# Schumer Urges Filibuster to Block Gorsuch Confirmation
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [March 23, 2017, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845 "2017-03-23T16:45:20Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 29
### Author:  [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/561 "2017-04-05T18:26:38Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> I’d be concerned about losing the filibuster if I thought there was any chance the Republicans _wouldn’t_ get rid of it for the next vacancy if there was an actual filibuster threat… but I don’t. I think there’s no chance McConnell wouldn’t be happy to get rid of it then too, and I think there’s no chance the rest of his party wouldn’t go along with it.
He still has to hold his entire party together. He’s obviously got the votes now, making the filibuster a pointless exercise. But should you choose to save the filibuster for later, it could easily be the case that the Republicans will be more fractured next time. If you believe that the Trump administration is going to be a disaster, it’s entirly possible that you will be able to find a few moderate Republicans lwho are willing to abstain from a cloture vote to distance themselves from a lame duck and an ultra-conservative pick - especially if it’s a liberal seat up for grabs.
Or you can consider this logic:
The chance of a filibuster succeeding now is approximately zero. Political capital gained filibustering this pick - zero or negative. Then you lose the future ability to filibuster at all, meaning Trump doesn’t have to worry at all about accommodating Democrats should Ginsberg or Kennedy retire.
On the other hand, the chance of a future filibuster working is unknown. But unknown beats zero. And the mere existence of the threat of a filibuster may cause Trump to nominate a more moderate justice in the first place to avoid the political blowback of a contentious fight.
---
### Author:  [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/562 "2017-04-05T18:27:57Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> This particular move is about motivating Democratic voters, not about trying to beat Trump. There was no way to not “lose” in the Gorsuch battle – therefore, IMO, it’s best to try and focus on turnout.
I think this is a mistake in tactics. It’s too soon to peak and by the time 2018 rolls around interest will have subsided a bit. I think it’s more valuable for Democrats to go along with this reasonable nominee so later they can get Republican party defectors to sustain the filibuster later, even sustain a majority against a more disagreeable nominee. Of course, I’m not a Democrat so take that with huge grain of salt.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/563 "2017-04-05T18:28:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Notice how my position with respect to the filibuster has never changed in the 18 years I have been posting here?
Actually, I haven’t. I just haven’t paid that much attention, sorry.
> [@](#):
>
> Notice how you say Republicans “held up” nominations, but Democrats were merely “mean” to Bork?
That’s because the Dems didn’t hold up Bork’s nomination.
And yes, it was _thirty fucking years ago_. Y’know, it’s silly to ask the Dems to just forget what happened last year, and refuse to abandon this grudge.
> [@](#):
>
> Notice how I don’t really care what your opinion is, because I’m convinced it arises from a desire to advance Democrats’ interests and you will fluidly adopt or discard principles in service to that goal?
>
> If not, then you are invited to start.
You are invited to start a Pit thread with evidence that I “fluidly adopt or discard principles in service to that goal.” I welcome your comments there.
---
### Author:  [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/564 "2017-04-05T18:29:51Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> This particular move is about motivating Democratic voters, not about trying to beat Trump. There was no way to not “lose” in the Gorsuch battle – therefore, IMO, it’s best to try and focus on turnout.
538 had an analysis that a filibuster might motivate the hard core, but probably won’t motivate more moderate voters. The hard core are probably voting Democratic anyway.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/565 "2017-04-05T18:31:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Well, the truth is that I’m sorry to see the filibuster go. I thought it was a mistake for the Democrats to eviscerate it in 2013, and it’s a mistake now to deliver the _coup de grace_. I’m not going to shed tears, mind you, but on balance I thought it was a useful tool to have in the toolbox. There will come a day, in 2020, or 2022, at some point, when the GOP is in the minority and President Warren appoints someone ultra-liberal, when this folly will be clear.
>
> But, meh, nothing for it. If they pull a knife, you pull a gun; if they send one of yours to the hospital, you send one of theirs to the morgue. That’s the DC way.
>
> (With apologies to Sean Connery).
I would prefer the filibuster were retained, but only as a “talking” filibuster – thus requiring actual endurance and toughness to make it happen. This way, human endurance would mean that it could only be used occasionally.
