Which Republican Senators would support Obama's Supreme Court nominee?

[blackhawk]

Maybe you should wait and see who Obama nominates first.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Give Der Fuhrer his selection of a SCN. Then let it go to hearing and when there aren't enough votes from Congress/Senate, Obama can try once again. After 3 or 4 attempts the elections will have happened, the liberal traitors will go to trial, and the new SCN, will be the final word on how to deal with traitors to the country. Cuba(Communist) is open for all you traitors that want Sanders or the Vagina for president. The Constitution does not ALLOW communism to work in America, even though you traitors keep trying to shove it down our throats. We are patiently waiting, but push us to far, and libs might not like it. McCarthyism

The word "McCarthyism" is not a neutral term, but now carries connotations of false, even hysterical, accusation, and of government attacks on the political minority. From the viewpoint of the political and cultural elite, the suppression of radicalism and radical organizations in the United States was a struggle against a dangerous subversive element controlled by a foreign power that posed a real danger to the security of the country, thus justifying extreme, even extra-legal measures. From the radical viewpoint it can be seen as class warfare.

The political minorities were Socialists who denied who they were. Today those minorities are in charge of the government and doing everything they can do justify class warfare. Shame dumbass liberals(redundant statement) don't learn history.

 

[MisterBeale]

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

It's not up to ANY of them. It's up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to move any potential nominee to the Senate. Not gonna happen. Only Graham has a vote there and I don't even think Goober is stupid enough to do something like that. In any event, if a nominee does move to the Senate there is the "nuclear option" which will prevent any up or down vote. Dream on Libs... not gonna happen.

I'm afraid you're going to have to go into this election waving the "obstructionist" banner to get your base riled up to get out the vote and HOPE you can keep Hillary out of prison long enough to win the White House.

Grassley decides if the Judiciary Committee holds hearings. Grassley has already begun to back peddle and said he would consider hearings, depending on who the nomination is. Translation=as long as the nomination is not an extremist and fits the definition of "moderate", a hearing will be held. Grassley is up for reelection this year.

Obama is a pawn of the internationalists.


The elites want open borders, and they want America to have no guns. This is their big opportunity.


Obama will nominate someone that looks like a moderate, quacks like a moderate, and walks like a moderate.



America won't know that the SOB is for giving every illegal that is here the right to full citizenship and all but deleting the right to private gun ownership until after the person is already confirmed.


And the internationalist, CFR, UN loyal Republicans certainly won't bother to find out.

This game is set up to screw over Americans and destroy their rights. Who ever this person will be, is going to be confirmed and it will be the end of the Republic as we all know it. It will make a Trump candidacy irrelevant.

 

[bodecea]

Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O

and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.

a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito

Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year

Especially considering that it comes across as childish and unprofessional to reject sight-unseen any Obama appointment....even before any are made.

 

[BlueGin]

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

Lindsay Graham in particular knows exactly what his constituents think of him siding with democrats. They reminded him everyday he was running for election on his website and FB page. It wasn't pretty.

I think Graham understands where he stands with his party

Makes him unlikely to step in line with McConnell

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

Lindsay Graham in particular knows exactly what his constituents think of him siding with democrats. They reminded him everyday he was running for election on his website and FB page. It wasn't pretty.

I think Graham understands where he stands with his party

Makes him unlikely to step in line with McConnell

Which is why his constituents hate him. He always votes against their wishes.

BTW name a non partisan Democrat.

That must be why his constituents have re-elected him for twenty years.He was a Representative in the House for eight years before becoming a Senator.

Lesser of two evil's. A left wing loon or Graham.

This is why term limits are needed.

Prime example

 

[bodecea]

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

Lindsay Graham in particular knows exactly what his constituents think of him siding with democrats. They reminded him everyday he was running for election on his website and FB page. It wasn't pretty.

I think Graham understands where he stands with his party

Makes him unlikely to step in line with McConnell

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

Lindsay Graham in particular knows exactly what his constituents think of him siding with democrats. They reminded him everyday he was running for election on his website and FB page. It wasn't pretty.

