-
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 |OT3| You know what they say about big Michigans - big Florida
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
feels weird to say this, but I hope Republicans stick to their guns and refuse to vote.
plagiarize
Banned
A center right Judge still moves the court further left than with Scalia and has a chance of being confirmed. If the GOP won't even allow hearings and a vote for a center right judge, that hurts them much more than if they refuse to do the same for a true liberal.
I still think it's the best choice. If the GOP have any sense, they'll realize this is the best deal they're going to get and take it, to prevent a friendlier senate and a first year Democratic President who can easily get someone much more liberal than Garland confirmed.
But they don't have any sense. So they are hurt more politically in the run up to the election... leading to a more favorable senate and house for President Clinton.
It's a gamble with very low risk. Worst case scenario, the court is only a little more liberal than it was with Scalia.
I still think it's the best choice. If the GOP have any sense, they'll realize this is the best deal they're going to get and take it, to prevent a friendlier senate and a first year Democratic President who can easily get someone much more liberal than Garland confirmed.
But they don't have any sense. So they are hurt more politically in the run up to the election... leading to a more favorable senate and house for President Clinton.
It's a gamble with very low risk. Worst case scenario, the court is only a little more liberal than it was with Scalia.
I dunno, earthly embodiment of Chaos, lives forever due to a stable time loop, likes to knock things down... makes a lot of sense to me.
That would include the super delegates.
At this point though, it's like two doctors arguing over how dead their patient is.
Officerrob
Banned
Interested to see how Bernie and Hillary respond to this
Frank the Great
Banned
Garland? Wow.
Classic Obummer, caving before negotiations begin.
Classic Obummer, caving before negotiations begin.
Orbis Tabula
Member
Boy, am I sick of hearing "don't underestimate X." Yeah, obviously. No shit. Do you think we needed to be told not to underestimate someone? That we were all sitting here thinking "yeah, I think I'll underestimate that guy"? It's a thing people say to make themselves sound smart but it's an entirely vacuous phrase. It's like saying "too much of a good thing is a bad thing." It's true by definition. Give me a reason why you think I am underestimating someone. Don't just tell me it's dangerous to do so.
I agree with this. Bams and his team know what they are doing and they've games things out far better than we have. Garland is qualified and the politics of his pick will help Democrats.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Pretty sure he's giving them room to criticize the pick from the left. It all just puts more pressure on the Senate and makes them look worse.
RustyNails
Member
I guess Garland is ok if you consider Sri will be replacing RBG.
tbh the worst case scenario really sucks, like huge wasted opportunity
Officerrob
Banned
Exactly
User 463088
Banned
I don't like this pick....
QuiteWhittle
Member
It was in that SC thread in OT, but yeah it looks like it's Garland. I don't mind him but I kinda hope Obama does a swerve.
aspiegamer
Member
Really think this might be bait. Someone who looks appealing and is entirely qualified, assuming Republicans won't give in, and the next President can reasonably say they'd want to do their own vetting process. Enter... whoever. And if Republicans blink it's still a solid pick. The Senate is already shitting on the idea of a confirmation vote, so mission accomplished on the bluff?
This is also not a bad point.
plagiarize
Banned
The republicans control the senate. Even if they have a hearing and a vote, how liberal a judge do you think they're going to confirm?
If they want to only think short term, and play stupid politics that likely lead to them losing more seats than the dems this November, and failing to get a republican President in place... that's their choice.
But Obama can only nominate and then the Senate do the confirming. What leverage does Obama have to get them to confirm a liberal judge?
I'll add on top of this, that whoever gets nominated is going to have to go through an ugly, damaging process this time around, with no guarantee of confirmation. There's a sense in which you don't want to subject the A listers to that.
I don't know if it's the right choice or not, but I kind of get it.
====
In other news, what is Hillary supposed to do now that she's out of deep red southern states like Ohio and Illinois?
plagiarize
Banned
Hehehe.
plagiarize
Banned
If Obama was up for reelection he'd have picked a real liberal Judge, to show voters the type of judge he's going to nominate and to highlight which senators up for reelection are standing against him.
But he isn't. Clinton is totally free to name alternate people to demonstrate who she'd want to pick and voters are likely instead to see which politicians are petty assholes who refuse to do their jobs, and who can't even see that taking a center right judge now is the smartest and least damaging course of action for them.
Picking a liberal judge who stands no chance of confirmation would just be a play for favorability ratings. Obama doesn't need those right now.
But he isn't. Clinton is totally free to name alternate people to demonstrate who she'd want to pick and voters are likely instead to see which politicians are petty assholes who refuse to do their jobs, and who can't even see that taking a center right judge now is the smartest and least damaging course of action for them.
Picking a liberal judge who stands no chance of confirmation would just be a play for favorability ratings. Obama doesn't need those right now.
JetBlackPanda
Member
Macho Madness
Member
Garland would definitely overturn Citizens United.
Whoa we may have a celebrity in here! What's it like working for TYT?