But the way it is (or was yesterday)? I’m glad it’s gone. It’s dumb, IMO, that 60 votes should be required for pretty much everything the Senate does.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/566 "2017-04-05T18:34:00Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#):
>
> He still has to hold his entire party together. He’s obviously got the votes now, making the filibuster a pointless exercise. But should you choose to save the filibuster for later, it could easily be the case that the Republicans will be more fractured next time. If you believe that the Trump administration is going to be a disaster, it’s entirly possible that you will be able to find a few moderate Republicans lwho are willing to abstain from a cloture vote to distance themselves from a lame duck and an ultra-conservative pick - especially if it’s a liberal seat up for grabs.
>
> Or you can consider this logic:
>
> The chance of a filibuster succeeding now is approximately zero. Political capital gained filibustering this pick - zero or negative. Then you lose the future ability to filibuster at all, meaning Trump doesn’t have to worry at all about accommodating Democrats should Ginsberg or Kennedy retire.
>
> On the other hand, the chance of a future filibuster working is unknown. But unknown beats zero. And the mere existence of the threat of a filibuster may cause Trump to nominate a more moderate justice in the first place to avoid the political blowback of a contentious fight.
I think the chance of a future successful filibuster is pretty much known now too – it’s near zero. If the Republican party is fractured to the point that it could be successful, then the Democrats wouldn’t have anything to really worry about anyway… the party is already almost ungovernable, and that would just tip it over well past any chance of organization and governance.
With this in mind, I put a much higher value on motivating Democratic voter than this minuscule (and probably unnecessary) chance of an actual successful filibuster in the future.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/567 "2017-04-05T18:35:13Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#):
>
> 538 had an analysis that a filibuster might motivate the hard core, but probably won’t motivate more moderate voters. The hard core are probably voting Democratic anyway.
I think there’s a much better chance of motivating more “moderate” Democratic voters (as well as hardcore Bernie supporters, among others) than of an actual successful future filibuster.
---
### Author:  [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/568 "2017-04-05T18:35:33Z")
I think it’s cute that so e of you think that the Democratic base needs further motivation, and that motivating them in this way won’t cause you to lose more moderates that have been fleeing the party in droves.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/569 "2017-04-05T18:36:35Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#):
>
> I think it’s cute that so e of you think that the Democratic base needs further motivation, and that motivating them in this way won’t cause you to lose more moderates that have been fleeing the party in droves.
Lots of Democrats didn’t vote, or voted third-party, in 2016. Certainly enough to swing the election the other way had they voted for Hillary Clinton.
If anything’s “cute”, it’s the idea that there are Republican Senators who wouldn’t jump at the chance to replace RBG or another “liberal” justice with a “conservative”, even if it required getting rid of the filibuster.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/570 "2017-04-05T18:42:14Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#):
>
> 1. Make a big show of how magnanimous you are being with Gorsuch, because a conservative is being replaced by a conservative of equally high qualification, and you are the reasonable party. Gain tons of political capital, which you can then use when a liberal retires and needs replacing.
I have to agree with **DSY** that very few people care about the procedural stuff, though that leads me to the differing conclusion that there is no meaningful political capital to be gained.
I think it would score some points with people like Fred Hiatt (WaPo editorial page editor). The Dems have a bad history of paying too much attention to what people like him think. The Republicans have a history of not giving a damn about the opinions of such people. (I think the GOP has the more politically effective approach, fwiw, and I’m certainly not arguing that they _should_ pay attention to Hiatt & Co. Just stating what I believe to be fact.)
_This is why I think it advantages the Dems for them to force the GOP to get rid of the SCOTUS filibuster if they want to put Gorsuch on the Court: they won’t do it themselves, and the day is coming when they will need it gone. While the GOP will get rid of it whenever it serves their purposes._
---
### Author:  [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/571 "2017-04-05T18:42:32Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#):
>
> Actually, I haven’t. I just haven’t paid that much attention, sorry.