I think Graham understands where he stands with his party

Makes him unlikely to step in line with McConnell

Which is why his constituents hate him. He always votes against their wishes.

BTW name a non partisan Democrat.

That must be why his constituents have re-elected him for twenty years.He was a Representative in the House for eight years before becoming a Senator.

Lesser of two evil's. A left wing loon or Graham.

This is why term limits are needed.

Prime example

There ARE term limits...it's called having their unhappy constituents vote them out.

 

[rightwinger]

Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O

and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.

a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito

Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year

Especially considering that it comes across as childish and unprofessional to reject sight-unseen any Obama appointment....even before any are made.

Typically, the process to fill a seat takes two months
Typically, a judge is sitting in the seat until a replacement is confirmed

Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year, just because you don't like the man who is choosing is unprecedented partisanship

Will the non-batshit crazy Republicans in the Senate be willing to break that ground?

 

[Boss]

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

It's not up to ANY of them. It's up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to move any potential nominee to the Senate. Not gonna happen. Only Graham has a vote there and I don't even think Goober is stupid enough to do something like that. In any event, if a nominee does move to the Senate there is the "nuclear option" which will prevent any up or down vote. Dream on Libs... not gonna happen.

I'm afraid you're going to have to go into this election waving the "obstructionist" banner to get your base riled up to get out the vote and HOPE you can keep Hillary out of prison long enough to win the White House.

I have not questioned whether a Republican hissy fit can block a nomination

Let the Senate Judiciary Committee block an Obama nominee
Then the next
Then the next

While Democrats have blocked Republican nominees in the past, they have never prevented a Republican President from filling a Supreme Court seat

To do so sets a precedent for partisan blocking of nominees pending a Presidential election. If Republicans do it for one year, what prevents future Democratic Senates from doing it for two years?

Well we don't have that many SCOTUS justices die unexpectedly 9 months before an election. If the Democrat senate wants to try and drag their feet for two years on a republican nomination, they can do that... they almost DID do that with Reagan.

Look.... whether you like it or not, Obama is not going to get to pick some wackadoodle liberal to fill the seat of Antonin Scalia. Sorry... that ain't happening. Now, if he nominated Ted Cruz, I would be opposed to Republicans obstructing his pick.... but we both know there is zero possibility that will be the case.

 

[Valerie]

Thanks for pointing out how pathetic and partisan Congress is.

I think I am pointing out that Congress is not as partisan as McConnell thinks

I also said pathetic.
My point was, they wont be nominating/not nominating for the right reasons.
Both parties make me so fuckin sick

what a drama queen..

omfg elected officials are human and they get to vote on scotus appointments and everything!

it's just not right for them to vote with their informed opinions regarding possible public repercussions.

 

[Camp]

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

Lindsay Graham in particular knows exactly what his constituents think of him siding with democrats. They reminded him everyday he was running for election on his website and FB page. It wasn't pretty.

I think Graham understands where he stands with his party

Makes him unlikely to step in

Assuming even McConnell realizes he can't table a Supreme Court nomination for a year

1. Susan Collins (ME): traditionally the most bipartisan Republican

2. Lindsey Graham (SC): fresh off a Presidential defeat, not too beholden to how his party treated him

3. John McCain (AZ): The old Maverick with strong traditional views of the process

4. Lisa Murkowski (AK): Write in candidate who was abandoned by her party

5. Mark Kirk (IL): Up for election in a blue state

Lindsay Graham in particular knows exactly what his constituents think of him siding with democrats. They reminded him everyday he was running for election on his website and FB page. It wasn't pretty.

I think Graham understands where he stands with his party

Makes him unlikely to step in line with McConnell

Which is why his constituents hate him. He always votes against their wishes.

BTW name a non partisan Democrat.

That must be why his constituents have re-elected him for twenty years.He was a Representative in the House for eight years before becoming a Senator.

Lesser of two evil's. A left wing loon or Graham.

This is why term limits are needed.

