McCain saying “I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up" is an alarming example. It sends a dangerous message, that Congress can just ignore their responsibility and leave the Court short a justice because they refuse to have a hearing until a Republican gets to make the pick.
The reasoning that “the American people should have a voice in the new Supreme Court justice” was always a shamockery, an outright refusal of Congressional Republicans to do their jobs and at least have a hearing for Garland, in efforts to ensure that a Republican President could choose the next man/woman up.
The fact that Congressional Republicans would be willing to stall four more years on even considering any Clinton nominee indicates exactly what you’re saying, Mufasa: how is either candidate going to do something meaningful for the good of the country when a significant portion Congress is willing to just take their ball and go home instead of actually doing their job?
If Trump wins, it seems likely that he will have a Republican House and Senate behind him. And while various Republican members of Congress have personal problems with Trump, it seems likely that they can make significant progress in terms of his policies.
It’s not the job of Congress to approve Supreme Court nominees. If it was, there would be no point in requiring the Senate to approve them. The point is that the senate can approve or refuse to approve nominees at its discretion. That’s why we have multiple branches of government. If they rubber stamped each other, it would be pointless.
I agree, dude. I’m not saying they have to approve any old nominee from HRC.
McCain’s declaration that they will not even consider any nominee is the problem.
It’s an outright “Nope, if the Dems win, we’re taking our ball and going home and staying there for four years, then we can show how ineffective Hillary was and take back the White House in 2020.”
The Senate is required under Article Two to “consent” to a SCOTUS pick, which is essentially approving/disapproving a Presidential nomination. This requires that they hold a hearing and take a vote. They’re not doing that now and if McCain has his way (I assume it’s hyperbole) then they wouldn’t be doing their duty for, what, 5+ years. Not only is that completely asinine, but it sets a terrible precedent that they’ll regret when Democrats control both houses in the future.
I’m curious about what the college educated white voter will do this year. According to an article in the WSJ this morning, Mitt Romney got 59% of the white vote, and 51% among all college grads.
I’m also interested to see what the millennials will do. (Cue Whitney Houston, I believe the children are our future.) In the last election, millennials were 19% of the turnout and 60% voted for President Obama.
And Utah. I’m really curious what all the deep-seated dislike for Trump is going to do there, and if the division gives it to Clinton. I’m seeing a lot of this from my university alumni and people from church.
I heart those folks for trying to vote their conscience, but I wish they were protesting by going Johnson. I’d really love to see him break 5%.
Yeah, a Libertarian. A big no thanks. I have no idea why people thought conservatives would flock to Johnson. McMullin would be a much better fit for Conservatives. So, not surprising at all.
