This is such a weird counterfactual. Republicans weren’t thinking about Trump noms in 2013, either.https://twitter.com/davidmdrucker/status/997219843685453826 …
-
-
Yes, and that’s a totally different statement.
-
I figured it was implied. Had that consideration been made, the power to oppose the next R president, who turned out to be Trump, would have been preserved. (I don't say this argumentatively.)
-
The consideration was made — but no one expected Trump. Harry Reid wasn’t thinking about Donald Trump in 2013. Nor was McConnell. They were thinking about Hillary and Marco or something. There were norms implied. They were thinking about the future — and the past.
-
That’s not at all to say, substantively, that it was the right decision or a smart move.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But there's no reason McConnell couldn't have just taken the same step. He's been perfectly happy breaking other norms. e.g. Garland.
-
There's a debate over whether he would have. But to just declare that he would have I think is a convenient assumption. IMO.
-
There’s a debate? Amongst whom? Anyone can see that Mitch cares only about winning and will do whatever it takes. I’m not sure if you’re faux naïf or just naive.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.