Senate Democrats block confirmation of SCOTUS nominee Neil Grosuch

[cubby]

Well I fear it is the likeliest path sadly. Consider this: Ginsburg or Breyer die before 2020 and either Thomas or Kennedy resign. That will result in a conservative majority for the next 30 or so years. If Dems hold both houses and presidency, there will be considerable pressure. That is why the bs talk about stolen seat is so dangerous.

The reverse, relatively speaking could happen, as well, with the Dems in 2020+ getting four seats from the same resignations/deaths. The right is far more likely to see irrational pushes like upping the court number.

I don't think term limits would solve much, you would cure some problems yes, but create new ones, such as even greater power of lobbyists. Anyway, Senators are not going to vote themselves out of office.

The answer to senators voting themselves out of office is to simply make existing members exempt. That's typically how the legislation has been drafted in the past, at least.

You are entirely correct about the power of lobbyists growing.

[Ghostpanther]

The point is that this isn't something to celebrate unless the GOP manage to win hard and retain seats in 2020. If the pendulum swings and the Dems go back into power, which is likely because of the shit show of a Trump presidency and the tendency to vote down ticket, the GOP will be choking on their own policy.

GOP senators are even acknowledging the gamble involved.

I do not think it is a good thing with the exception Gorsuch will end up being on the Supreme Court.. It is regrettable it came to this. But I do not blame the GOP for doing it.

[Omega10]

I need to screenshot comments like this just to laugh at the inevitable tears in 2020 when the pendulum swings and the next D president gets to put up 3 justices with no possible recourse from Republicans.

This whole thing is a disaster for both sides. But the GOP are taking a huge gamble on going nuclear with this and some senators have even admitted such. If the Trump ship burns and/or the Dems fire back in 2020, they get fucked by their own plan. That's why the Dems didn't back down and forced the GOP into going nuclear. Gorsuch was getting through regardless so best bet is to eat shit in the short term and play the long game.

In the short term this is a huge win for Republicans. In the long run it could become a very costly victory. Health care used to be an issue that united republicans, and kept democrats on the defensive. Now, less than three months after an across the board victory for republicans, Obamacare is still law of the land, it's popularity has reached new highs, and republican governors are working to make it more accessible to its state citizens. Not what was expected at all. Furthermore, the odds of it being repealed anytime soon are fairly close to zero.

There is no way to know who will ultimately win out by this republican "victory". The fact that it seems so wonderful and high profile for republicans is exactly what gives it its potential danger for republicans in the future. Many senators saw how winning the last election has backfired so spectacularly on Obamacare so quickly, and are hoping to tamp down expectations in order to try to reduce their risk for this "victory".

We won't know who wins from this for another few years.

[Bullettime]

I do not think it is a good thing with the exception Gorsuch will end up being on the Supreme Court.. It is regrettable it came to this. But I do not blame the GOP for doing it.

Which is fine. My point is mainly at the right leaning people who are celebrating this as a massive victory when in reality, it's kicking the Democrats in the balls but giving them a gun to shoot you with in 2020.

[Zoranon]

The reverse, relatively speaking could happen, as well, with the Dems in 2020+ getting four seats from the same resignations/deaths. The right is far more likely to see irrational pushes like upping the court number.

The answer to senators voting themselves out of office is to simply make existing members exempt. That's typically how the legislation has been drafted in the past, at least.

You are entirely correct about the power of lobbyists growing.

Well yes, but I would be very surprised if Trump did not get at least another open spot. And if he gets the "right one" (anyone that is not Thomas), what happens in 2020 will be much less important. And given how nomination battles escalated in the past, it was the left that came with new tactics and the right to use them to their full potential - true for both fillubusters of lower level and SCOTUS nominees (lets not forget Alitos nomination). So I would expect Dems to start by creating two new seats and Reps reacting by creating 4 more in turn.

Frankly, I dont see any hope for term limits. And I dont see them as particularly desirable either. In the past, I though repealing the 17th amendment might help, but the state level is as badly politicised as the federal level now.

[Barnabas]

Which is fine. My point is mainly at the right leaning people who are celebrating this as a massive victory when in reality, it's kicking the Democrats in the balls but giving them a gun to shoot you with in 2020.

Democrats kicked themselves in the balls plenty the past 8 years. Why not once more?

[Jimmy Woods]

Hillary WAS a middle of the spectrum candidate.

She was just a bad candidate for other reasons.

