in the same way that certain segments of the alcohol industry did. marijuana is one of those things no one is going to start doing when they re 30. if you don t start when you re 17 you re not going to start. that s not true. the marijuana industry is going to know that and is going to act according will. i it s not true. plenty of time use marijuana
handy craft industry. it is not. there are huge economies of scale. big profits. it is going to be a gigantic industry. it s going to look like the tobacco industry of the past. what s wrong with that, david? of course it is going to target kids. andrew except for 2 out of the 100 people who might use it for medical reasons for a short period of time, the profit, the value will be getting people to start when they re 17 and continue through life. why can t we regulate appeals to kids through advertising the way we do with tobacco and alcohol? why are you treating this in a separate category when it really should be in the same general category except it s much more beneficial to people than alcohol or tobacco? one of the reasons it s going to be difficult to regulate there will be people on television saying things like it s beneficial to people. it is. it s just not. it is extraordinary for creativity. relaxation. where is it in the hierarchy of harms? it may not be as