Amebix wrote:
I don't agree with Gorsuch politically, but I know people who know him - he even taught one of my closest friends in law school - and by all accounts he's a decent person. It seems like Trump's picks certainly aren't going to get any better than this, so I'm not necessarily against him.
Jacoby wrote:
Nuclear option, he will be passed by simple majority if need be and you can thank Harry Reid for that. Obstructing Gorsuch because you're butthurt that Obama couldn't squeeze in one more nominee right before an election is unjustifiable partisan hackery. Elections have consequences, deal with it.
That seat was Obama's to fill. He literally didn't fill it because of Republican obstructionism. You're being hypocritical, but it's okay because I assume you're too uninformed to realize it, and you're just parroting out what you heard from pundits.
No, you are ignorant and do not know history
unlike me so I suggest you read up and stop thinking you're so smart. It has long been practice, look up Homer Thornberry or the Biden Rule. That seat doesn't belong to any president, Obama wasn't owed anything and he never had the votes to get anybody confirmed. There was SCOTUS opening and we had an election shortly to decide who would get to choose who filled it, if Hillary had won then it would be her nominee going thru the confirmation process. It's not obstructionism since Obama never had the votes, he thought if he nominated somebody futily that it would energize the Democratic base to turn out but in reality it actually energized conservatives more in lining up behind Trump.