The problem with Hillary Clinton, aside from running a shitty campaign, and likely for any Democrat in the future is "younger" people (under 50) are becoming more and more liberal. And in order to win a majority of the vote you need liberals (or conservatives if Republican) and many moderates. It's why Russian bots influencing Bernie Bros was such an effective strategy. Left leaning people are the majority and possibly permanent majority, but for more and more liberals moderate candidates aren't good enough for them.

I don't see how the nuclear option is bad for Democrats. Republicans were going to do this for the next justice if they still were in power anyways. They say they wouldn't but anyone paying any attention know Republicans only care about the wealthy and corporations. Gorsuch is a globalist judge just like Scalia, which is a slap in the face to Trump's anti-globalist voters. They also favor unlimited dark money in politics, so people like the Koch brothers can control the countries climate policy.

Also, there were more filibusters of Obama judges in 6 years then there were in the previous 60 years, so Republicans can keep lying about it's the democrats fault, but they were king obstructionists.

[Paranoid Android]

I need to screenshot comments like this just to laugh at the inevitable tears in 2020 when the pendulum swings and the next D president gets to put up 3 justices with no possible recourse from Republicans.

This whole thing is a disaster for both sides. But the GOP are taking a huge gamble on going nuclear with this and some senators have even admitted such. If the Trump ship burns and/or the Dems fire back in 2020, they get fucked by their own plan. That's why the Dems didn't back down and forced the GOP into going nuclear. Gorsuch was getting through regardless so best bet is to eat shit in the short term and play the long game.

Exactly. What comes around goes around. I know Trumpsters love stroke themselves thinking this is the beginning of something new, but it will swing. 2020 looks to be a good start with the way Trump is starting out his Presidency.

Mabye, just maybe this backfires on Dems as for as Senate elections in that the Republican base or whomever gets more fired up about the SCOTUS pick being in play. One thing about Dems/Liberals are they are very unreliable when it comes to voting so they tend to shoot themselves more in the foot that Republicans.

[lazypeon100]

Hillary committed Treason. so whats the difference

One) No she did not.

Two) What the hell does this have to do with anything I said? Reread what I wrote.

[Brubear]

They have no choice...the Democrats refuse to work with Trump on anything...no matter what.

Man, I wonder what that must be like. Having a party that does everything in their power to thwart the current administration. Like, could you imagine the party leader doing something crazy like flat-out stating from day one their biggest priority was to make sure that president was out of the White House come the next election? Or a record-shattering amount of filibusters? Man, that'd be insane. But Democrats have never had to deal with that

[cubby]

Democrats kicked themselves in the balls plenty the past 8 years. Why not once more?

Lol, yeah - all that shitty legislation that helped people. Fucking legislators! What are they thinking trying to better the lives of their constituents. Go the GOP way - line your pockets and fuck everyone else. MAGA!

- - - Updated - - -

Well yes, but I would be very surprised if Trump did not get at least another open spot. And if he gets the "right one" (anyone that is not Thomas), what happens in 2020 will be much less important. And given how nomination battles escalated in the past, it was the left that came with new tactics and the right to use them to their full potential - true for both fillubusters of lower level and SCOTUS nominees (lets not forget Alitos nomination). So I would expect Dems to start by creating two new seats and Reps reacting by creating 4 more in turn.

I would be surprised as well if at least one more didn't open up. I still don't see the Dems starting the "adding more spots on the court" but I think that might be my general political bias slamming up against yours. I mean that only objectively, not criticizing you (this time ).

Frankly, I dont see any hope for term limits. And I dont see them as particularly desirable either. In the past, I though repealing the 17th amendment might help, but the state level is as badly politicised as the federal level now.

I don't see any realistic hope of them getting passed, true. Not a lot of happy options for the U.S. at this point. Politics seems to be in a death spiral at this point, both sides contributing.

[Fahrenheit]

Both parties are culpable here, of that I have no doubt. But Reblicans started this with outright dereliction of duty during President Obamas terms. They tossed any pretense of pragmatism out the window and opted to refuse to permit nearly 100 ferderal judgeships go through. So facing a backlog of about 80 empty seats Harry Reid made the poor decision to push for the removal of the 60 vote super majority to confirm Judges and Presidential appointees with the exception of SCOTUS. Fast forward to Feb of 2016, Justice Scalia dies unexpectedly. Before the body is cold, Senate majority leader McConnell is out there saying no matter who Obama nominates they won't confirm him. Another direct dereliction of their constitutional duty, siting the nonexistent 'Biden Rule' as justification.
Removing the 60 super majority for Federal judges was bad enough, but removing if for SCOTUS nominees is asinine. Sure it'll hurt Democrats in the short term, but it's going to end up hurting all of us in the long run, and looking at the emerging demographic shifts in the US. It's going to hurt the Republicans the most in time.

