# re: SCOTUS Nomination, what is Obama's long game? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 17, 2016, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240 "2016-03-17T08:06:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240/41 "2016-03-18T01:18:22Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > Straight from the [US Senate](http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/President_Pro_Tempore.htm): > The VP cannot just show up and take over. You are so misreading that rule. The Vice-President cannot address the Senate means present bills, debate, make speeches, etc. because he is not a Senator. There is nothing that prevents him from actually presiding. [Cite](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5qCA61c2Us) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240/42 "2016-03-18T02:02:15Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > And what happens if the next senate also refuses to even consider HRC’s appointment to the court. Sure they will drag out Bork, but there were long hearings on Bork and the full senate voted him down. Even if the Dems were to win back the senate (or tie it), they could filabuster till the cows came home (or till they jumped over the moon). If that happens then it becomes normal practice for no new justices to get appointed unless one party controls the White House and the Senate. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240/43 "2016-03-18T04:56:47Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If that happens then it becomes normal practice for no new justices to get appointed unless one party controls the White House and the Senate. And I’m sure the GOP does not want that, at least not consciously. A Pub POTUS could be stymied in exactly the same way – not only if the Dems have a Senate majority, but if they hold even enough seats to support a filibuster – and through gradual attrition the SCOTUS could be reduced to its three or four youngest justices. But I am beginning to wonder whether the Congressional Pubs are even capable, any more, of thinking that far ahead. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240/44 "2016-03-18T04:57:24Z")
It’s short term politics at its worst. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240/45 "2016-03-18T05:03:18Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > It’s short term politics at its worst. But they’ve painted themselves into a corner, haven’t they? They know they won’t be in politics in the **long** term unless they keep the worst and stupidest elements of their base happy. At this point, any Pub senator who suggests holding hearings on Garland risks being primaried from the right (not this year, perhaps, too late, but there’s always another election coming up). ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240/46 "2016-03-18T05:16:28Z")
I think caving is still the best bet though. Unfortunately, teh President did not actually nominate someone conservative enough that we could just declare victory to save face. Garland is actually a liberal on most issues(at least the ones Obama cares about). So the choices are either surrender or hold firm. Sometimes it’s best to surrender. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-scotus-nomination-what-is-obamas-long-game/749240.md?page=2)