Yes, of course. These assholes’ refrain of ‘teh democarts would do the same thing!!’ might actually carry some weight if they had not refused to fill a seat for nearly a year entirely due to partisan politics. Fuck you, Chuck. Die in pain.
I mean, it’s disappointing, but when the other side is literally in favor of executing babies and then eating the executed babies and then selling the executed babies into child pornography sex slavery, what can you do, really?
Yeah, the drumbeat of one senator after another saying that they’ll vote to confirm pretty much makes this entire thing academic.
It’s gonna happen, and it’s gonna happen before November 3rd.
There is nothing the Democrats can do to stop it.
rei
5355
Well not unless McConnell dies somehow. With or without help from friendly Canadians mailing Ricin.
Canuck
5356
Does it really matter if they do it before the election rather than after the election? I mean, they already have a 5-3 advantage. Maybe if they get someone in before the election then it will piss off even more people and get them out to vote. And those who might have come out to vote for Trump to get that supreme court seat filled won’t feel as energized because it will already be done.
Tim_N
5357
Isn’t one potential D senator going to maybe take his seat very soon after the election? If so, if you add him + the 2 GOP senators who have already said no (assuming these are genuine commitments and aren’t retracted when Mitch realises he needs them), then the future of the SC will be in the hands of Romney. What all the other GOP senators do don’t matter. Although, I am sceptical that Romney would turn down Trump’s SC nomination. So probably not much either way.
Yes, if Mark Kelly should defeat Martha McSally in Arizona, it appears that by state law he should be seated upon certification of the vote (the seat is the one won by John McCain in 2016.)
That would seem to put pressure on Mitch to get this done fairly quickly, as far as these things go.
Menzo
5359
This will be done and sealed before November 3rd, for certain. In fact, I expect it to be done in the next few weeks. Republicans are definitely going to want to run on the fact that they’ve turned the corner on the Supreme Court and that the end of Roe v. Wade is coming.
That might be a massive tactical mistake.
Roe v Wade is a car.
Republicans are a dog that has barked furiously at the car for decades.
They are probably in better shape barking at it than actually catching it. There are a number of mainline protestant (non-evangelical) protestant voters in the rust belt who are Trump voters who are also pro-choice and this is not a super great strategy or tactic at all.
Menzo
5361
I don’t disagree with this assessment at all. But I still think that’s what’s going to happen.
Remember, it’s not like the fight is over when Roe v. Wade is struck down. At that point it becomes a state-by-state battle to outlaw abortion, and of course the next Federal-level fight is for punishment for those who do get abortions.
There will still be plenty to push for.
RichVR
5362
Especially if Amy Coney Barrett is appointed.
Menzo
5363
We don’t know what the eventual nominee is going to do, but what we do know with 100% certainty is that Trump will nominate the person his overlords assume will be the most likely to vote to overturn.
Trump will, of course, prefer the person who promises supreme loyalty to him personally in their meeting. He’s not going to take a chance about how the SC will rule in the inevitable election lawsuits and then the inevitable criminal proceedings against him after he’s out of office.
Timex
5365
The thing is, even if RvW were overturned, it’s not like abortions suddenly become illegal.
It just means that fucked up backwards States could make them illegal. But I skeptical that even they would actually want to.
Like trigger says, this is like the ACA. It’s useful to the GOP as Rallying cry. They don’t actually want to DO it.
Aren’t abortions already extremely hard to get in some fucked up red states?
Meanwhile, Yglesias chews it all over:
Enidigm
5368
If you believe abortion is murder you’re not going to be content with leaving it up to the states.
Timex
5369
I think Romney is one of the few that actually opposes abortion on moral principle, rather than partisanship. He actually thinks it’s murdering a baby.
I don’t agree with him, but i respect his position much now than someone like Trump who uses it as a political cudgel, while paying women to have abortions.
I view Romney’s impeachment vote considerably more charitably (indeed, admiringly) than some folks here, but I don’t think its meaning can be expanded beyond that particular issue (or, if you want to frame it more cynically, beyond Romney’s attempt to triangulate himself within a post-Trump GOP). It certainly never meant he was ‘one of us.’ Still, if he doesn’t call out the flagrant bad-faith behavior of the McConnell Senate, that is disappointing.
I think he will but there won’t be a fourth.
