So tell me if I am wrong about my predictions regarding Scalia's replacement.

[stevebreeze]

President Obama has already said he will put forth a nomination. That's a given here are some assumptions.
The nominee will be a moderate.
If you, and most of you will have read anything about the President in Springfield last week, he was saying basically we should all get along. If for no other reason Pres Obama wants to appear reasonable. Even a moderate would be a move left from Scalia. It has been decades since a USSC nominee has been to the left of his or her predecessor. I don't know if it will be Sri Srinivasan, who's name has been mentioned, but you can be sure it will be someone with record or reason he should be targeted as "too Liberal" whatever that means.
The GOP will block any nominee President Obama picks.
No matter how qualified no matter if they just voted for them in another position. You heard at the GOP debate, and you have heard Mitch McConnell. They didn't have time to think about it, and they didn't need to, they will oppose anyone. It will make them look petty and small and but some, maybe most of the GOP senators up for reelection in a bind. With the exception of tax cuts most of the desired changes the GOP has made federally, have been through the USSC rulings. They can not afford to have a more moderate court so they will stick to obstructionism. It's been years since obstructionism has hurt them so that is what they will do.
The public will hate the partisan BS and take the GOP to task for it.
It will drive up Democratic participation rates, and the Democratic candidate will win. They will have obvious coattails in the Senate, probably not enough to turn the house, but it will be a big win for us in November.

So am I wrong in this analysis? If so where?

[FrenchieCat]

1. It will most likely be someone already vetted and confirmed for a Federal Judgeship....

By this Senate, as that would save a lot of time....which we don't have a lot of,

I think that is why Sri Srinivasan's name is floating up, as he fits the criteria above.

[stevebreeze]

3. It also has a short paper trail. Not much to opose him on.

[tularetom]

2. Attila the Hun would be an improvement over Scalia

But of course being Obama, he won't want to make any waves with a really liberal court appointment.

So he'll appoint a really mushy moderate, the republicans in the senate will go apeshit and whine like this moderate is to the left of Lenin and the president will find somebody even more moderate and the game will go on until Obama has negotiated away any hope of getting the type of justice he told us he wanted to appoint. So we'll go into the general election with an empty seat on the court.

But I don't think its going to be any help in the election. Everybody knows how Obama does business, and many Democratic voters blame him for failing to stand up to congress. So that the fact that the republicans drag their feet is discounted before the votes are cast. Hopefully, voters will not blame the Democratic candidate for the failure of the parties to come to agreement on a justice. If we do end up with a Democratic chief executive, he can start with a clean slate. And he can forge his own relationship with the congress and possibly achieve a better end result.

[stevebreeze]

4. You know and I know how Obama has done bussiness, but I don't think the general pubic does as much

Most people don't pay that much attention, and only see the fighting, but I think this is a clear bright red line the GOP will be crossing.

[jaysunb]

7. Get over yourself.

This sly bullshit about, " Everybody knows how Obama does business, and many Democratic voters blame him for failing to stand up to congress."is pretty fucked up from my perspective. It's one thing to not get your pony, but to imply that "everyone " somehow sees the President as a failure , is pure horseshit...

[stevebreeze]

8. I am not trying to imply Obama has been a falure, I am saying outright that he has bent over

backwards for those who will no bend an inch.

[jaysunb]

9. My response was not to you. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. GOP will decide that it is better to confirm a moderate now than a liberal next February

They'll also reason that confirming sooner rather than later will remove it as an election issue, either for their own angry base or for ordinary people sick of their bullshit. They have 24 Senate seats up for grabs, including some in very blue states. Kirk is probably -1 already in Illinois, for example, but he'll definitely get the shitcan if he blocks a SC nom.

The current bluster is meant to move the choice more moderate; it's simply not serious. They'll get their ducks in a row and figure out who needs to vote which way. I predict somebody like Sri Srinivasan will be confirmed by summer.

[mountain grammy]

6. I agree. I think if the vacancy remains at the time of the election

Democratic participation will go through the roof. If not, I think I'll give up and ride off into the sunset.

[earthshine]

10. The GOP base eats it up. They love political obstruction and openly stated vitriol to the left.

Obstructing Obama will not turn off republican voters. As for democrats, that it will piss us off does not mean more votes. Are we not already plenty pissed at this Congress?

The GOP will do whatever they can to block it all the way to 2017. They certainly don't want the left to have a SCOTUS majority any sooner than is necessary.

I do not expect Obama to fight hard, here. This is not a man who likes to make waves.

[Wounded Bear]

11. I hope you're right about Dem voter turnout going up...

but I wonder. A lot of people don't care much about the court.