Right. Hard to see how any such deal would be remotely enforceable. Also right is separate Q re: filibuster. Agree @brianefallon?
I would not support any deal with McConnell if that was directed at me. Separate q if Dems should try filibusterhttps://twitter.com/sweetal/status/844700367388520449 …
-
-
-
Senate Dems are suckers if they a) go for anything close to Coons-floated deal or b) give McConnell 60 votes on cloture
-
.
@brianefallon@bmaz My thoughts on Judge Gorsuch and the filibuster http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91762 -
There is no q in my mind they'll nominate arch-conservative next time too, even if RBG seat. And wld go nuclear to confirm
-
Absolutely agree. Just think the battle better+more effectively joined there than here. Sucks to say that though!
-
What is gained by waiting to join battle then? Difference between 5-4 conservative majority and 6-3 wont animate public
-
do believe case can be made, which cannot be made now, as to how much law would change with 5th vote
-
.
@brianefallon@bmaz on cases like affirmative action and abortion, it would be a new 5th vote, not new 6th vote. That's the key point. - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Dems can filibuster all they like, Reps can use nuke option now and later if another vacancy on SCOTUS opens up. Thank Harry Reid
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
that "deal" would be utterly worthless
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Just curious why that is a bad deal. (I don’t like filibuster period but given where we are . . . is the worry deal won’t hold?)
-
why in the world would they stick to their deal
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.