If you were REALLY sorry, you’d make up for it by going back and reading all of his posts for the last 18 years. That way you’d see just how consistent he’s been! 😃
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/572 "2017-04-05T18:45:40Z")
Another reason to filibuster – it increases the likelihood of the Republicans getting rid of the filibuster, and for the legislative filibuster as well, and _this will help the Democratic party in the long run._
Next time the Democrats are in power, if there isn’t a filibuster, then universal health care is much easier, so is increasing the minimum wage, and many other priorities. And repealing those things when the Republicans inevitably take back power would be incredibly difficult (as we’ve seen with the ACA).
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/573 "2017-04-05T18:49:20Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#):
>
> I think it’s cute that so e of you think that the Democratic base needs further motivation
It’s more the other way around: the Dems need to avoid DEmotivating the base.
> [@](#):
>
> and that motivating them in this way won’t cause you to lose more moderates that have been fleeing the party in droves.
Well, who’s paying attention to the procedural stuff? We keep on coming back to the point that **most people aren’t.** And if you aren’t paying attention to it, what the Dems do or don’t do about it won’t bother you.
But the folks who are newly aroused in their opposition to Trump and the GOP - they ARE paying attention. The Dems could lose _them_ by not fighting. So in terms of their support, filibustering has little if any cost, while failing to filibuster has potentially huge costs.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/574 "2017-04-05T18:50:21Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#):
>
> If you were REALLY sorry, you’d make up for it by going back and reading all of his posts for the last 18 years. That way you’d see just how consistent he’s been! 😃
Now I know what I should do, as soon as I’m retired. 😃
(Still a few years off, alas. :))
---
### Author:  [@squidfood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squidfood)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/575 "2017-04-05T18:52:14Z")
> [@Bone](#):
>
> I think it’s kind of a mixed bag. Many people have been consistent, others not so much.
Interesting, but I do believe in changing views in light of “new information”, and I think the idea that a majority party would block an up-or-down vote indefinitely (Garland), without electoral penalty, is “new information” that changes the long-term calculus.
---
### Author:  [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/576 "2017-04-05T19:00:23Z")
Democrats need more political capital. They also need to improve their auras.
---
### Author:  [@squidfood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squidfood)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/577 "2017-04-05T19:15:58Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#):
>
> But the folks who are newly aroused in their opposition to Trump and the GOP - they ARE paying attention. The Dems could lose _them_ by not fighting. So in terms of their support, filibustering has little if any cost, while failing to filibuster has potentially huge costs.
This is an example where Garland has changed the calculus: Campaign: “If we take the Senate in 2018, we can block Trump from replacing RBG indefinitely; by holding fast now, we can prove to our donors/base that we have the will to do so.”
---
### Author:  [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/578 "2017-04-05T19:16:47Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#):
>
> So, looks like Gorsuch [may have plagiarized](https://twitter.com/christinawilkie/status/849466954549260292/photo/1) a section of his book.
It looks like Christina Wilkie and Politico may be pushing fake news, or peddling plain ol’ fashioned horseshit. Maybe they should have ACTUALLY verified the story BEFORE they published their version of reality. Or not.
---
### Author:  [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/579 "2017-04-05T19:17:13Z")
> [@squidfood](#):
>
> Interesting, but I do believe in changing views in light of “new information”, and I think the idea that a majority party would block an up-or-down vote indefinitely (Garland), without electoral penalty, is “new information” that changes the long-term calculus.
W’s Federal Bench appointments were blocked, in some cases for the length of his term.
So were some of Clintons.
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2017, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/580 "2017-04-05T19:18:36Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#):
>
> 538 had an analysis that a filibuster might motivate the hard core, but probably won’t motivate more moderate voters. The hard core are probably voting Democratic anyway.
This, essentially. If the Dems are pinning their hopes on an outraged backlash against the GOP for how they are handling Supreme Court nominations, I would have expected them to suffer more losses in 2016. Instead, turnout dropped off and Hillary lost.
Besides, if they filibuster someone as calm and moderate-appearing as Gorsuch, the Dems are the ones looking like the partisans determined to get their way at all costs.
I rather doubt if the mainstream of American politics reacts the same way to these things as the SDMB does.
Regards,
Shodan
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845.md?page=28)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845.md?page=30)