SCOTUS Justice Scalia Dead

[archibaldcrane]

But that interim appointment is not permanent.

Honestly if the Senate stalls until November and Hillary wins with a Dem majority Senate, at that point Obama should pull the nominee and let Hillary and the new Senate decide.

It's one thing to declare Obama a lame duck with 11 months to go, but I don't really think it's right for an actually lame duck Senate majority to be holding votes on something as important as a Supreme Court justice.

[Tyrath]

No, but you think the GOP will stand for even an interim appointment happening? No chance.

[Tyche]

Since the 2014 SCOTUS decision of the National Labor Relations Board vs Noel Canning, when and how the senate declares a "recess" and "how long" recess is makes a bit harder for a president to squeeze in such an appointment. Even when they recess, they may not actually "recess". However, since that appointment would only be temporary, until the end of the next senate session, they could actually allow the recess and allow Obama to get an appointment in without casting a vote or looking like obstructionists. Then, when the next senate session begins in January, before Hillary begins (very short January window) the new senate could attempt cloture and push through if Dems get a tie or majority.

[Gredival]

it's cute how many times I see one of you say "the repubs will screw themselves if they dont do it" as if they're constituents give a shit that some baby killer isn't being appointed to their palace throne.

jesus lol.

This. Obstructionism has worked for the GOP so far because for the most part they have a dedicated base of voters that like obstructionism.

[Tyrath]

Yeah but its not like they have a hold on the Senate like they do the House. Only a few seats need to change for them to lose the majority.

[Tyche]

it's cute how many times I see one of you say "the repubs will screw themselves if they dont do it" as if they're constituents give a shit that some baby killer isn't being appointed to their palace throne.

jesus lol.

Their constituents don't care, but the dems do. You aren't going to changed the mind of the hive, but it could get the liberal base fired up enough to hit the polls.

[Churchill]

arent polls/primaries showing a more active gop base atm

[Tyche]

arent polls/primaries showing a more active gop base atm

Yes, but as I've posted about ten times already, historically speaking, the primary turnout doesn't correlate well with general election results. Before 2008, the record turnout for the GOP (2004) and the Democratic (1988) primaries resulted in losses of the popular by their candidate.

[Tyche]

And with the GOP leader barely pulling 40% of his own constituency, coupled with the fact that a large amount of democratic voters are voting GOP in open primaries to oust Trump, I don't think there's a whole lot we can take away from the primaries when predicting the general.

[Tyrath]

And you can bet that Trump being the nominee will in fact bring a lot of people to the polls just to stop him from being president. His craziness is working well in the primaries by bringing in his supporters but its going to work the other way when the generals happen.

[Tyche]

I would think that Anything vs Trump would result in record numbers hitting the polls. Record numbers of voters has never bade well for the GOP.

Although head to head general polls at this point have shown to be pretty pointless, Hillary is crushing Trump H2H among registered voters.

[Fiye]

https://twitter.com/SenToomey

This shit too good.

[arus2001]

Approve Garland or he'll knock them all down~

[Tyrath]

^ I had made the connection but didn't come up with a decent enough joke to post lol