McConnell did have history on his side. The last time a SC nominee was confirmed in an election year where the Senate and Presidency were two different parties was in 1880.
By which you mean 1988, right?
Hmm. I vividly recall Hillary Clinton saying in a recent interview that Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances if Trump is declared the winner on Nov 3.
Yes. Given the blue shift phenomenon and the fact that Trump has made it clear he intends to try and insist he won before the votes are counted that's just reasonable.
Neither should concede before the result is solid.
If I recall correctly, the GOP controlled the Senate at the time of Obama's last quarter. (I.e. Obama during his tenure as POTUS had 4 two year quarters.)
There was no way Obama could succeed in nominating a Liberal justice at the time.
Which is why he nominated a very moderate justice like Garland.
I suspect the GOP has been planning for this day since before it was even made public that Ginsburg had cancer. They have ready to go their preferred candidate or candidates.
Remember that Trump announced his list 10 days ago.
President Trump on Wednesday announced a list of 20 more people he would consider nominating to the Supreme Court, including three sitting Republican senators.
www.foxnews.com
Most people close to her said they knew she wasn't going to make it much longer starting about 2 weeks ago.
Expect an announcement today or tomorrow since time is of the essence.
I was saying earlier that McConnel would hold off until after the inauguration because it would allow it to be used as a tool to whip up turnout and protect vulnerable senators.
Seeing how quickly he put out his statement, though, I have come around to the idea he will happily sacrifice those pieces in order to make sure they can control the court for a generation.
Announcement of nominee before Wednesday and confirmation by Friday October 2nd.
They seem to be even more worried than we think about winning without the Court deciding the election.
They also need the new justice there to kill the ACA.
The longer you let the vulnerable senators think about it the worse it is. McConnell probably figures they will just lose anyway.
Ram it through and dare the Democrats to pack the court because they probably won't and if you win it doesn't matter.
The next next step will be the formation of a senate committee which will have hearings to ask questions of the nominee.
No committees.
Just bring it to a floor vote.
Claim it is crucial to have a full set of justices in case something happens with the election.
That's bullshit, but McConnell doesn't care about spouting bullshit.
Rogue GOP senators like Collins, Murkowski and Romney.
Irrelevant. He can lose all 3 and it is a tie then Pence breaks the tie.
Maybe Romney votes no, probably not.
At worst, they vote no on a procedural vote to bring it directly to the floor and then vote yes for the nominee.
Murkowski is already on record as saying she wouldn't support putting a nominee through until after the election.
She will walk it back. She will say she does think fair's fair, but given the chance of a contested election she will have to reluctantly vote to confirm. (Or she will abstain, since it will do nothing to stop the confirmation but she can say she technically didn't vote before the election.) Besides, she said it before Ginsburg died so I don't think you can count it as a real statement. She isn't up for re-election though, so she could go either way.
Romney hates Trump so he'd probably vote against the nomination too.
He is the only one I think is more than 50% to vote against. Still wouldn't be surprised if he rolls, though.
That leaves Collins as the true wild card. She does have principle
That's a weird statement. What principles do you think she has?
She is in bad shape in her election right now and if McConnell thinks she is a lost cause he isn't going to help her out. Voting no won't win her back any democrats or independents and will cost her GOP support.
She will make concerned noises and then do what she's told as usual.
Hate to say it, but...
All of this shit could have been avoided if Ginsburg had retired under Obama when the Democrats had control of the Senate. Obama would have been able to nominate a younger Liberal justice to take Ginsburg's place.
But instead her hubris got in the way and now 7 weeks short of the election, we are where we are at.
This is true, unfortunately. She should have resigned in 2013 after her first big cancer scare.
One more wild card:
The Arizona special election could add one more dem senator before a vote happens.
Not if they vote before next Friday.
If McConnell pushes it through the dems, unless the Moscow Mitch SC rules Trump won regardless of the votes, the dems will have the grounds to go nuclear.
Declare Washington a state, adding 2 more likely dem senate seats
Add 2-4 more SC judges
Kill the filibuster
I think Mitch figures they were talking about that all before (he made a big fuss about it recently and how it would be unfair) and he can complain about it being unfair later so he should take the win and count on the Democrats who are reluctant to go nuclear to still be reluctant. He doesn't care about looking like a hypocrite and the Democrats tend to not like escalation and want to preserve the institution. He probably figures they will go squishy.
The entire Supreme Court system is ridiculous as it exists. The solution is fixed terms and scheduled appointments.
Every person who said that pointing out the Supreme Court was in play in 2016 was "blackmailing me into voting for Clinton" deserves every slap in the face and public humiliation they get.