RastaMentality
Banned
Wow I was so confident he wouldn't go for another white guy. Kinda sucks.
QuiteWhittle
Member
Another?
He would be the second Jewish appointment iirc.
If Donald Trump is the nominee, the president in 2017 will be Hillary. And it's likely the Democrats will have more seats in the Senate, if not a majority (but I'm thinking majority). I'm afraid some Republicans might actually wise up to this reality and vote for this more centrist nominee, instead of getting a more liberal nominee next year.
I hope Republicans don't wise up.
Coriolanus
Banned
No one knows what Sri actually is, tho, which is why he was previously confirmed so well.
Isn't a case of a liberal vs a conservative choice, but a case of a ? vs a known quantity.
plagiarize
Banned
No, the problem with the GOP is that a lot of them still think they have a good chance of winning in November and putting someone as conservative as Scalia on the court. Obviously that's highly unlikely.
They'd accuse Obama of playing politics no matter what he did. If he picks someone really liberal that it's obvious they won't confirm, they'd say that was playing politics and wasting everyone's time too.
They can claim what they want. This underlines who is playing politics. Obviously Obama thinks Garland would be an improvement, however small and he's comfortable with him getting confirmed. It's not really a 'bluff' in the truest sense, and it doesn't hurt his image at all if he succeeds in getting his nominee confirmed.
I just hope Garland has some thick skin.
RastaMentality
Banned
Obama was the first president to actually add >1% of Asian judges to federal courts. I think he is playing a game with this but it would've been much better.
It's win/win for Obama.
If the Republicans don't confirm a moderate center-right Justice, they look like complete obstructionist jokes. Obama's approval numbers goes up, Hillary gets to appoint a more liberal judge for free.
If the Republicans confirm him, then Obama looks strong by getting a pick through a completely obstructionist Senate. Still makes the Republicans look bad since they didn't keep their word. Obama's approval numbers go up.
If the Republicans don't confirm a moderate center-right Justice, they look like complete obstructionist jokes. Obama's approval numbers goes up, Hillary gets to appoint a more liberal judge for free.
If the Republicans confirm him, then Obama looks strong by getting a pick through a completely obstructionist Senate. Still makes the Republicans look bad since they didn't keep their word. Obama's approval numbers go up.
They probably will later in the years, but as of now they are too far down the rabbit hole. This is as much about putting as much pressure as possible on Ayotte, Pittman, Johnson, Kirk, and Toomey as it is about the SCOTUS. Taking the Senate would be a bigger win considering Hillary and the Dems controlling the Senate would allow them to replace RBG safely.
GregLombardi
Member
So, what are the odds that the best way Republicans can beat Hillary is keep their nominee shrouded in mystery until the last minute? This strategy prevents their nominee from being attacked or known, and the surprise of who the nominee is is enough to create momentum in a general. Will this be their ultimate strategy, or has it been all along perhaps?
This is how I read it:
-Garland is a moderate, experienced, highly respected judge.
-BUT he is pro-gun control.
-This makes it impossible for the GOP to justify accepting him to their base.
-So they will have to vote him down.
-Obama gets to say "I put up a moderate, they voted him down."
-Garland is a moderate, experienced, highly respected judge.
-BUT he is pro-gun control.
-This makes it impossible for the GOP to justify accepting him to their base.
-So they will have to vote him down.
-Obama gets to say "I put up a moderate, they voted him down."
Spoiled Milk
Banned
It's win/win for Obama.
If the Republicans don't confirm a moderate center-right Justice, they look like complete obstructionist jokes. Obama's approval numbers goes up, Hillary gets to appoint a more liberal judge for free.
If the Republicans confirm him, then Obama looks strong by getting a pick through a completely obstructionist Senate.
And it further alienates and fractures the GOP base and establishment. Win/win.
Officerrob
Banned
I'm disappointed in the pick, but NO
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
There's a reason parties never actually do this.
RastaMentality
Banned
This is an overreaction lol. We could've lost in 2012 with that shit.
Macho Madness
Member
Garland is more center-left if we wanna go that route. He's not going to overturn Roe v Wade nor Obergefell. He will likely either gut or overturn Citizens United. Unsure on the rest but he's not a liberal nightmare.
He'd side with the liberals more often than not.
He'd side with the liberals more often than not.
QuiteWhittle
Member
1. Anyone dumb enough to try and primary Obama in 2012 would've gotten crushed and had their political career ruined.
2. What has Garland done to deserve this scorn exactly?
Like said it hurt him last time. This is giving free air time, without his BS taking up time, to Kasich and Cruz. That gives a significant amount of spotlight to Kasich, who just beat him in Ohio. While sharing that spotlight with him might have been bad for Trump, not even being there at all is worse. They can attack him and show off how they are without him being able to push back at all.
Officerrob
Banned
Considering he now thinks Obama should have been primaried, I'm going to go with his argument against Garland being he's not a "progressive"
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked