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.
If I trusted McConnell not to change his mind, this would be great news. I guess the Biden video is propping up his new found backbone. If something happens that would not allow McConnell to hide behind the video, I have no doubt that McConnell will back down, like usual.
If the republicans actually follow this path it may very well do them more damage than good come November, depending on how big this issue could become.
If the republicans actually follow this path it may very well do them more damage than good come November, depending on how big this issue could become.
I tend to agree. It is often said that the voting public has a 'short memory', and that a scandal will wither away after about six months. However, the Democrats would be able to keep this issue alive right up to Election Day.
I would suggest that the Senate duly hold a hearing on an Obama nominee, then reject him or her. Obama sends down a new nominee: Senate holds a hearing, rejects. And repeat as need be.
At least, that way, the Senate Republicans can claim "we would gladly advise and consent to a new Justice, but not the Socialist Marxist Communists (you get the idea) nominees Obama keeps sending us".
It would not totally mitigate the damage, but it would to some degree.
I tend to agree. It is often said that the voting public has a 'short memory', and that a scandal will wither away after about six months. However, the Democrats would be able to keep this issue alive right up to Election Day.
I would suggest that the Senate duly hold a hearing on an Obama nominee, then reject him or her. Obama sends down a new nominee: Senate holds a hearing, rejects. And repeat as need be.
At least, that way, the Senate Republicans can claim "we would gladly advise and consent to a new Justice, but not the Socialist Marxist Communists (you get the idea) nominees Obama keeps sending us".
It would not totally mitigate the damage, but it would to some degree.
Spot on. I don't agree with the auto rejection tactic, but if they simply filibuster any nominee and don't consider it, they will get hammered in every debate, conversation and ad over being Constitutionalists of convenience. They only want to follow it when it suits or is advantageous to them, not when it's best for everyone. The party of "No" will raise its head again.
McConnell. What a patriot. A puppet for chinese business interests. Would stab the Pope or Mother Theresa in the back if it meant he could sell a shovel-full of coal to his overlords. Great guy
I tend to agree. It is often said that the voting public has a 'short memory', and that a scandal will wither away after about six months. However, the Democrats would be able to keep this issue alive right up to Election Day.
I would suggest that the Senate duly hold a hearing on an Obama nominee, then reject him or her. Obama sends down a new nominee: Senate holds a hearing, rejects. And repeat as need be.
At least, that way, the Senate Republicans can claim "we would gladly advise and consent to a new Justice, but not the Socialist Marxist Communists (you get the idea) nominees Obama keeps sending us".
It would not totally mitigate the damage, but it would to some degree.
lots of threads on this subject... but
my opinion is they don't so much hold hearings as keep asking for more information... just a little at a time.
then when asked respond with "we are vetting the candidate and trying to get information..."
then make it seem like the whitehouse isn't complying.
then keep that up until the election. if the candidate is an idiot, hold the hearing in late October and expose the idiot as an idiot and totally Bork the nominee. then use that to say the dems will give more of the same if they get elected.
if the nominee isn't an idiot just keep asking for more information and run out the clock.
then after the election just drop it. and don't talk about it again. period.
This is a gamble for the GOP. If the Democrats retake the Senate in November, as they have a good chance of doing, the new Senate will be seated in early January. Obama will have a window of a few weeks where he can send a nice, liberal/progressive nominee to the new body and they can confirm that nominee before the new president is sworn in. Whereas if they go through the normal process the way the Constitution outlines it, the president will nominate someone much more moderate in an attempt to get him confirmed.
He's going to bend. We all know that he will. He's not going to bend due to pressure but because he is afraid what the Democrats will do with the process if the Republicans win the White House.
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.
