Cheering on a moderate SCOTUS choice

[Meldread]

24. I agree with you 100%. +1

Okay, maybe Obama couldn't nominate a flaming liberal like I'd want him too. I get that. The Republicans control the Senate. However, he could have at least nominated a solid and well qualified progressive--there were many on his list.

Obviously, Garland is qualified to sit on the court. I don't dispute that. However, Obama could have--and should have--done better than him.

The odds are in our favor right now when it comes to retaking the Senate and the White House in November. If Obama had actually nominated a qualified progressive, another Elena Kagan for example, someone who was a minority as well--then that would have been good.

We could have campaigned against Republicans for their obstruction, as well as threatening to nominate someone EVEN MORE liberal should Hillary become President.

There is a possibility that the Republicans would have allowed a more progressive justice through, and then voted him or her down. That is fine. At that point, you bring forward a Garland. You don't have Garland as your opening move. They could vote him down as well--then where do you go? Further to the right?

The best strategic move for Republicans is to have hearings on Obama's nominee and then vote them down on whatever flimsy grounds they can find. They would treat it like a negotiation, forcing Obama's nominees further and further to the right. Their worst strategic move is the one they are openly playing right now.

In the end, I am confident that the Republicans are going to eventually cave and let a nominee through--at least to get a full vote on the Senate floor. I don't believe obstruction is possible--not with Donald Trump as their likely nominee. It's too easy for Democrats. "Republicans are openly obstructing President Obama's nominee to allow the KKK loving Donald Trump to make an appointment to the Supreme Court!" The ads practically write themselves.