Josh Marshall: A Lot Weaker Than They Look

[babylonsister]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-lot-weaker-than-they-look

A Lot Weaker Than They Look

ByJosh Marshall
Published February 24, 2016, 1:48 PM EST 8210 views


As I said before, let's not forget the massive stakes for Republicans in the next Supreme Court nominee. Many Republicans would genuinely prefer to maintain control of the Supreme Court than elect the next President. Republican control of the Court, a de facto reality for more than a generation with total control going back a decade, is that big a deal. Yet there's a lot more weakness to Senate Republicans' embrace of the "three nos" yesterday than I think most observers, certainly most Beltway observers, realize. Not just no confirmation, but no vote, no hearings, not even courtesy meetings. They even took this bizarre step of having all the members of the Senate Judiciary sign a letter pledging absolutely not to hold any hearings of any Obama nominee. The signatures appear to be in ink not blood. But who knows?

As I said, I don't need to be convinced that Republicans will do anything to block President Obama from choosing Scalia's successor. But I think they protest way, way too much about the brittleness of their position and the potential electoral fallout. The emphaticness of the "three nos" isn't really necessary to convince anyone at this point. It's to make the point so ferociously, totally, almost maniacally that they can actually end the debate now. But I doubt they actually can. And I think the fallout for Republican senators up for reelection in swing states this year is potentially far greater than people realize.

A colleague told me that he can't believe someone as savvy as Mitch McConnell can't read the electoral tea leaves. And perhaps he can. He probably can. But that only tells me what's behind the ferocity of the "three nos." They need to end the debate now to avoid the political fallout. It is entirely within Mitch McConnell's power to simply never hold a vote, which is all that really matters for the Court. But managing the politics is another matter. And that is why it is critical to end the debate now.

If the Democrats are smart about this, this is a far more potent electoral cudgel in Senate elections than most folks realize. Start with the given that this battle is life and death for partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans. But those people seldom determine statewide elections, certainly not in swing states. Lightly affiliated Democrats and Republicans and actual swing voters are highly attuned to charges about political dysfunction, refusal to do your job and so forth.

So let's start with this. Republican senators won't meet with the nominee. We get it. But I'm pretty sure Democratic senators will meet with him or her and make quite a show of it. I'm also fairly sure the White House will keep trying to set up meetings with Republican Senators and make a show of the on-going refusals. Senate challengers will press it in their campaigns too. And I have little doubt the White House will be sure to arrange meetings with the couple Republican senators who've so far bucked the unified front.

snip//

The smarter Democrats must see this. And I suspect the Republicans do too. That's why they are doing everything they possibly can to shut this process down before it starts. That's the key. It is entirely within their power not to hold a vote. The public spectacle of nine months of stonewalling, the political fallout and the narrative it creates is not. That's what's behind the almost maniacal blood oath drama of the "three nos". This is not close to over unless the Democrats agree to make it over. And I doubt they will.

[Bucky]

1. Take a page from President Jed Bartlett's playbook.

Drive on down Pennsylvania Avenue, sit outside McConnell's office and wait for him to come out and, in front of the cameras, request that the Senate schedule a meeting time for a highly qualified SCOTUS nominee. Just stand there and let Tippy sputter out an answer about why he can't schedule a single hearing over the next 10 months.

Then have a press release ready on "all'' the accomplishments of the 114th Congress.

[blm]

2. I concur with this strategy.

; )

[babylonsister]

3. Sounds like a great plan to me! nt

[Andy823]

4. Excellent idea. nt

[eggplant]

9. +1.

[NewJeffCT]

11. That would be a fantastic idea

make sure the entire news media is there. I mean, some of the initial speculation was Sri Srinivasan, who was confirmed to the lower court 97-0 several years back. And now they can't vote on a guy they confirmed 97-0?

[maddiemom]

20. Great idea!

And sadly, not at all impossible, just highly improbable. Paints a great picture of Pres. Obama and his Secret Service guys (and cameras) just hanging around, waiting for Mitch to come out. I didn't see that episode, so it sounded even better to me.

[wiggs]

5. Someone with a bully pulpit could not only address this specific issue

but tie it up with 7 years of bad behavior and obstructionism. Easy case to make...all the judges delayed, double the rate of filibusters -- sometimes of republican ideas, recess trickery, meeting of gop during inauguration to discuss obstructionism strategy, mcconnell saying his top priority is to make Obama a one term POTUS, etc.. An hour's worth of summary to reinforce the point and undermine the gop's attempt to couch this as taking the high road.

A prime time TV spot...an hour of summarizing his experience with this unpatriotic, undemocratic, extreme gop.

[chapdrum]

6. Pardon my naivete, but

people like Mr. Marshall are wasting their time (but if they're getting paid to do so, that aspect is understood).

It's a disgrace that we are obligated to take the Republican Party seriously, at all.

Even a cursory review of their past and present "leaders" shows very clearly that they are petulant, overgrown children (too bad it doesn't end there).

Again, please pardon my naivete.

[lunatica]

29. It isn't naivete, it's that your description of the Republicans in office

also applies to their base. People will support what they see as a reflection of themselves. Their base doesn't see petulance because it mirrors their actions which they perceive as being resolved, or principled, or honorable.

We do the same thing.

[NoMoreRepugs]

7. 'someone as savvy as Mitch McConnell'.... I gagged when I read that...

made me hunt for some Jon Stewart turtle impressions to get my stomach back in order

[chapdrum]

13. McConnell is savvy all right.

At being seditious.