Prime example

Term limits will never happen. Remember when the Republicans promised term limits in the 90's? They broke that promise before they new guys who made the promises even took their new oaths of office.

 

[TNHarley]

Thanks for pointing out how pathetic and partisan Congress is.

I think I am pointing out that Congress is not as partisan as McConnell thinks

I also said pathetic.
My point was, they wont be nominating/not nominating for the right reasons.
Both parties make me so fuckin sick

what a dram queen..

omfg elected officials are human and they get to vote on scotus appointments and everything!

it's just not right for them to vote with their informed opinions regarding possible public repercussions.

Public repercussions for their jobs shouldn't be an issue. Their issues are with the American people.

 

[BlueGin]

Thanks for pointing out how pathetic and partisan Congress is.

I think I am pointing out that Congress is not as partisan as McConnell thinks

I also said pathetic.
My point was, they wont be nominating/not nominating for the right reasons.
Both parties make me so fuckin sick

what a dram queen..

omfg elected officials are human and they get to vote on scotus appointments and everything!

it's just not right for them to vote with their informed opinions regarding possible public repercussions.

Public repercussions for their jobs shouldn't be an issue. Their issues are with the American people.

Exactly. Actions have consequences

 

[Boss]

Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..

It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.

 

[Rocko]

Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O

and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.

a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito

Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year

Nah. The average American isn't thinking they better fill the supreme court while Obozo is still in office. Most people don't give a rat's ass whether Obozo appoints another justice or not.

 

[Boss]

Public repercussions for their jobs shouldn't be an issue.

Neither should a justices politics. But it's the world we now live in.

Once was the time, a Scalia would have been the template for a SCOTUS justice. Someone who is going to look at the original intent of the constitution and rule accordingly as opposed to some "living document" idea that we must re-interpret it and establish law from the bench.

 

[BlueGin]

Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O

and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.

a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito

Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year

Nah. The average American isn't thinking they better fill the supreme court while Obozo is still in office. Most people don't give a rat's ass whether Obozo appoints another justice or not.

Most of Obozo's voters dont even know what the Supreme Court is.

 

[Valerie]

Thanks for pointing out how pathetic and partisan Congress is.

I think I am pointing out that Congress is not as partisan as McConnell thinks

I also said pathetic.
My point was, they wont be nominating/not nominating for the right reasons.
Both parties make me so fuckin sick

what a dram queen..

omfg elected officials are human and they get to vote on scotus appointments and everything!

it's just not right for them to vote with their informed opinions regarding possible public repercussions.

Public repercussions for their jobs shouldn't be an issue. Their issues are with the American people.

that's what i'm talking about... no kidding.

blindly obstructing this nominee is playing politics.

the op is asking who on the right would possibly rise above.

 

[Camp]

Leaving the most important judicial seat in our nation empty for over a year..

It won't be for over a year. It would be a little less than a year and in case you didn't know, the SCOTUS still hears and rules on cases in the meantime. A 4-4 tie simply is the same as a defeat... or fails to pass... however you want to look at it. And hey... Ruth Bater Nutbag is pushing 83... she could kick it at any time. Then we'll be back to a 7-man court like we had before FDR packed it.

FDR did not pack the court. There have been nine justices since 1869.

 

[Valerie]

Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year

exactly, the proof is in the pudding.

let the nomination process proceed as it should, then the American people will see for themselves...

 

[Boss]

Hopefully they listen to their constituents on this matter: so that should make the total, O

and then we get to witness all the Faux outrage from the two faced hypocrites which would include Obama and his cult followers.

a post from someone who see what's coming
In 2006 Obama voted to filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Alito

Many of the Republican Senators are from blue states and have constituents who will not tolerate partisan gridlock in an election year

Nah. The average American isn't thinking they better fill the supreme court while Obozo is still in office. Most people don't give a rat's ass whether Obozo appoints another justice or not.

Most of Obozo's voters dont even know what the Supreme Court is.

I bet it Crowder or somebody did one of those "man on the street" interviews... they'd think it was some kind of pizza place!