What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Oexmelin]

Really? I mean, even the Republicans who may be ready to jettison Trump (are there any?) know that a Supreme Court justice is the bigger prize, including among their zealous constituants.

[Admiral Yi]

Really? I mean, even the Republicans who may be ready to jettison Trump (are there any?) know that a Supreme Court justice is the bigger prize, including among their zealous constituants.

I hold open the possibility that some senators will be bothered by the hypocrisy.  Mitt for example hasn't announced his position AFAIK.

[Oexmelin]

I mostly read that as theater for the press (see: the Kavanaugh hearings) to safeguard some sort of respectability. Hypocrisy hasn't done a lot of work amongst Republicans for the last four years, on much more minor issues to boot. 

[Admiral Yi]

I mostly read that as theater for the press (see: the Kavanaugh hearings) to safeguard some sort of respectability. Hypocrisy hasn't done a lot of work amongst Republicans for the last four years, on much more minor issues to boot.

Interested in a bet?  I would need odds.

[The Larch]

Really? I mean, even the Republicans who may be ready to jettison Trump (are there any?) know that a Supreme Court justice is the bigger prize, including among their zealous constituants.

I hold open the possibility that some senators will be bothered by the hypocrisy.  Mitt for example hasn't announced his position AFAIK.

He said he was ok with filling the vacancy right after RBG passed away.

[Sheilbh]

Really? I mean, even the Republicans who may be ready to jettison Trump (are there any?) know that a Supreme Court justice is the bigger prize, including among their zealous constituants.

I hold open the possibility that some senators will be bothered by the hypocrisy.  Mitt for example hasn't announced his position AFAIK.

What's the threshold - 51, right? (An aside - can Pence cast a tie-breaker?) Republicans have 53 Senators. My prediction would be that exactly 2 or 3 Senators vote against (depending on the Pence thing).

Edit: Incidentally - why would Mitt have an issue with this? She's the type of nominee any regular Republican President (including Mitt) would appoint. She's not some crazy fake-tanned TV judge that Trump likes. My bet would be Murkowski and Collins vote against, everyone else votes for.

[Admiral Yi]

What's the threshold - 51, right? (An aside - can Pence cast a tie-breaker?) Republicans have 53 Senators. My prediction would be that exactly 2 or 3 Senators vote against (depending on the Pence thing).

Pence is the tie breaker AFAIK.

[grumbler]

Really? I mean, even the Republicans who may be ready to jettison Trump (are there any?) know that a Supreme Court justice is the bigger prize, including among their zealous constituants.

I hold open the possibility that some senators will be bothered by the hypocrisy.  Mitt for example hasn't announced his position AFAIK.

What's the threshold - 51, right? (An aside - can Pence cast a tie-breaker?) Republicans have 53 Senators. My prediction would be that exactly 2 or 3 Senators vote against (depending on the Pence thing).

Edit: Incidentally - why would Mitt have an issue with this? She's the type of nominee any regular Republican President (including Mitt) would appoint. She's not some crazy fake-tanned TV judge that Trump likes. My bet would be Murkowski and Collins vote against, everyone else votes for.

All it takes is one defector on the Judiciary Committee, which is split 12-10.  On a tie vote, the committee will not forward the nomination.

[PJL]

I do think ramming in the nomination before the election has backfired on Trump & the Republicans, as I think it has energised wavering Democrats to go out & vote. It's not as though they were going to lose control of the SC has they not done this, they could have played it slow to help out Trump (as a carrot to Republican voters to go out & vote to ensure it goes through).

Of course it could be that Republicans think Trump is toast in this election (at least privately), so that is why it's being rushed through. Either way, it's ironically a good thing for the Democrats electorally.

[Valmy]

I would think waiting and then doing it in the lame duck period would be more cynical and strategic. But I am hardly some expert on procedure so maybe there is a reason they cannot do that.

[Caliga]

Mitt won't vote against her.  He hates Trump, but let's not forget he's super conservative.

[The Minsky Moment]

The Democrats have raised a ton of money off it, but holding the nomination up now doesn't put the money back in spigot.  All the more reason to secure the Court by approving.

The one thing I though might get some traction would be extracting a pledge that she recuse herself from a election disputes for the 2020 election.

[alfred russel]

Mitt won't vote against her.  He hates Trump, but let's not forget he's super conservative.

Some would even say he is severely conservative.

[Admiral Yi]

Mitt won't vote against her.  He hates Trump, but let's not forget he's super conservative.

Is he?  He didn't campaign for prez, either in the primiaries or the general as anything other than a centrist managerial can do type.

[DGuller]

Mitt won't vote against her.  He hates Trump, but let's not forget he's super conservative.

Some would even say he is severely conservative.