Not surprisingly, 89% of Democrats said it would be a bad idea. "Not unless they want to continue their decline as the party of only white people," says one unnamed dem.
Republicans are less unified on the issue, but a large majority -- 64% -- say blocking Obama's nominee would be a political loser. "It makes no sense to try to block something you can't block," says one GOPer. "She will either get through easily, or will self-destruct."
"Careful scrutiny, yes. A holy war against her, not unless your name is Rush, Rove, or Huckabee -- none of whom votes in the United States Senate," said another.
The pro-obstruction Republicans don't make very good cases for their position. "We need to stand for something," says one. "Draw lines. A Supreme Court fight gives us that opportunity." Opposition for the sake of opposition doesn't make a lot of sense, but there ya go. For the most part, those who think it'd be a bad idea cite demographics.
"Sotomayor won't change the philosophical makeup of the Court, so why should Republicans oppose her and risk alienating Hispanic voters?"
"Don't rain on big Latino parades, especially when the outcome is already certain."
"It would be lunacy. Woman; Latina: two groups the GOP needs to court."
"Demographics 101: Don't pick another fight that appears anti-Hispanic."
I know the media is talking about the GOP "gearing up for a big court battle," but that's just hype to get people to watch TV. It looks like the Republican party is gearing up to make a big show of token opposition, after which she'll be confirmed easily.
1 comments:
The Repubs have a history of being much less confrontational on Supreme Court pics than the Dems. Over the last 20 years:
Republican picks:
Alito: Senate confirmed by 52-48.
Roberts: 78-22.
Thomas: 52-48.
Dem picks:
Breyer: confirmed by 87-9.
Ginsberg: 96-3.
So yeah, there'll be sniping but not much more. The Repubs just don't take the Supreme Court that seriously.
Post a Comment