[lark]

8. Exactly!

If they stonewall the nominee and the D's use this non-stop in advertising and in the media, on every talking heads show, etc. they could very well end their control of the Senate. So, just say the worst happens and the Repugs win, but the D's have control of the senate, Nuclear Option all the way, and the Repugs will not be able to select their candidate. It would be far better for us progressives to have the Senate keep the SCOTUS at 4-4 rather than let another Scalia/Thomas or Alito type on the bench. I just don't trust the corporatists like Feinstein and Schumer to support the nuclear option. That's the only problem with this picture. Well, other than the gigantic problem this country and it's entire working class will face if a Repug becomes president!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. As long as no meeting, no hearing, no vote, Obama & Democrats can keep bringing it up

There are multiple ways.

Democrats can hold their own informal hearings.

Democrats can get bar associations to vet the nominees.

Obama can meet with the nominee multiple times.

I'm sure creative people can think of other ways too.

A nominee can withdraw after some period of time and Obama can put another nominee up, a little more liberal, and the whole circus can start all over again, keeping it in the news, which is just what the Turtle doesn't want.

[Bucky]

18. Yeah but how humiliating for that nominee

Judges by temperament expect to be dignified all the time. They expect people to wait on them, not to wait for others to meet with them. I doubt there assets many super qualified judges put there willing to be a prop in this sort of theater. None wants to be seen as that eager for the gig. They want to appear called to service, not merely allowed in thru the door

[TrollBuster9090]

12. Charles "Sauerkraut" Krauthammer said exactly the same thing on FOX yesterday.

I watch Fox News so you don't have to:

Yesterday on the Special Report Panel, George Will said it was a political mistake for Republicans to refuse to even meet with a nominee, because it only proves what most people already suspect: that "BOTH SIDES" are NOT responsible for gridlock in Washington. It's only the Republicans who are acting like petulant children. Will then said they should just go through the motions of having hearings, and then take a vote and reject whatever candidate Obama puts forward as being 'too liberal.'

Krauthammer then piped up and said "George I don't have your faith in the GOP Senators being able to handle this with skill and brains. If they even START this process, they'll get rolled." Then went on to say they have to put up a 'solid stone wall,' and not let the process even get started. Then he (accurately) blathered about how another Obama Justice on the Supreme Court would change it for a generation etc...

The beautiful part, however, is that the GOP is stuck between a rock and a hard place. They either let Obama's nominee through, given that Obama has a history of appointing 'moderate' judges to the SCOTUS, ...or risk having Trump win their nomination, and turn off enough 'moderate' Republicans that they actually loose control of the Senate. So, they could end up getting an even MORE liberal justice after the election. I think there's a very strong possibility of that. In fact, if they blow the election, and lose control of the Senate, Ginsburg might decide it's a good time to retire, and the next Democratic President can make TWO appointments right off the bat.

[blackspade]

14. "This is not close to over unless the Democrats agree to make it over. And I doubt they will."

Don't bet on that.
I never underestimate the ability of triangulating Democrats to fuck up a political advantage.

[ccinamon]

23. exactly my thoughts...

At the moment I can't think of a single time deems took advantage of repub misstep!

[Major Hogwash]

15. This could go on all summer long, maybe even longer.

And the Democrats in the Senate have been singing "Time Is On My Side" ever since Justice Scalia passed away.

It can only get worse --- for the Republicans!!!!!!

[Jerry442]

17. Actuarily, maybe not.

Ginsburg - 82
Kennedy - 79
Breyer - 77
Thomas - 67
Alito - 65
Roberts - 61
Sotomayor - 61
Kagan - 55

[Bucky]

19. Those Clinton nominees are ready for rotation

But the republican strategy of nominating 50 yr olds is paying off. Both of Clinton's noms were near 60. That was a hell of a gamble. Obama's done better with noms in their mid 50s, but you can bet the next GOP prez will be looking at 30 somethings to appoint

[Jerry442]

16. "If the Democrats are smart about this..."

{sigh}

Now there's a leap of faith.

[mountain grammy]

21. Of course the court is important to Republicans

It's how they "win" elections.

[Raster]

26. Ding! Winnah!

[lunatica]

30. You are so right!

Don't stop reminding us. It's easy to forget what happened 15 years ago.

[ccinamon]

22. bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha --- funniest thing I've heard in days!

snip: This is not close to over unless the Democrats agree to make it over. And I doubt they will.

WHEN have the Democrats stood up to the Republicans in any significant manner in the last 16 years?

I admit they *may* have and I have forgotten about it, but at the moment, I can't think of one.

After years of being totally lame-ass and caving, I don't see the democrats having enough strength of character to stand up to the republicans *now* and holding meetings on a new justice if Obama suggests one.

[scubadude]

24. There are some good points here, but I ask this...

Who owns the media and who will use it to spin their point across millions of screens again and again? It sure isn't the Democrats....

[Raster]

27. This is the 21st century, scubadude, and they don't own the 'Net...

...at least not yet. Not that they aren't trying...

[scubadude]

33. Very true Raster, but that won't matter for millions of low information voters.

Will it?

[Raster]

34. No, probably not...

...although I gotta say, I am seeing more of an "information awareness" this election cycle that I have not seen before. Could it be that all those Millennials are not "just texting" on their smart phones???

[pscot]

25. Unless the President nominates a Republican

in which case all they have to do is vote to confirm.

[Gothmog]

28. I predict that the GOP will give the nominee a hearing and a vote

[houston16revival]

31. This is a nascent legislative coup d'etat

to see how much the people will put up with

[spooky3]

32. Mitch is betting that he'll please Big $ and the Tea Party more

Than he will tick off potential voters for the Dem nominee.

I hope voters prove him VERY wrong.

At the very least Dems need to hammer home the obstruction message and how it affects Americans' daily lives to have a chance of motivating them.