McConnell followed through on what he threatened to do if Harry Reid exercised the nuclear option. There are costs and consequences to violating norms of behavior, tit for tat is one of them.

The blame game is boring. Let's just say that when Harry Reid eliminated the filibuster, he eliminated a precedent that carried real costs for violating. As McConnell warned at the time, removing that precedent would make it exceedingly easy for Republicans to do the same (with little / no cost) in the future, as played out.

I'm not sure if McConnell deserves respect or the Democrats deserve condemnation. They've been outmaneuvered for a decade now and counting.

Sure... and the response to Republicans denying Obama his pick and giving Trump his 44 days before an election will be to remove the fillister and stack the court.

I agree the blame game is boring. Going forward, this is just about power. People who talk about norms are stuck in the 20th century.

Entirely different situation. Obama did not have the Senate Majority. The people elected a Republican Senate Majority -- which served as Obama's check and balance. They voted down Garland.

The parties will operate in their best interests. That goes for Republican or Democrat, this is obvious, as you stated.

Today, Donald Trump does have a Senate Majority. Though several members may not fall in line (which sounds like Collins, Romney, and Murkowski).

This post was edited by GLYC123 on Sep 20 2020 10:07am

Yeah, if Democrats get a big win in November after the shenanigans Republicans pulled in 2016 and all throughout Obama's presidency I would 100% support stacking the court and doing whatever they have to.

In fact it would make me more likely to vote for them since it would show they actually have balls.

Imo, court packing is a huge step, largely seen in despotic regimes, that would have long-lasting ramifications on constitutional order.

It's a dangerous step to take, and one that can backfire immediately (public blowback) and in the long run.

At this point, though, it wouldn't surprise me. The Democrats are already leaning on private companies to crack down on Republican campaign spending. You'd expect this stuff in Hungary, not the United States, but it really is the dawn of a new era.

This post was edited by bogie160 on Sep 20 2020 10:20am

The point of norms is that they act against blatant partisan interest and power struggle. If the validity of a SC pick the year before an election hinges on whether the President's party controls the Senate, it's not a norm, it's just power politics. Stop pretending otherwise.

I really wish Democrats had railed hard on Republicans refusing to confirm nominations. That would have been a huge win for them. Imagine commercials like "Republicans hate justice. They've refused to allow X dozen judges to assume their position. This Republican even said there's no issue with the nomination. Vote for justice." WOuld have been so easy.

Too bad they're pussies.

this might have been posted here before but this situation does have me thinking about the fact mitch is on the chopping block this year. I wonder how his actions from this point will affect his numbers

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sethcohen/2020/07/10/ann-coulter-endorsed-a-democrat

Ideal world, Demmys filibuster and launch a proper attack campaign against him forcing him out of his seat (Which he probably deserves)

I have mixed feelings about it. I don't want them to stack the court, but I see it as a perfectly rational and reasonable response to the behavior of Republicans since 2016. America's anti-democratic structures are alienating Democrats. Maybe under a Kasich or Romney presidency it wouldn't be dire enough to incentivize the norm-crushing. But Trump lives to divide the country and escalate the stakes... so I reluctantly sympathize if Democrats go that route.



I don't know how you can look at Trump's last 4 years, look at his place in the polls and his decent chance of winning re-election, and pretend violating norms matters to voters.

Sure, cultists and anti-anti-Trumpers will argue that the Democrats are violating norms more than he did. That argument will work well with people who already support him, and practically no one else.

McConnel is one of the most toxic politicians still in his seat. He can obstruct really well, but he has almost no talent for actually building policy and improving on the situation.