Well That Didn't Take Long. "Sheepish" GOP Senators Have Already Caved On One Of Their '3 No's.'

[TrollBuster9090]

Well that didn't take long. Senate Republicans emerged from a meeting two days ago and said they were going to ...


Close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears, and hum...so as not to hear or see any talk of a SCOTUS nomination by Obama.

This strategy included 3.5 'No's'

A) Refuse to meet with Obama to even discuss a nominee.
B) Refuse to meet with any nominee Obama puts forward.
C) Refuse to hold hearings with any Obama nominee, and
D) Refuse to hod a confirmation vote on any Obama nominee.

Obama then went on national TV and claimed "that's what they say, but they're actually being quite SHEEPISH about it."

Josh Marshall said the same thing yesterday. This is a very weak facade, and if Democrats push lightly on it, it'll collapse like a house of cards.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-lot-weaker-than-they-look

One day later, the sheep have caved on the first item. GOP Senate leaders to meet with Obama to discuss their REFUSAL to discuss a SCOTUS nomination...

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/270767-obama-to-meet-mcconnell-grassley-to-discuss-supreme-court-vacancy

Gosh, could this have anything to do with the fact that polls are showing that if they obstruct Obama's nominees it will simply PROVE what most people already suspect: namely that Washington gridlock is NOT the fault of "both sides," and that it's only the Republicans that are acting like obstinate, petulant children. And that if this continues, several of their Senators in swing states could lose their seats.

Personally, I think it might also have to do with the fact that they realize that if Trump wins the nomination, it could turn off enough voters that they'll lose not only the Presidential election, but control of the Senate as well. Thus, allowing the next Democratic President to appoint an even more liberal justice than Obama would.

[elleng]

1. 'obstinate, petulant children'

exactly!

if Trump wins the nomination, it could turn off enough voters that they'll lose not only the Presidential election, but control of the Senate as well. Thus, allowing the next Democratic President to appoint an even more liberal justice than Obama would.

[TrollBuster9090]

2. Yep, I think it's a strong possibility that this could be a very effective election issue.

And, regardless of what the GOP has convinced their batshit crazy base to think of Obama, the Party establishment knows that he's a moderate, not a hard core progressive. And they're better off letting a moderate Democrat send a SCOTUS nominee to a GOP Senate than letting the next Democratic President send a nominee to a Democratic Party controlled Senate next January.