Republican Senator slips up- shows the BS behind the curtain

[RandomGuy]

Oops! Senator's article tells of phantom meeting with Obama nominee
https://www.yahoo.com/news/oops-senators-article-tells-phantom-meeting-obama-nominee-173104386.html?nhp=1


If you wanted proof that the stated reasons the Republicans won't give Garner a hearing are utter bullshit and just some political game here it is:


[here are the reasons that i hate this guy, my meeting with him didn't change my mind about him at all]

Only... the meeting wasn't scheduled until four days after the op-ed appeared. Meaning his opinion was set and nothing the nominee could ever say would make him change his mind.

Fucking oops.

Hatch didn't care how qualified the the nominee. He wants to play partisan games with the process, putting his party over the good of the country.

[spurraider21]

No shit. I don't think anybody believes otherwise in the first place. All of them are already going with the "but Biden said" excuse. It's been a political game all along, doesn't really take an investigation to confirm it

[CosmicCowboy]

At this point it's a win/win for Republicans. If Trump wins the election they wait and confirm a more conservative judge. If Clinton wins the election they confirm him before Hillary gets the chance to appoint anyone further to the left.

I'm surprised you political junkies can't see the logic in that. You might not like it but in this case it's smart politics.

[boutons_deux]

At this point it's a win/win for Republicans. If Trump wins the election they wait and confirm a more conservative judge. If Clinton wins the election they confirm him before Hillary gets the chance to appoint anyone further to the left.

I'm surprised you political junkies can't see the logic in that. You might not like it but in this case it's smart politics.

Does Obama's appointee persist past Obama's term?

Hillary is not obligated to stay with Obama's appointee.

She could make her own liberal appointee (but she would appoint a center-right asshole, since she's a VRWC-fellating Repug shill)

[CosmicCowboy]

Does Obama's appointee persist past Obama's term?

Hillary is not obligated to stay with Obama's appointee.

She could make her own liberal appointee (but she would appoint a center-right asshole, since she's a VRWC-fellating Repug shill)

:lmao

Are you not aware that Obama doesn't have to move out of the White House on November 6? Plenty of time in the lame duck period to approve O's nominee if it comes to that.

[boutons_deux]

:lmao

Are you not aware that Obama doesn't have to move out of the White House on November 6? Plenty of time in the lame duck period to approve O's nominee if it comes to that.

If Hillary were elected and didn't want to support Obama's appointee, Obama probably wouldn't force the matter and/or the appointee would probably withdraw.

[RandomGuy]

At this point it's a win/win for Republicans. If Trump wins the election they wait and confirm a more conservative judge. If Clinton wins the election they confirm him before Hillary gets the chance to appoint anyone further to the left.

I'm surprised you political junkies can't see the logic in that. You might not like it but in this case it's smart politics.

I guess, if you discount the fact that the nomination can be withdrawn any time, and the political damage playing football with it will do.

Just another brush stroke in the painting that the Dems should be making of a Republican party that has lost its fucking mind, and is willing to put its own interests above all else.

My guess is that we are going to see a heavy turnout, and that will not benefit the Republican party this fall. If my memory is correct, they have a lot more vulnerable members up for election in the Senate than the Democrats.

The top slots will have some solid down-ballot effects.

We will get to see. Trump is a fiasco when it comes to trying to appeal to independents, who actually do the electing of presidents.

[boutons_deux]

Trump is a fiasco when it comes to trying to appeal to independents

... and women,

and blacks,

and Latinos,

and LGBT,

and very probably most of Bernie's 18-34 crowd.

[RandomGuy]

My sense is that turnout will be very heavy in the kinds of demographics that traditionally don't vote much, which doesn't bode well for the GOP.

[boutons_deux]

My sense is that turnout will be very heavy in the kinds of demographics that traditionally don't vote much, which doesn't bode well for the GOP.

eg, (TX) Latinos, who are notorious for low turnouts