Found here. Short version: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell continues to refuse to cave on this nomination. I’m actually having difficulty thinking of ways McConnell could improve on his current performance. I’d be amazed, but I’m too busy trying to figure out how to relaibly replicate the effect.
12 thoughts on “My RedState post on Mitch McConnell and Merrick Garland.”
Comments are closed.
A _lot_ of people are going to have egg on their face if Trump actually wins the general.
Given the percentage of the GOP that will walk out the door if he gets the nomination – including me – I think that the GOP would be better off worrying about other things during a hypothetical Trump general campaign, like somehow keeping the House of Representatives. Which is a lot more at risk than people think, gerrymandering or no.
I understand and appreciate the sentiment.
.
I also note the Dixiecrats.
.
Mew
I we get to that point, I wouldn’t really care.
I understand that. But here’s the thing–I plan on voting for the Republican nominee, just like I was exhorted to do in 2008 and 2012, by a bunch of people–I wasn’t reading this site then, so I don’t count you among that number–who insisted party unity was critical. If the Establishment types feel that Trump is a bridge too far, well I always felt the Republican party needed to be broken up and reformed; I was just hoping it would happen to the Democrats first.
All I’m gonna say on that it that it’s a weird Establishment that has *me* in it. 🙂
Duly noted.
” I’d be amazed, but I’m too busy trying to figure out how to reliably replicate the effect.”
.
And insure that the effect remains. I am not sanguine about that….
It’s been 5 days. I’ll praise McConnell on this ONLY if he doesn’t cave by January 20th, 2017, and not a day sooner.
Well, if we lose the Senate, the new Dem Senate will be seated before Jan 20th. That new Senate could ram whoever Obama wanted through before the new president took office. Of course assuming it’s Hillary, they’d probably wait for her to nominate someone more lefty than the current offering, hense the speculation that the R’s would confirm the current “moderate” nominee after the election to prevent someone even worse from tipping the court to the left. (not that it matters much at that point from our point of view. The court would be firmly leftist for the next 20+ years) So even if McConnell holds firm, it won’t prevent a lefty from getting on the court eventually if the election plays out the way it looks right now.
True, but if McConnell caves now it’ll play into the suggestion that the GOP is doomed this year. Things are bad enough right now without adding more fuel to that fire.
“Well, if we lose the Senate, the new Dem Senate will be seated before Jan 20th. That new Senate could ram whoever Obama wanted through before the new president took office.”
Not if the Republicans refused to show up and create a quorum.
What? The Democrats certainly thought it was acceptable when they did the same thing in Texas and Wisconsin.