Discussion for article #246120
What are the splits for just “President should nominate” vs. “President should not nominate”? That’s at the heart of Mitch McTurtle’s pre-emptive strike - that the President should not fulfill his Constitutional duty. Never mind about how the Senate reacts after the nom - undoubtedly they will delay and filibuster and get up to all sorts of shenanigans to avoid a vote. That’s the role they’ve chosen for themselves, so whatever.
It’s the suggestion that the President shouldn’t even put up a nomination that is unprecedented. And no doubt based in the sure knowledge that a 9-month SC nomination battle is not going to make the GOP look better to voters in November.
14 Likes
Fortunately, it doesn’t matter what any voter thinks about this - the Constitution is clear what should happen - impact on voters will (hopefully) show during the November election. ® voters upset if the Senate confirms might kick them all out. Too bad.
Dem voters will hopefully be fired up enough regardless to flood the polls in November, keeping the White House in (D) hands, and putting the Senate there, too…
19 Likes
Those numbers will change in the weeks ahead.
9 Likes
So much for respect for the rule of law.
10 Likes
I remember, as a kid, visiting the Mr. Lincoln exhibit at Disneyland. Mr. Lincoln said that it wouldn’t be any foreign power to take America down, if America were to fall. He said it would be failure of Americans to respect the rule of law. Looks like we are half way there.
11 Likes
Nothing, absolutely nothing, shows the conviction of Teabaggers that the Supreme Court is in their pocket more than this.
14 Likes
That’s about to become all cleared up for them. Or as my late father was wont to say, the honeymoon’s over.
3 Likes
Maybe if the MSM didn’t frame everything as a competition the numbers wouldn’t be so evenly split. “Obama fights GOP over Supreme Court nomination.” “Obama’s comments set up a HUGE BATTLE.” “Obama WON’T GIVE IN TO THE GOP’S SUPER REASONABLE DEMANDS, WHAT’S WRONG WITH HIM?” Gosh, that Obama, playing the obstructor of freedom again!
Maybe if the MSM reminded their audience what the Constitution actually says, there would be more support for what the Constitution actually says.
19 Likes
Maybe just a little depressing that approximately half the polling sample appear to have shit for brains. Also, who are the freakin’ 19% of democrats who don’t think Obama should nominate someone this year? I know we can’t afford to drive democrats away, but they’re really stinking up the joint.
9 Likes
81 percent of Democrats believe that the should be followed; 81 percent of Republicans feel that it should.
Fixed it for you.
you’re welcome.
The poll of 800 registered voters was conducted Feb. 14-16, in the days immediately following Scalia’s death.
I think we’re becoming captive to the Polling-Industrial complex. On the other hand, I’d like to offer my polling opinions to the WDJ and NBC at half the cost they pay otherwise. I’ll even throw in some party-appropriate anecdotes to support my opinion.
4 Likes
I believe that, as per Chuck Todd, that is not their responsibility
9 Likes
No, they won’t. Republicans will go to their grave insisting Obama should not get a third appointment and Democrats will go to their grave insisting he should.
The Republicans could be right that the President is not necessarily owed a third confirmation, but that is completely separate form his fulfilling his obligation to offer a nomination. If Republicans want to deny a vote on a position which is vital to the functioning of the national government, well, have at it. Truman blistered Republicans with his arguments of a “do nothing” Congress. Obama and the 2016 Democratic nominee could do the same - plus the tag of the “Know Nothing” candidate for President if either of the current leaders were to get the nomination. The USSC needs to replace Scalia so that they can prepare their calendar for 2016-2017, because the Court’s calendar differs from the legislative and electoral schedules. Lacking a full panel of Justices could mean delaying some cases until the following year, 2017-2018. Does Congress really want to make the US government that dysfunctional?
4 Likes
Who cares if voters are split over this, this isn’t a voter issue, it’s a constitutional issue and a very obvious and very clear one. The sitting President gets to nominate a candidate and the Senate HAS to vote on that nominee, rinse and repeat until the sitting President, not the next President, has his nominee advanced to the Supreme Court.
It’s really about time the media steps in and does their fucking job, by telling every citizen, every Republican, every talking head in the media, that this isn’t an issue that’s up for debate, there is no question about what should be done or even when, the GOP needs to say hold a vote and say they will, otherwise they’re acting against the sworn oath they took when accepted the job of being a United States Senator.
14 Likes
Why? So he can kill more people via drone strikes?
Let’s take another national poll, one question: Should the sun rise in the east, or should it not?
9 Likes
There’s hope for America yet. More people think Obama should name a replacement than know what state the country of Iowa is in.
2 Likes
WTF is wrong with people. Of course he should be replaced this year.
1.) He’s dead.
2.) It’s only mid-February.
7 Likes