How about the statements made in 2018 by Graham? Or in the summer of 2020 by Chuck Grassley?
Just let those go by? Don’t bring them up at all? Is that your hot take?
rrmorton
5152
Weren’t we talking about senators looking to distance themselves from Trump if polls weren’t closer heading into Labor Day? This seems like an opportunity to do that. Maybe enough of them are starved to do something right for a change. (A boy can hope. That’s all he knows how to do.)
I went with the Crooked Media fund via Actblue.
tomchick
5154
I don’t think Telefrog is saying don’t confront Republicans with their hypocrisy. That’s a pretty uncharitable reading of his post. I think he’s just venting his frustration that they’re shameless about their hypocrisy. Every Republican knows by now that hypocrisy is a prerequisite to being a party member. It’s not that they don’t know. It’s that they don’t care.
-Tom
I know they don’t care, and that sucks. But anyone who even vaguely follows current events knows that, pretty much.
That doesn’t mean that their prior statements shouldn’t be thrown in their faces and that they shouldn’t have political capital burned for their dishonesty and moral vacuity though, and I would thus not categorize those putting those statements up for perusal in social media (and regular media, for that matter) as “idiots”.
It’s who they are. So rub it in. Make them pay. Own it. Every fucking cent of it.
rrmorton
5157
Absolutely. And don’t think nothing matters or that people aren’t paying attention because WE ARE.
Enidigm
5158
McConnell is going to play the odds, and what he does depends entirely on what the polls look like whether they’re going to keep the Senate or not.
If it looks like they’re going to lose both the Presidency and the Senate he’s actually likely to not push for an appointment, imo. Not because he can’t, but because the level of hypocrisy and bad faith politics will force the Dems to court pack - and then the GOP will lose the SC until, well forever, because it looks like the GOP is on the point of national collapse and they have just one more cycle to make money for their donors. He’d much rather save for the GOP a 5-4 Conservative Supreme Court than play a card badly and live with a 9-6 liberal SC for the rest of time.
If it looks like they’re going to keep the Senate, otoh, out comes the shit eating grins.
rrmorton
5160
I guess all our nerves are shredded this evening but I also took offense at frog’s “idiots” and “dumbasses” post. “Thinking they’re going to shame Republicans” isn’t the only reason to re-post those statements far and wide. Pointing out examples of their brazen hypocrisy seems like something we should totally be doing.
It’s like the oft-repeated “Trump can’t lose supporters” crap. He can and has been. Same goes for Mitch. Not all of America is onboard with the plan to throw all our rules and decency out the window. And defeatism is lame.
(Either I’ve gone mad or the post I was responding to isn’t here any more.)
Strollen
5161
That’s my view, which is why I’d want to Schumer to threat Mitch with very dire consequence if he even tries it. I’d rather not go full nuclear on the Republicans if we can guarantee no lame duck vote. Mitch just tells the President he doesn’t have the votes to get it through.
Plus I’d ad also threaten to admitting DC, and Puerto Rico as states and spliting California into 3 states, that 7 or 8 new Democratic senate seats. Sure there may be some court battles, but we just added 6 new Democrats to SCOTUS, and even if Breyer votes with the Republicans, that’s still an 8-7.
Alstein
5163
It wouldn’t.
Lot depends on whether Republicans think they can keep the Senate.
If they think they will- they’ll wait until lame duck session, or try to get concessions from the Dems to not do certain things (which the Dems should agree to, then immediately break their word, a Republican’s word means nothing)
If they think they won’t, they’ll ramrod a total loyalist in so they can steal the result whatever it is.
The question is, do Schumer and Manchin have the balls to fight back? If not, you can’t do anything about Manchin, but Schumer should be removed if he doesn’t.
CF_Kane
5164
It is more useful in motivating Democrats than in shaming Republicans. It hurts people like Susan Collins (and possibly Gardner), in close races, who are relying on some crossover votes from democrats or independents who like them based on their perceived moderation.
It also makes the case long term for court packing. I think our Senate leadership lacks the spine for it, but the best framing for court packing within the Senate caucus is that Republicans broke the norms already, and there is no going back. Convincing Joe Manchin to do his fucking job is as important as convincing voters on this.
KevinC
5165
My wife cried for an hour and a half last night. She’s honestly scared, scared for the country her two nieces (ages 24 and 20) may be living in. She’s politically active and one of her primary driving reasons has been the importance of women’s rights, particularly rights over their own bodies. I very much care about these things too but it really drove home how personal this is for her. She’s having nightmares of a scenario where the likes of Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, and the zealots on the religious right get to legislate control of her nieces’ bodies. And it’s not just abortion, it’s a worry of what if anything is next.
I’ve alternated between despondence and anger. This morning it’s more anger and determination. I just feel like we (liberals) can’t keep getting outplayed by following the rules the other side doesn’t play by anymore. I don’t know what it will take. Pack the courts, do whatever is necessary, pull out all the nuclear options. Because I feel like – even more than I have over the past four years – that we’re at a crisis point where we could lose this country, at least the one I recognize.
And honestly that scares me, because going nuclear is going to have consequences, but I feel like the other side has already gone there: collusion with hostile intelligence services, depriving Obama of his SC appointment, allowing COVID and forest fires to ravage what they view as enemy territory. It’s left me more worried about not pulling out all the stops at this juncture.
Given the way the Senate skews, if religious zealots and white nationalists are able to control that branch as well as pack the Supreme Court for decades? Tyranny of the minority for the rest of my adult life, likely. I won’t have it. I won’t fucking stand for it.
Paul Kane is the senior congressional correspondent for the Washington Post. He’s covered Mitch McConnell for years and years and years and knows him about as well as anyone in media does.
Per PK, McConnell has two motive forces above all: one is filling Supreme Court and other judicial vacancies…but especially the Supreme Court. The other is having a Republican majority in the Senate.
If it’s possible, Mitch will do the thing he thinks will satisfy both of those desires.
If he doesn’t think fulfilling both is possible, he’s going to do what he thinks will at least get him one of those things.
Which is me saying that I’m not sure how this plays out, necessarily (I think he tries to get a nominee to a floor vote by the end of October, personally), but keep those two things in mind as pieces are moved on the chessboard.
Alstein
5167
This is why I think he waits until lame duck. He knows he’ll get the court (and even if he fails, still a majority) , the Senate is in doubt, and Dems might pack the court if he loses.
McConnell: “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”
I dunno, I think an immediate statement to the effect that you’ll absolutely hold a vote on a nominee as soon as Trump names one doesn’t really signal that you want to wait. Call me crazy.
It’s possible he won’t have the votes, but I think he will.
McConnell’s staff is well aware that if Mark Kelly beats McSally, he could be seated by November 30. I’m not sure they trust Romney or even a possible lame duck Collins to get him his SCOTUS vote in a lame duck session.
Who controls the timing? I don’t really know.
McConnell needs 50 votes plus Pence, right? So he can lose Murkowski, Romney, and one other and still confirm Trump’s nominee. He’ll do that.
