My friend, a huge political junkie, believes if RBG dies McConnell will force an appointment through in the lame duck session if they lose the election. I think it would be more likely if they hadn’t ostentatiously preached about why they blocked Merrick Garland in an election year. This would be way, WAY beyond that, shoehorning in an appointment after they lost the election. And replacing a liberal lioness at that? They risk having massive protests outside their homes. No way would Romney go for it, and I am not sure the GOP incumbents who get ousted really want this as their last act in office.
I’m not sure I follow you; if that’s all it takes, then can’t right-wingers just say they’ll, uh, protest outside homes?
There won’t be a moments hesitation. They’ll fill the seat immediately.
Every time she gets re-admitted, people think this is it, and she fools us again.
They have no shame. OK, maybe you’re right, and Romney doesn’t vote to confirm. Who else has shown even a modicum of fair play or respect for tradition in the face of furthering their goals? They’d still have what, 52 votes plus the tie-breaker in Pence? They blocked Garland when Obama should have had the pick. Later, they pushed through beer-boy.
No shame. They will push it through. Stacking the supreme court has been one of their highest priorities, if not THE highest priority, these past few years. Makes sense, since it helps further their agenda when in control, and retard Democratic agendas when they are not.
Republicans pushing through a SC nominee at any possible opportunity is the safest bet I can think of.
I would say “we’ll see”, but hopefully we will not because RBG will hang on by sheer force of will until late January. If that does happen, though, I think it would unleash a volcanic eruption in the body politic that would make the fight over Brett Kavanaugh look like nothing by comparison.
And McConnell has already said that they’d fill it.
There is absolutely NO chance Republicans wouldn’t ram through a replacement for Ginsburg if she died between now and the time the new Democratic Senate majority takes over. The stakes are far too high for them to play nice or be morally principled or anything; this would go down as the slam dunk of McConnell and Trump’s careers. “Principles” only mean so much in politics; when there’s a golden opportunity to get something one really, really wants, one will get it.
But I’m not saying they will operate from high principle, or that they couldn’t get well over 40 Republican senators to try to ram through a nomination. I just think there are a few of them that would not want the political headache of the whole thing. Just as there’s no reason to expect high moral principle from these people, there’s also quite a few of them that are not true believers when it comes to remaking the Court, especially after they have already been voted out of office and getting primaried is no longer an issue.
I sincerely hope we will not have a chance to test this prediction either way.
[quote=“SlackerInc, post:249, topic:827368”]…
I just think there are a few of them that would not want the political headache of the whole thing. …
[/quote]
Not trying to be too rough on you, but can you name a single other action/issue/decision on which more than 1-2 Repub Sens have acted in a principled manner to avoid “political headaches”? The most we’ve seen has been a couple of dissents, and a couple more mealy-mouthed “gonna be a tough decision…”
As others have said - no doubt about it. These whores will take whatever action they can conceivably get away with, and will face no appreciable political fallout as a result.
I notice they didn’t repeal Obamacare…
There isn’t much payoff to repealing Obamacare. But the political payoff of replacing Ginsburg with a conservative would be immense. Not only would it be a titanic shift in the Court’s political balance going forward, but it would electrify their base in an election year where the Republicans lag severely behind the Democrats in voter enthusiasm.
They don’t need to electrify their base. No matter how electrified they are, they can still only vote once each. They need to win back white suburban women, and this would be exactly the wrong medicine for that.
ETA: And let’s not pretend the base was not fiercely dedicated to overturning Obamacare. Not to mention that it was a huge humiliation for Trump, which you can see in how horribly he acted about McCain after he died.
But ramming through a SCOTUS nomination puts a lot of the R agenda safely beyond the reach of those suburban women voters for 20 years.
Obamacare was saved by two ladies whom Trump pissed off forcing the tie, and a man who could say “WTF can you threaten me with?” breaking it. But Mitch and his buddies really couldn’t care less if billions of humans curse their names together with Trump’s for centuries to come, just as long as “they win” in getting what they want right now.
Amen, but I hope that they are, at least, pelted with an assortment of gayly colored fruit!
Let me preface this by saying that I completely understand the anxiety here, and agree that Republicans nominating a third justice would be very bad. I’m also not about to say anything exclusive to anything that happens on this board.
But you know what I dread the most about the end of this breathless and somewhat ghoulish death watch (besides the sad end of a long and storied life/career)? It’s all the inevitable shirt rending and wailing about how much 2020 sucks and the endless rampant speculation about how screwed we are, only some of which will come true. And it’ll last until the process is finished. Just you watch. Ugh.
Again, I get it. The powerlessness one feels can either be freeing or stifling. But as I’ve expressed in another thread, one of the bad things about this year is how many opportunities it gives people for (sometimes dead serious, sometimes over the top) despair and suicide half-jokes. I don’t think it’s helpful, I don’t think it’s healthy, and I’m not 100% sure it’s completely and totally warranted. I understand where it’s coming from, very well, but at a certain point it becomes a hinderance to doing what needs to be done, and serves little purpose besides catharsis (which is indeed important) and dragging other people down.
You know what else occurs to me? Maybe it’s better that America’s time as top dog seems to be passing. If the result of ONE election in ONE country can doom ALL of humankind, I’m not sure that’s the kind of power I want any country to have.
End rant. My apologies.
Good point. I shouldn’t have used such universal language. Tho I imagine they would have faced more political headaches if they HAD reduced affordable care. Many many Repub voters like to protest the existence of what they denounce as government hand outs to the undeserving, while putting their own hands out to grab what they can.
First of all, let’s hope RBG lives for years to come. I think if she bought the farm on the last day of the current Senate, Moscow Mitch would ram through a replacement in a single day. The GOP has the morals of a snake.
The weird thing here is that ISTM you are seeing them as more “principled”, from a right wing ideological perspective, then I am. I look at all the ways they have contorted and sacrificed conservative principles to get right with Trump, and I see a group of politicians who just want to preserve their own jobs and power, not to sacrifice them so that another group of people down the street can continue to exert conservative influence over the government after they have fallen on their swords.
If that happened I think the case would be absolutely made for Dems to stack the court as soon as they get the opportunity to do so. I think they should do it as things stand now. If McConnell, at this point, rammed another justice in there from Trump and then lose the presidency and the senate it’s hard to see why the Dems wouldn’t stack the court.