2016 Postmortem

still_one

(92,224 posts) Wed Oct 26, 2016, 07:18 PM Oct 2016

Conservatives lay the groundwork for blocking all of Hillary Clinton’s nominees. [View all]

"Maybe Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had the right idea after all. Maybe Republicans are willing to trigger a constitutional crisis over the Supreme Court.

Some conservatives certainly seem to be warming up to McCain’s controversial suggestion last week that Senate Republicans should dig in their heels and block any and all Supreme Court nominees put forth by a future President Hillary Clinton."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/supreme-court-hillary-clinton-nominees_us_580fed9ae4b08582f88cb00c

I am not sure if they can do this if we have a majority in the Senate, but if they play this bullshit, perhaps impeachment charges should be brought against them for NOT doing their job.

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Conservatives lay the groundwork for blocking all of Hillary Clinton’s nominees. [View all] still_one Oct 2016 OP

Little doubt imo this will continue to be the way they 'do business' for many years. elleng Oct 2016 #1

Why wouldn't it be? vi5 Oct 2016 #8

Scorched earth policy davekriss Oct 2016 #9

If they change the fillibuster rule... Wounded Bear Oct 2016 #2

As long as we get majority, which we need, I hope they take that threat seriously and still_one Oct 2016 #4

Yep - but has to done on the first day of the session pkdu Oct 2016 #6

Actually no it doesn't, the filibuster can be removed at any time - which is what Reid threatened.. PoliticAverse Oct 2016 #11

I saw that article a couple of days ago, and didn't like it then ILFightinDem Oct 2016 #26

This is how I understood it as well... TheDebbieDee Oct 2016 #27

Here's what Wikipedia says about Filibuster rules/closure. Not exactly clear cut. ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #28

and here's another article from 2013 that makes more sense (but gives less detail/history) ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #29

And this is precisely why Republicans stopped blocking judicial nominees. Reid called their bluff. PoliticAverse Oct 2016 #33

How many SCOTUS justices will be left after 8 years? VMA131Marine Oct 2016 #3

Recess Appointments Chasstev365 Oct 2016 #5

Indeed Pook99 Oct 2016 #14

I think she would do that out of respect for Obama and what he was trying to accomplish. Zing Zing Zingbah Oct 2016 #19

I hope you are right brer cat Oct 2016 #20

If the GOP doesn't like it ThoughtCriminal Oct 2016 #21

If the Democrats get the Senate they can end the filibuster of judges at any time... in fact... PoliticAverse Oct 2016 #7

Yeah, I posted about this above... Wounded Bear Oct 2016 #12

Yes, end filibusters completely ASAP ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #30

Counting on President Clinton to come out fighting from day on on this. enough Oct 2016 #10

The House must initiate impeachment, and they are likely to Agnosticsherbet Oct 2016 #13

Why wouldn't obstruction be considered an impeachable offense? There actions are still_one Oct 2016 #15

Senators are allowed by Senate Rule to Obstruct. Agnosticsherbet Oct 2016 #17

Then hopefully the Democrats will win the majority in the Senate, and change the still_one Oct 2016 #18

Most of the republicans do not respect the will of the people. Zing Zing Zingbah Oct 2016 #16

We need to work hard to take back the House ... totally need these obstructionist Greywing Oct 2016 #23

The minority party doesn't get to block judical appointments! Coyotl Oct 2016 #24

ok, got it, but the can't the filibuster rules be changed at anytime? still_one Oct 2016 #25

That article says Reid would change it but he'll be gone and Schumer is not hot on changing it ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #31

I assume if we get control of the Senate, even by a couple of votes, they won't have the 2/3 still_one Oct 2016 #32

I think you misinterpret the 2/3 rule. It takes a 2/3 vote to PREVENT filibustering. ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #35

This truly would create a constitutional crisis. Demsrule86 Oct 2016 #34

'tough talk' they'll never follow through on radius777 Oct 2016 #36