Support NeoGAF

[Steejee]

Now I'm reading the Dems are going to cave on the SCOTUS pick too?

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/democrats-supreme-court-battle



Good Lord, just get down and kiss the ring right now.

I think it may come down to who he actually picks. This is for Scalia's seat, after all, so in effect there's probably not going to be a 'loss' of where the court stands in the end. They should certainly drag it out and grill the shit out of whoever is picked as a thank you for never bothering to vote on Obama's pick, but they're not interested in taking up the GOP 'Fuck everything' strategy quite yet. They're probably hoping Trump will pick someone like Kennedy, though the list he released didn't give much hope of that happening.

As for Tillerson, I still think he's not shown himself to be a competent choice and has conflicts of interest out the wazoo, but on the sliding scale of Trump awfulness he's a 'meh, could be worse'. Since he does have experience heading a big company, I hold out a little hope the State Department will at least retain most of its experienced rank and file and function somewhat like it's supposed to.

 

[Xe4]

Gah. Fuck that. Those democrats are making a tactical miatake. There is a high chance Tillerson and the Trump admin are going to be huge fuckups in the next two years, so it's in their best intrests to or against it. If I lives in those states I'd still support them over any far right crazy mofo's that will inevitably be on the GOP ticket, but people have to call and let them know this is unacceptable.

 

[kmag]

Now I'm reading the Dems are going to cave on the SCOTUS pick too?

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/democrats-supreme-court-battle



Good Lord, just get down and kiss the ring right now.

If it turned to be Hardiman nominated then the Dems should let him through. It would actually shift the court to the center. I mean there's no chance that Trump would nominate Hardiman as he inclusion on the shortlist is just a sop to Trump's sister who vouched for him.

 

[Blader]

If it turned to be Hardiman nominated then the Dems should let him through. It would actually shift the court to the center. I mean there's no chance that Trump would nominate Hardiman as he inclusion on the shortlist is just a sop to Trump's sister who vouched for him.

How is Hardiman a shift to the center? I don't see him as any less conservative than Gorsuch.

Frankly, if all three of these guys are Trump's final choices, I don't see there being much daylight between any of them.

 

[Dr.Acula]

Now I'm reading the Dems are going to cave on the SCOTUS pick too?

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/democrats-supreme-court-battle



Good Lord, just get down and kiss the ring right now.

Someone needs to explain US Senate procedure to me.

The reason for the tactic: Republicans are considering gutting the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees if Democrats stay largely united and block Trump's first pick.

So if Dems fight this, then the GoP will simply shove the pick through. So the Dems should allow this pick so they can fight another pick down the line. But why can't the GoP then shove that one through?

 

[Iksenpets]

Nothing you can really do about Manchin and Heitkamp, but Warner and King need to face serious shit

If it turned to be Hardiman nominated then the Dems should let him through. It would actually shift the court to the center. I mean there's no chance that Trump would nominate Hardiman as he inclusion on the shortlist is just a sop to Trump's sister who vouched for him.

Hardiman would be better than Gorsuch, but Dems should still filibuster him to force McConnell to either go nuclear over someone he doesn't actually want, or to have him chicken out and create beef between him and Trump. If it doesn't work out and we get Justice Gorsuch, oh well, he's just replacing Scalia anyway.

 

[Blader]

Someone needs to explain US Senate procedure to me.



So if Dems fight this, then the GoP will simply shove the pick through. So the Dems should allow this pick so they can fight another pick down the line. But why can't the GoP then shove that one through?

I guess the thinking is that since replacing Scalia with a Scalia-esque pick would be maintaining the status quo, McConnell would view Dems filibustering as obstruction for the sake of obstruction and be more likely to nuke the filibuster. Whereas if Trump were trying to replace, say, Ginsburg with another Scalia, which would drastically shift the balance of the court, that may be a more 'worthy' use of the filibuster.

So I understand that line of thinking but not sure if it's really realistic. McConnell doesn't seem to want to nuke the filibuster but also doesn't want to cross Trump in allowing Senate Dems to block his SCOTUS pick -- and Trump has already told McConnell to nuke the filibuster if Senate Dems put a blockade. On the one hand I think Dems shouldn't push their hand too hard and lose the filibuster right at the start, since Trump can very well end up having one or two or even three more SCOTUS selections on his hands down the line. On the other hand, if you're never using the filibuster out of fear of losing it, then what's the point of having it in the first place?

 

[kmag]

How is Hardiman a shift to the center? I don't see him as any less conservative than Gorsuch.

Frankly, if all three of these guys are Trump's final choices, I don't see there being much daylight between any of them.

Socially he's better than Gorsuch by all accounts. Don't get me wrong he's probably more to the right of Scalia on police/law and order and prisons but I don't see anything which suggests he's a fundamentalist conservative on social issues.

 

[LegendofJoe]

A five point victory when their sister to the south was 8.6 points more Republican is a big deal. That puts it at D+3 when in 2008 it and NC were both R+6.8-ish. That's almost a ten point swing over the past eight years and it includes the fact that the state has a Democratic governor and two Democratic senators. Warner's reelection was close but he won in a Republican wave election. His reelection bid (if he runs again) will be in 2020, guaranteeing that he won't be subject to a midterm backlash during a Democratic president's term. He has no excuse other than that he's a fossil from a time when Democrats could win in reddish-purple states by running right-tilting centrists and doesn't really have a place in the party going forward.

He should definitely be primaried in 2020 if he refuses to move left.

Agreed, Warner is a smart target for the Justice Democrats. Manchin and Heitcamp though? Not so much.

There is plenty of time to recruit an improvement over Warner as well. Virginia will continue to become more blue over the next 4 years, so running someone more progressive won't jeopardize winning the general election. Warner puts work in though engaging with the democratic base. He does enough to be fairly visible with the black community in Hampton Roads. Whoever runs against him needs to be genuine and be willing to put in this work as well. It's not enough to be more idealogically progressive.