If the GOP were to prevent Obama from nominating a Supreme...

[hexola]

Doesn't that open the door for Obama himself to be nominated?

(Assuming a DEM next president)

The GOP better think long and hard about their strategery here!!!

Remember that smile Ms. Clinton gave when asked if she would put Obama on the Supreme!?

[FreakinDJ]

1. I think the obstructionist tag won't go in their favor

It opens the door for a Dem candidate

[B Calm]

3. The MAJORITY of Americans voted for OBAMA and he is the voice of Americans. I agree

obstruction would not go in the favor of the republican party. The democrats have been waiting a long time for a liberal Supreme Court, now it's time for the republicans to do the same.

[rogerashton]

2. Their majority in the Senate is not at all safe, either.

270 to win considers 47 states safe for the pubs, 9 contested. A dead-even tied Senate, with everything decided by the VEEP, seems to me the most probable outcome -- but a one-seat majority for the Dems is also a strong possibility.

http://www.270towin.com/2016-senate-election/

[hoosierlib]

6. Indiana is up for grabs...

If Todd Young gets kicked off the ticket (very real possibility), they will get stuck with Marlin Stutzman (who is a Tea Part dipshit in the mold of Richard Mourdock). We have Barron Hill running who won a conservative house district back in the mid-2000s. He's a moderate, but he stands a good shot.

[rogerashton]

9. Pennsylvania similar.

Toomey, a Club-For-Growth apparatichik, will face a strong challenge -- maybe by Admiral Joe Sestak, though the opposition to him by the party insiders may be a problem. I like Joe, but I think Katie McGinty might be a better candidate. Our primary is in April.

Generally, this is a good reason to support Demoderates in Senate elections where the alternative is any Publican.

[davidpdx]

4. This is one time I'd like to see both campaigns (both Hillary and Sanders)

say that if a nominee is not confirmed by the time he leaves office that they would nominate Obama. The ole' good cop bad cop routine.

[Red Knight]

5. Why don't we just let voters decide the Supreme Court?

That's basically what the GOP is saying.

Well...I haven't noticed that we vote for Justices. It seems they are appointed. It is the president's job to put up a nominee and the senate to confirm or deny that nominee. The president is going to do his constitutional job--but the hypocritical lying Republicans who walk around with copies of the Constitution in their pockets are going to ignore what they don't like.

I will never accept these frauds lying and whining about Constitution this or that. It only means something to them when they can twist it to support their political agenda.

President Obama should start making that point every day they leave his nominee sit.

[davidn3600]

8. The Senate has the right to reject the nominee

Obama can nominate someone, but the Senate can easily just reject the nominee. There is nothing unconstitutional about that.

The Senate can also leave it vacant as long as they want. There is nothing in the Constitution that says there must be 9 justices to hear cases. In fact, the Congress can even change the number. The Constitution does not specify a number. Congress sets that number.

The very first Supreme Court only had 5 justices. And it has actually changed several times. In 1866, the Congress didn't want President Andrew Johnson to nominate any vacancies. So they changed the number to 7. Andrew Johnson, as you may know, was impeached by the House. So there serious tension there between him and the Congress. Once Johnson left office, the Congress set the number to 9 in 1869 where it has stayed since.

So there is no Constitutional crisis here. The president nominates for the Supreme Court. The Senate though has the power of confirmation and can determine how the court is organized.

[onenote]

7. No way that he wants the job. No way he'll get it.

He certainly wouldn't get confirmed if the repubs continue to control the Senate and even if we capture a majority of the Senate - which is by no means a given - I highly doubt he would want the job and I highly doubt that either Bernie or Hillary would nominate him -- too many conflicts (i.e., there are still cases in the pipeline that involve Obama's own actions).

[kentuck]

10. He would be a great Supreme Court Justice.

[wheniwasincongress]

11. While I'd love to see him as a judge,

he probably doesn't want to be one, at least/especially so soon after his presidency.

[former9thward]

12. I believe Obama wants to follow the Bill Clinton example

of a post presidency vs. the Jimmy Carter example. He is going to make a lot of money like Clinton did. SC justices don't make much money so I don't think Obama wants to go that route.