Scalia is dead

**dex71** · 02-29-16, 10:06 PM

I think you are reading too much into McConnell's "fuck you". It's gamesmanship, and no, I don't think the Repubs are worried about losing Congress during this election cycle....thus the bold talk. If he was worried about losing the majority, I'm sure the tone would be much more diplomatic. It's an election year.....McConnell is just rallying his bench, and likely playing a little chess with the POTUS.

I also think this is just Round 1. If Barry puts a decent, centrist candidate foreward (see Sen. Amy Klobuchar as a great example), the Dems have the opportunity to play a little offense. Make McConnell defend his line in the sand, and make the Repubs take the pr hit for obstructing.

**dex71** · 02-29-16, 10:10 PM

Also.....If the Dems keep the WH, having to come to the Repub controlled Congress for some deal-making for a SCOTUS confirmation would put the Repubs in a more powerful position with which to deal from.

It's in the Republican's best interest to deal with the new POTUS no matter which team he/she is batting for.

**Ranger10** · 02-29-16, 10:41 PM

Don't forget, there are several aging Justices that might not make it another 4 years. Justice Ginsburg (83) looks like a sock puppet propped up with an empty toilet paper roll . Justice Breyer (78) and Justice Thomas (68) are getting up there, too. Anyone of them, or all, could also have a "hunting accident" over the next 4 years. The issues of replacing SCOTUS Judges will be something we endure often.

**AetheLove** · 03-01-16, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by dex71

I think you are reading too much into McConnell's "fuck you". It's gamesmanship, and no, I don't think the Repubs are worried about losing Congress during this election cycle....thus the bold talk. If he was worried about losing the majority, I'm sure the tone would be much more diplomatic. It's an election year.....McConnell is just rallying his bench, and likely playing a little chess with the POTUS.

Rallying his bench... to not play?

If this is gamesmanship, then the game is to not play.

The refusal to consider a nominee or to hold hearings isn't the sort of position it's easy to back off of. This sure doesn't feel (to me) like an opening position in a negotiation. He didn't imply that there might not be enough time. He didn't say that the political climate wasn't conducive to a speedy confirmation.

A line in the sand isn't a flexible tactic. Once drawn, you can't give it up without looking weak and relinquishing the initiative.

In tactical terms, I think it was a smart play. This is a battle where fighting to a draw is a strategic win.

... and that's my problem. I'm not saying that this is a shitty thing for Republicans to do, I'm saying that this is an irresponsible thing for the Senate majority leader to do. This is a bad precedent.

Of course this is political. It always is. But responsible leadership in a democracy needs to recognize the difference between vigorously advocating your position and corrosive motherfuckery which damages the institution itself.

Originally Posted by dex71

Also.....If the Dems keep the WH, having to come to the Repub controlled Congress for some deal-making for a SCOTUS confirmation would put the Repubs in a more powerful position with which to deal from.

It's in the Republican's best interest to deal with the new POTUS no matter which team he/she is batting for.

Is there a typo in there somewhere? If the Dems keep the WH, then the Dems will be in a stronger position when they bring a nominee.

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Don't forget, there are several aging Justices that might not make it another 4 years. Justice Ginsburg (83) looks like a sock puppet propped up with an empty toilet paper roll . Justice Breyer (78) and Justice Thomas (68) are getting up there, too. Anyone of them, or all, could also have a "hunting accident" over the next 4 years. The issues of replacing SCOTUS Judges will be something we endure often.

I don't understand your images. In particular, what is a "hunting accident" ?

(also, the sock puppet thing is... weird. were you once hot for The Ginsburg and are disappointed at how she's aged?)

And yeah; at some point there will be more vacancies, and more nominees, and etc. Though I didn't state it, I guess that was a baseline assumption.

Æ

**dex71** · 03-01-16, 03:59 PM

If the Dems keep the WH, the new POTUS will need to approach the Republican controlled Congress with their deal-making pants on. Much more so than the lame duck who is more interested in bringing pow's here than actually being serious about getting a SCOTUS candidate confirmed. Barry has less he needs to get done than whoever is next. Saving the seat for the next POTUS to fill puts the Repubs in a stronger position than they would be in with Barry. Most especially if they win the WH. Either way, it's still in the best interest of the Repubs to let the election play out before they start confirmation hearings.

I'm betting the tough talk from McConnell is just gamesmanship. He's basically telling Barry to not bother, hoping he can avoid the pr hit the Repubs will likely take by not confirming whoever Barry puts up (especially if he puts up a decent centrist). No need to worry about backing down, or explaining their strategy IF Barry is either intimidated enough ,or would rather use whatever political capitol he has left to get something else accomplished, than put forth a serious nominee.

**Ranger10** · 03-01-16, 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by AetheLove

I don't understand your images. In particular, what is a "hunting accident" ?

(also, the sock puppet thing is... weird. were you once hot for The Ginsburg and are disappointed at how she's aged?)

And yeah; at some point there will be more vacancies, and more nominees, and etc. Though I didn't state it, I guess that was a baseline assumption.

Æ

Oh, Scalia apparently died hunting with some sooper sekret society of hunters. And Ruth is a classy lady!

My assumption was that even if Obama tried to get a moderate who leaned to the left, the GOP might not want to fight it as much hoping they'd have more options in the future should the older justices are gone as well. It might be part of the gamesmanship you two are talking about. Just another factor. Now, how much they care about that is up for debate. Of course, if they lose the WH, yet still hold to the Senate, then we're talking about politics for the foreseeable future. It may be that McConnell is picking his battles. However, he's a feckless hack so he might just be doing what a fortune cookie told him to do.