[Blur4stuff]

I'm laughing my ass off watching conservatives celebrate this. They seem to honestly believe that dems will never have control of the senate again.

This may end up being one of the biggest republican political mistakes of the century.

[Slybak]

GOP senators are even acknowledging the gamble involved. If the Dems win in 2020, they get to ram through 3 justices unopposed.

If Democrats win in 2020, they can do the same cynical invocation of precedent that McConnell & co are doing now and get rid of the legislative filibuster, thereby eliminating probably the biggest veto point in the entire Federal political apparatus.

[Macaquerie]

I'm laughing my ass off watching conservatives celebrate this. They seem to honestly believe that dems will never have control of the senate again.

This may end up being one of the biggest republican political mistakes of the century.

They're probably banking on being able to ram all sorts of unconstitutional voter suppression schemes through the courts, so that Democratic voters are completely disenfranchised and GOP one-party rule is ensured in perpetuity.

[Underverse]

They're probably banking on being able to ram all sorts of unconstitutional voter suppression schemes through the courts, so that Democratic voters are completely disenfranchised and GOP one-party rule is ensured in perpetuity.

So, more of them same.

[Pterodactylus]

Use of nuclear option during Obama presidency

In 2011, with a Democratic majority in the Senate (but not a supermajority), Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.) proposed "a sweeping filibuster reform package" to be implemented via the constitutional option but Majority Leader Harry Reid dissuaded them from pushing it forward.[54] In October 2011, however, Reid triggered the nuclear option to make a more modest change in Senate precedents. In a 51-48 vote, the Senate prohibited any motion to waive the rules after a filibuster is defeated.[55][56][57]

Changing Senate precedents with a majority threshold does not reach the level of an actual change in Senate rules. On several occasions in the past, former Senate Majority leader Robert Byrd used this same procedure to change Senate precedents. On one occasion, he was able to put an end to the post-cloture filibuster by setting a precedent that the Presiding Officer take the initiative to rule dilatory amendments out of order.

The nuclear option was raised again following the congressional elections of 2012.[13] The Hill reported that Democrats will "likely" use the nuclear option in January 2013 to effect filibuster reform,[14] although as of mid-November supporters of filibuster reform did not even have the support of 51 Senators, according to Senator Tom Udall (D-N.M.), a leading proponent of the nuclear option.[58]

In the end, negotiation between the two parties resulted in two packages of "modest" amendments to the rules on filibusters that were approved by the Senate on January 24, 2013, without triggering the nuclear option.[59] Changes to the standing orders affecting just the 2013-14 Congress were passed by a vote of 78 to 16, eliminating the minority party's right to filibuster a bill as long as each party has been permitted to present at least two amendments to the bill.[59] Changes to the permanent Senate rules were passed by a vote of 86 to 9.[59]

In July 2013, the nuclear option was raised as nominations were being blocked by Senate Republicans as Senate Democrats prepared to push through a change to the chamber’s filibuster rule.[60] On July 16, John McCain announced an agreement had been made, avoiding a showdown and allowing a vote on nominations.[61]

Thanks Obama.

[Miztickow]

Trump is officially a lame duck now. Democrats will not help Republicans pass anything after this so next up is the legislative filibuster.

Trump already filed to run again in 2020, "so we shouldn't confirm any of his nominees because the American people deserve a voice!"
http://www.snopes.com/trump-filed-re...ch-nonprofits/

Just quote what Republicans said about Obama now. It's bullshit, but it's their bullshit.

[Z-Man]

Trump already filed to run again in 2020, "so we shouldn't confirm any of his nominees because the American people deserve a voice!"
http://www.snopes.com/trump-filed-re...ch-nonprofits/

Just quote what Republicans said about Obama now. It's bullshit, but it's their bullshit.

They also said "people", not "counties", which puts Gorsuch about 5 million votes behind Garland according to the American people.

(I'm also still waiting for Kennedy to be escorted out of the courthouse in handcuffs, since his illegal appointment occurred during an election year. Rules are rules.)

[ati87]

The Democrats are to blame. They are the ones who filibustered it. And they are the ones who did the change on the lower court confirmation rules a few years back. Now they are going to have to deal with a mess they started.

- - - Updated - - -

Uhm are we rewriting history to exclude historical obstructionist by Republicans the 6 years they had senate control? I mean come on dude, every single thing the US Senate had to do become trench warfare when republicans took over.

It wasn't democrats that used the filibuster in historical terms, republicans went as low at some point to even filibuster their own proposals.