Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Cutlass, Feb 13, 2016.
They're gentlemen, not unlike the one in France who'd guillotine you even if the weather's crap.
Update on the Nomination. No Negotiations. Period.
There's a joke in there about Star Wars and 'the negotiations were short' but lol
That doesn't mean no nominations. It only means no confirmations. McConnell is too anti-American to do his job.
Of course... The President had until yesterday to make a recess appointment, so it makes perfect sense that they hold off on this announcement until after they are back from recess... now Prez Obama can't do anything about it. If they had made this announcement last week, he could have just shrugged and made a recess appointment.
Its funny that they are hiding behind "letting the American people have their say" because the American people did have their say... in 2012 the American people said we want Prez Obama to fill SCOTUS openings from now until January 2017.
George Washington got his election year vacancies quickly filled, but I'm sure that Senate had no clue about original intent.
Obama would not have made a recess appointment even if they announced beforehand.
Reports are floating around that Obama is vetting Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval, for the spot...
That is such a brilliantly stupid, too-cute-for-its-own-good move it hurts.
Why is it stupid?
I mean, I think it's a politically savvy move. If Obama nominates the most popular Republican Governor in the country (who is also very centrist) and the Republicans shoot it down. It should be chalked up as a win.
Frankly, the Repubs already saying up-front that they'll refuse any candidate without question should already be a win for the President, but... meh.
Oh it is, but nominating a Republican for the post and having Republicans shoot him down would be quite the icing on the cake.
It might be politically smart, in that it would put the Republicans in a tight spot (though I wonder how Democrats would feel about it), but it's putting a Republican on the Supreme Court, which defeats the whole point of a Democrat pick. It's like giving the Republicans a lot of what they want just so they can't complain about it.
Sandoval is essentially a democrat on social issues and I think Obama would prefer to have a moderate on the court than someone mirroring Scalia.
Republicans want a replacement as far right as Scalia though.
Which is why I think nominating a moderate would be as great a victory as any. I don't think it is safe to wait until November, who knows who will get elected and who that person will appoint.
Mostly what Camikaze said. It's squandering a once in decades opportunity to drastically reshape the Court, and he's floating a Republican. Even if the guy doesn't hate gay people and is otherwise "moderate" on social issues, he's still going to be far to the right on environmental, labor, and other issues that will arise.
Tactically, selecting a popular governor whose name is often mentioned as a Senate candidate or a possible VP for 2016 sounds like a savvy move, but it's all short term politics with no long-term gain. That's mostly why I'm calling it brilliantly stupid. If this was a chess book, it wouldn't be listed as a good or brilliant move, nor as a blunder, but as a mixed, unexpected, WTF moment like "?!"
Let's dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing.
He has no chance of nominating anyone else, in my opinion. Sandoval is not "far-right" on really anything. He is pro-choice, he supports gay-marriage, he has been a huge supporter of renewable energies in Nevada, and he raised taxes. I am not saying he is the best choice (by any metric) but as I mentioned Obama has zero chance of nominating a real liberal. It's just not going to happen. I will take the moderate in place of Scalia any day.
Separate names with a comma.