Discussion for article #247596
I also suspect the President would not withdraw support for Garland. If anything happens on that end, itāll be Garland withdrawing his name after being tired of being toyed with or the Senateās dam breaking, them having a vote on him, and rejecting him nonetheless.
Exactly what I said on another thread. Itās just not in this Presidentās DNA to use people as pawns in a political game. Heās simply too dignified and classy for that.
Republicans on the other handā¦
This gives Republicans incentive to stonewall until the election. Heh heh hehā¦
Meh. Itās a long way off. Depends what happens between here and there, and what Hillary asks of him then.
And I cannot imagine a scenario where the President would withdraw his support from his nominee
Thank you! To assume that Prez Obama is using Garland strictly as a political pinata is just wrong.
Yes, I believe there were political considerations in his choice, but Garland, as a decent man and supremely-qualified candidate, has been in his top tier each time there was a SCOTUS opening.
Anyone who thinks that the Prez would dangle Garland out there as a GOTP punching bag for 8 months and then say ⦠āsorry, your political convenience is over ⦠see yaā, doesnāt understand that our president is a good and loyal man.
What does it say about this President that even his most ardent opponents assume that he is a class act and would not withdraw the Garland nomination. Mr. Obama is a man of his word, and everyone, even those who hate him, know it.
Well said. It took me about a gabillion more words to try to make the same point.
And those that hate him, hate him for it.
āThere are two questions a man must ask himself: The first is āWhere am I going?ā and the second is āWho will go with me?ā If you ever get these questions in the wrong order you are in trouble.ā āSam Keen
He needs more imagination. lol
How about the Judge becomes āillā, or has a āfamily emergencyā.
Garland seemed -way- too happy to be willing to withdraw his name for purely political reasons and I find it unlikely that President Obama chose him unaware of this.
Canāt wait for Trump to weigh in on Garland.
(With his brilliant insight and grasp of current affairs, he probably thinks Merrickās the Elephant Manā¦)
Agreed. Yes, we like to focus on that aspect of it, but I tend to think he is first and foremost trying to do his fucking job and do it right.
He already has, in a fashion:
President Barack Obama plans to announce his Supreme Court nominee on Wednesday, but Donald Trump thinks the Senate shouldnāt give the pick a hearing.
āI donāt think so, no I think they should do what theyāre doing,ā the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination said on āGood Morning Americaā Wednesday. āI think they should wait until the next president and let the next president pick.ā
WHAt? PROgreSSIVEs donāt THINK Heās sufficiently doctrinaire BECAUSE wHY? HE DOEsN"T SUPPort Socialistic UTOPIARY? He Doesnāt EAT Aborted FETUSES? WHAT?
And this is exactly why I think Sen. Sanders was mistaken to say what he did. Heās trying to have his cake and eat it too:
Iām 100 percent prepared to support Judge Garland. I think heās clearly very knowledgable and can serve ably on the Supreme Court, but between you and me, I think there are some more progressive judges out there,
If thereās some other judge that youād like better, youāre not really 100% prepared to support his nomination, are you? And it introduces an unnecessary āDemocratic candidate second guessing Democratic Presidentā narrative that just isnāt helpful when we should be presenting a unified front ā President has constitutional authority to make pick, President made pick, we support Presidentās pick. Repeat, repeat, repeat.
Too bad: heās way too conservative. We donāt need another Kennedy.
WHO asked this question? This sounds like another one of those āWe know WEāRE bad, but what about Obama???ā questions.
