Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly. I actually heard McConnell's statement before I realized Scalia had died, that's how fast he got out there declaring he wouldn't follow the process laid out in the Constitution. He didn't waste a second.
The only way that Obama will have ANY leverage in this situation is if he nominates someone who is generally moderate (or even some ties with Conservatives). Otherwise, the Senate can claim that the nominee is nothing but a Robert Bork or a Harriett Myers.
The only way that Obama will have ANY leverage in this situation is if he nominates someone who is generally moderate (or even some ties with Conservatives). Otherwise, the Senate can claim that the nominee is nothing but a Robert Bork or a Harriett Myers.
Not sure if you can really compare the situation to Myers or Bork. Myers was pretty much brought down by other Republicans and Bork was a very controversial pick, but still received an up or down vote. The vote ultimately failed 42-58 with even six Republicans voting against him.
Refusing to hold a vote on the nominee I think can really hurt the Republicans if they go that route.
Refusing to hold a vote on the nominee I think can really hurt the Republicans if they go that route.
and that was my main point in making this topic. They can vote the person down...that would be fine to me but if they obstruct and delay to not even have a vote then that's the part that is just political theater.
Typical Republican crap, Scalia dies with 10 months left of the Obama Administration and in their minds it's the next presidents (hopefully a Republican) job to nominate a replacement. They are all about defending the Constitution when it works in their favor, when it doesn't it becomes all about blocking and obstructing the Constitutional process.
and that was my main point in making this topic. They can vote the person down...that would be fine to me but if they obstruct and delay to not even have a vote then that's the part that is just political theater.
I would generally agree. Voting someone down is one thing, not holding a vote period is something entirely different.
With that being said, if the nominee isn't super controversial it will be interesting to see how things play out with some of the more moderate Republicans in the Senate (Collins, Murkowski), and especially those in the Senate up for re-election in swing states or Democratic leaning states (Portman, Johnson, Kirk, Toomey, Ayotte)
Anyone who thinks a new justice has more than a snow balls chance in hell of getting appointed until after the elections is smoking crack.
Its just not going to happen.
If it was a dem controlled congress and a rep president the outcome would be the same.
Neither party is going to let a lame duck pres from a different party appoint a justice. Not gonna happen.
Obama's quote about the constitution and it being bigger than our parties was laughable. I don't know how that guy says stuff like that with a straight face. I can't name a president since FDR who has done more to destroy the constitution than him.
LOL.
He knows he's lame and doesn't have a chance of getting a justice nominated. Any big liberals better hope he doesn't nominate someone that would normally stand a chance and make a good "liberal" judge. Anyone nominated by him will be a waste and won't be getting nominated by whomever takes Obama's place.
Well, now that I think about it. There is a chance it could happen. I mean most of the repubs in power now have sold their souls already so once more isn't gonna hurt them any more.
You can only delay for so long until it's obstruction. There's no value in delaying in this case.
Hmmm ... last SCOTUS appointment had zero judicial experience. Harry NEVER, EVER had a problem with delay (also ignored the word obstruction) and now the dims will scream. A reality check is coming to see if the Republicans really do control the Senate ... the dims sure did when they had the majority.
El Nox
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
