-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT| Ask us about our performance with Latinos in Nevada
- Thread starter Makai
- Start date
- Status
Frank the Great
Banned
Republicans are scum if they don't let Obama appoint anyone. They have dominated the court for so many decades simply by getting lucky regarding retirements. They are going to look like spoiled brats if they refuse to even consider any appointment.
Obama still has a fucking year left in office. He's the President, how disrespectful is it to take this responsibility from him for partisan reasons.
This really feels unprecedented . . . Benji where are you? We need some historical context.
Obama still has a fucking year left in office. He's the President, how disrespectful is it to take this responsibility from him for partisan reasons.
This really feels unprecedented . . . Benji where are you? We need some historical context.
User 463088
Banned
Morning Joe is making me want to vomit right now.
Seriously.
Seriously.
Fivethirtyeight gives them a C-
If Mitch McConnell is any indication, the justification is that the American people should get a say in the nomination. As if electing Obama wasn't having a say...
Yoda
Member
Historical no, but you could have said that about the multitude of government shutdowns.
EDIT: looks like I was wrong, if you go back pre-civil war you can find some.
https://twitter.com/studentactivism/status/698635987702788096
User 463088
Banned
Let me review the poll and nitpick something faulthy so I can construct a counter argument about how this is actually great for Bern.
<3
Git it gurl.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
This is so blatantly idiotic. There's no pretense of anything even close to the realm of a rational defense for this sort of behavior. Anyone who thinks about it for more than 2 seconds can understand how stupid it is, all you have to do is flip the script to Democrats or extend the hypothetical. If one year is OK, why not 2? Why not an entire term? Why not just say we won't nominate anyone ever until a Republican is president? Can we stop passing laws until the election so the "next Congress" can decide on the budget? This is terrible optics, it's the distillation of Obama is illegitimate thing.
When have they not been children if they don't get their way?
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Obama better find a damn good Judge who can last a year's worth of scrutiny.
Because they're trying to avoid an internal mutiny, most likely.
to be fair as Kyle Kondik noted the voters decided in 2014 and handed the Senate to the Republicans so there has to be a compromise.
shinra-bansho
Member
Well, that escalated quickly.
Compromise? Huh? Since when has congress got to nominate a Supreme Court Justice?
Slackerish
Member
GOP can have 1 person each day come in, start the day even for 1 minute just to make sure it is not recess.
FloydtheFathead
Member
Would this hurt chances in 2016 for Hillary/Bernie if Obama were forced to do a recess appointment?
to be fair as Kyle Kondik noted the voters decided in 2014 and handed the Senate to the Republicans so there has to be a compromise.
More like dems got lazy and apathetic, handing them the senate on a platter.
SenorArdilla
Member
How is this going to affect voter turnout?
That's a good point... that'd drive up turnout like crazy if the Supreme Court hangs in the balance.
talisayNon
Member
what are the chances of the democrats taking back control of the senate in 16?
Yup. No better way to unite the fractured dems than a shared enemy.
No idea, but McConnell just improved them.
I really don't think a referendum on the SCOTUS will work out how they think. Not while you have Obama making national addresses calling for a vote
They've gotten too comfortable ignoring lesser nominations the public doesn't care about
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, I don't think there's ever been a time when congress outright refused to appoint a justice solely based off hatred of the president nominating him.
There's been some highly debated appointees where congress tried to get the president to change the appointee, but that's very different from saying the sitting president is flat out not allowed to appoint anyone no matter what.
User 463088
Banned
Because, there is no way the GOP could spin this other than obstruction. They can waive away a lot of the other shit, but a Supreme appointment is not something that they can just pretend isn't a Constitutional requirement for them to fill.
Good for Dems since it's not a midterm election. It depends in Trump's/Rubio's ability to mobilize the poor, white, Christian voters.
Aaron Strife
Banned
This is going to blow up in the Republicans' faces.
Basileus777
Member
It depends on who the nominees are. Trump or Cruz makes it a lot more likely.
The same way the shut down blew up in their faces.
Mobilizing the various wings of the Dem Party is easy when you actually have a super tangible benefit(an open Supreme Court). Keep in mind that previously, it was about maintaining the status quo(4 lib, 4 con, 1 mid). Now it's about swinging a court.
maabus1999
Member
Better than the House.
WayneMorse
Banned
Seems like conservatives are coalescing around the "let the people decide" argument.
Third Strike
Member
Very high. I'm expecting 51 seats, but up to 54 is also possible depending on who the nominees are.
eBay Huckster
Member
already something like 50/50, probably tilting better now
Letting the people decide never works in the Democrats favor and they know this.
Officerrob
Banned
This will lead to an insane general election turnout, for both sides
Frank the Great
Banned
The Republicans should really just try to compromise with Obama and get someone who isn't too far to the left. It's their only real play here.
I wonder if cooler heads will prevail after this news is digested. I also wonder if McConnell's statement is just the starting position for them to compromise away from.
I wonder if cooler heads will prevail after this news is digested. I also wonder if McConnell's statement is just the starting position for them to compromise away from.
There are a lot of ways to counter this, starting with the people elected Obama for 4 years, not 3. Plenty of important cases coming up, etc.
For example, Republicans would have lost on blocking obama's clean energy agenda last week with 8 justices
Not that it matters when you need 60 to do almost anything. Obstruction won't get better with a president Clinton or Sanders.
If they take the presidency, they very likely get the senate too.
Such a good point. However the shutdown was two years away (maybe a only a year, can't remember) from election. This is 9 months away and is going to be a daily thing. The shutdown lasted a month and then it was over. Voters didn't have constant reminders of republican incompetence/corruption.
WayneMorse
Banned
Yea I'm gonna predict election turnout's gonna be 60%+.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Can Souter or another retired justice fill Scalia's spot until his successor is approved?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked