Should Obama seat Merrick Garland?

[yurbud]

The argument for seating him is that the Senate, by refusing to hold confirmation hearings, has waived their right to advise and consent.

On this issue, both sides have high negatives: if he does seat him, it might set a precedent Republicans could abuse, for example, "Democrats did hold confirmation hearings in 24 hours, so they lost their shot."

On the other hand, letting Trump choose instead would be the ultimate reward for Mitch McConnell's eight years of obstruction, and set a percent for Republicans to do even worse the next time the Democrats win the White House.

I lean toward seating him as a way for Obama to admit his "go along to get along" tactic with Republicans mostly didn't work.

Also, even if people don't like Garland, who is about as middle of the road as you get, they might respect Obama for having the courage of his convictions.

And if the Republicans don't like it, they can always impeach Garland--or Obama.

39 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Obama should seat Garland.
	36 (92%)
	Obama should not seat him.
	1 (3%)
	other
	2 (5%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll