Scalia just died (really). How will this affect the race?

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

You can't control the consequences either. It can be argued that Obama is just as obstructionist by not naming a centrist judge.

Republicans would not approve a centrist judge, because they want a Scalia clone. Obama could appoint a moderate Republican and they would still not take it up. He'd have to nominate Ann Coulter to placate them.

Maybe you guys should have won the last elections then.

And maybe you guys should have won the 2012 election if you wanted Ann Coulter on the Supreme Court.

In all likelihood, this stunt will cost Republicans the 2016 election, so it really is plus for Democrats. Thanks.

Yes, you're a great prognosticator! AMAZING! Just ask recently reelected Senator Mark Udall.

Or wait....

I corrected your spelling. Maybe I don't get the predictions right all the time, but I'm fairly confident that 2016 will not be a good Republican year if they nominate a crazy person and spend the whole year leaving a vacancy on the court.

We aren't doing anything. We didn't kill Scalia. We will confirm the best person for the position. The balls in your court. Hopefully Obama will be competent for once and nominate somebody who can make everyone happy.

Also, while we have our issues with Trump, your nominee is just as likely to end up in the big house as she is in the White House. Remember that

Such a person doesn't exist.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Conservatives would be the only ones to buy that activist talk. Obama doesn't need to cut a deal, because he is within his authority to select a nominee for the court. It's Republicans who have something to lose, not Obama.

Liberals have been predicting that the sheep--I mean American voters will see the light and toss out the "obstructionist" GOP for half a decade.  The American people just don't care about your whining.

I don't think Republicans antics helped them any in the 2012 election. Trump as the nominee and a long vacancy on the Supreme Court is a recipe for disaster. The American people just don't care for your insanity.

Yeah, they totally are more in line with the likes of Kay Hagan and Mark Udall. Oh wait...

A midterm and a presidential election are different. I recall everyone thought Obama re-election would lose because Republicans won big in 2010. I'm still amused at how devastated Romney was at his loss.

So, elections only matter when Democrats win. Good to know!

[DrScholl]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

You can't control the consequences either. It can be argued that Obama is just as obstructionist by not naming a centrist judge.

Republicans would not approve a centrist judge, because they want a Scalia clone. Obama could appoint a moderate Republican and they would still not take it up. He'd have to nominate Ann Coulter to placate them.

Maybe you guys should have won the last elections then.

And maybe you guys should have won the 2012 election if you wanted Ann Coulter on the Supreme Court.

In all likelihood, this stunt will cost Republicans the 2016 election, so it really is plus for Democrats. Thanks.

Yes, you're a great prognosticator! AMAZING! Just ask recently reelected Senator Mark Udall.

Or wait....

I corrected your spelling. Maybe I don't get the predictions right all the time, but I'm fairly confident that 2016 will not be a good Republican year if they nominate a crazy person and spend the whole year leaving a vacancy on the court.

We aren't doing anything. We didn't kill Scalia. We will confirm the best person for the position. The balls in your court. Hopefully Obama will be competent for once and nominate somebody who can make everyone happy.

Also, while we have our issues with Trump, your nominee is just as likely to end up in the big house as she is in the White House. Remember that

Good luck with all that, you people will need it. lol.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

You can't control the consequences either. It can be argued that Obama is just as obstructionist by not naming a centrist judge.

Republicans would not approve a centrist judge, because they want a Scalia clone. Obama could appoint a moderate Republican and they would still not take it up. He'd have to nominate Ann Coulter to placate them.

Maybe you guys should have won the last elections then.

And maybe you guys should have won the 2012 election if you wanted Ann Coulter on the Supreme Court.

In all likelihood, this stunt will cost Republicans the 2016 election, so it really is plus for Democrats. Thanks.

Yes, you're a great prognosticator! AMAZING! Just ask recently reelected Senator Mark Udall.

Or wait....

I corrected your spelling. Maybe I don't get the predictions right all the time, but I'm fairly confident that 2016 will not be a good Republican year if they nominate a crazy person and spend the whole year leaving a vacancy on the court.

We aren't doing anything. We didn't kill Scalia. We will confirm the best person for the position. The balls in your court. Hopefully Obama will be competent for once and nominate somebody who can make everyone happy.

Also, while we have our issues with Trump, your nominee is just as likely to end up in the big house as she is in the White House. Remember that

Such a person doesn't exist.

Surely they do. You really only need to get McCain, Portman, Ayotte, Murkowski, and a few other safe moderates (Graham, etc) to cross the aisle. Cruz and company don't matter as long as the nominee is a relative centrist.

[Frodo]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

You can't control the consequences either. It can be argued that Obama is just as obstructionist by not naming a centrist judge.

Republicans would not approve a centrist judge, because they want a Scalia clone. Obama could appoint a moderate Republican and they would still not take it up. He'd have to nominate Ann Coulter to placate them.

Maybe you guys should have won the last elections then.

And maybe you guys should have won the 2012 election if you wanted Ann Coulter on the Supreme Court.

In all likelihood, this stunt will cost Republicans the 2016 election, so it really is plus for Democrats. Thanks.

Yes, you're a great prognosticator! AMAZING! Just ask recently reelected Senator Mark Udall.

Or wait....

I corrected your spelling. Maybe I don't get the predictions right all the time, but I'm fairly confident that 2016 will not be a good Republican year if they nominate a crazy person and spend the whole year leaving a vacancy on the court.

We aren't doing anything. We didn't kill Scalia. We will confirm the best person for the position. The balls in your court. Hopefully Obama will be competent for once and nominate somebody who can make everyone happy.

Don't be disingenuous.  Obama could nominate a bonafide centrist who still wouldn't get through the Republican Senate, especially in an election year.  The only thing that would make you happy is if he nominates a conservative justice like Miguel Estrada, which is never going to happen.  

[Gass3268]

Could Obama try a recess appointment?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

You can't control the consequences either. It can be argued that Obama is just as obstructionist by not naming a centrist judge.

Republicans would not approve a centrist judge, because they want a Scalia clone. Obama could appoint a moderate Republican and they would still not take it up. He'd have to nominate Ann Coulter to placate them.

Maybe you guys should have won the last elections then.

And maybe you guys should have won the 2012 election if you wanted Ann Coulter on the Supreme Court.

In all likelihood, this stunt will cost Republicans the 2016 election, so it really is plus for Democrats. Thanks.

Yes, you're a great prognosticator! AMAZING! Just ask recently reelected Senator Mark Udall.

Or wait....

I corrected your spelling. Maybe I don't get the predictions right all the time, but I'm fairly confident that 2016 will not be a good Republican year if they nominate a crazy person and spend the whole year leaving a vacancy on the court.

We aren't doing anything. We didn't kill Scalia. We will confirm the best person for the position. The balls in your court. Hopefully Obama will be competent for once and nominate somebody who can make everyone happy.

Also, while we have our issues with Trump, your nominee is just as likely to end up in the big house as she is in the White House. Remember that

Good luck with all that, you people will need it. lol.

Thanks for giving us the Obama Justice Department. They just subpoenaed the Clintons the other day!  

[Bojack Horseman]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

You can't control the consequences either. It can be argued that Obama is just as obstructionist by not naming a centrist judge.

Republicans would not approve a centrist judge, because they want a Scalia clone. Obama could appoint a moderate Republican and they would still not take it up. He'd have to nominate Ann Coulter to placate them.

Maybe you guys should have won the last elections then.

And maybe you guys should have won the 2012 election if you wanted Ann Coulter on the Supreme Court.

In all likelihood, this stunt will cost Republicans the 2016 election, so it really is plus for Democrats. Thanks.

Yes, you're a great prognosticator! AMAZING! Just ask recently reelected Senator Mark Udall.

Or wait....

I corrected your spelling. Maybe I don't get the predictions right all the time, but I'm fairly confident that 2016 will not be a good Republican year if they nominate a crazy person and spend the whole year leaving a vacancy on the court.

We aren't doing anything. We didn't kill Scalia. We will confirm the best person for the position. The balls in your court. Hopefully Obama will be competent for once and nominate somebody who can make everyone happy.

Also, while we have our issues with Trump, your nominee is just as likely to end up in the big house as she is in the White House. Remember that

That has to be the dumbest thing I've read all day. Obama could nominate Jesus Christ to the Supreme Court and the Republicans wouldn't even confirm him.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Could Obama try a recess appointment?

He could, but that'd be as bad for the Dems as if the GOP shot down a centrist with broad bipartisan support.

[DrScholl]

Conservatives would be the only ones to buy that activist talk. Obama doesn't need to cut a deal, because he is within his authority to select a nominee for the court. It's Republicans who have something to lose, not Obama.

Liberals have been predicting that the sheep--I mean American voters will see the light and toss out the "obstructionist" GOP for half a decade.  The American people just don't care about your whining.

I don't think Republicans antics helped them any in the 2012 election. Trump as the nominee and a long vacancy on the Supreme Court is a recipe for disaster. The American people just don't care for your insanity.

Yeah, they totally are more in line with the likes of Kay Hagan and Mark Udall. Oh wait...

A midterm and a presidential election are different. I recall everyone thought Obama re-election would lose because Republicans won big in 2010. I'm still amused at how devastated Romney was at his loss.

So, elections only matter when Democrats win. Good to know!

That's not what I said. It's common knowledge that midterm and presidential election results are quite different. You are banking on Trump winning because Hagan and Udall lost, which makes no sense.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Justice Committee Chairman Senator Grassley is now saying that Obama won't get to appoint a new Justice.

LOL @ all the Democrats who voted FF on the poll we had about him recently.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The Senate works on unanimous consent, if I were Reid, I would place a unanimous  hold in the Senate. This cant go on forever, but Abe Fortas tactic shouldnt ever be used.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

You can't control the consequences either. It can be argued that Obama is just as obstructionist by not naming a centrist judge.

Republicans would not approve a centrist judge, because they want a Scalia clone. Obama could appoint a moderate Republican and they would still not take it up. He'd have to nominate Ann Coulter to placate them.

Maybe you guys should have won the last elections then.

And maybe you guys should have won the 2012 election if you wanted Ann Coulter on the Supreme Court.

In all likelihood, this stunt will cost Republicans the 2016 election, so it really is plus for Democrats. Thanks.

Yes, you're a great prognosticator! AMAZING! Just ask recently reelected Senator Mark Udall.

Or wait....

I corrected your spelling. Maybe I don't get the predictions right all the time, but I'm fairly confident that 2016 will not be a good Republican year if they nominate a crazy person and spend the whole year leaving a vacancy on the court.

We aren't doing anything. We didn't kill Scalia. We will confirm the best person for the position. The balls in your court. Hopefully Obama will be competent for once and nominate somebody who can make everyone happy.

Also, while we have our issues with Trump, your nominee is just as likely to end up in the big house as she is in the White House. Remember that

That has to be the dumbest thing I've read all day. Obama could nominate Jesus Christ to the Supreme Court and the Republicans wouldn't even confirm him.

Read my above posts about how a centrist can be nominated.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Justice Committee Chairman Senator Grassley is now saying that Obama won't get to appoint a new Justice.

LOL @ all the Democrats who voted FF on the poll we had about him recently.

Newsflash: Moderate Senators don't exist.

Not true. Moderate Republican Senators don't exist.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Justice Committee Chairman Senator Grassley is now saying that Obama won't get to appoint a new Justice.

LOL @ all the Democrats who voted FF on the poll we had about him recently.

Newsflash: Moderate Senators don't exist.

Not true. Moderate Republican Senators don't exist.

^^^^

Moderates make up about a third of the Democratic caucus.

[cinyc]

Could Obama try a recess appointment?

Only if McConnell is stupid enough to allow the Senate to go into recess.  I doubt he is.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Could Obama try a recess appointment?

Only if McConnell is stupid enough to allow the Senate to go into recess.  I doubt he is.

Yeah, they are going to hold down the fort all the way through January.

[DrScholl]

And now there are conservatives on Twitter claiming that Scalia was murdered. You knew it was coming.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Could Obama try a recess appointment?

Only if McConnell is stupid enough to allow the Senate to go into recess.  I doubt he is.

Yeah, they are going to hold down the fort all the way through January.

Which means they can only delay an appointment until January 3, 2017.

[The Other Castro]

And people wonder why Democrats are favored to retain the White House. This kind of childish behavior on the part of Congressional Republicans is exactly why most people hate politics.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

And people wonder why Democrats are favored to retain the White House. This kind of childish behavior on the part of Congressional Republicans is exactly why most people hate politics.

Again, we've been doing this for years. Why did we win the last midterms?

[MT Treasurer]

And people wonder why Democrats are favored to retain the White House.

Certainly not because of this.

[Antonio the Sixth]

And people wonder why Democrats are favored to retain the White House. This kind of childish behavior on the part of Congressional Republicans is exactly why most people hate politics.

Again, we've been doing this for years. Why did we win the last midterms?

Because nobody showed up to vote. That's the only reason Republicans ever win any election since 2010.

[The Other Castro]

And people wonder why Democrats are favored to retain the White House.

Certainly not because of this.

It goes with the theme of constant Republican obstructionism of any kind of agenda that it doesn't agree with 100%.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

TNVol, declaring Heitkamp as liberal as Cruz is conservative is beyond dumb.