If Trump nominates anyone, couldn't Democrats in senate filibuster the nomination?

[Stuart G]

Is that possible? Same as withholding vote?

[zaj]

1. No filibuster anymore

[TwilightZone]

2. Filibuster is gone. Kavanaugh was approved 50-48.

[Stuart G]

5. I am sorry, I forgot this change in rules...I was totally wrong..

"A filibuster indefinitely prolongs the debate, preventing a final vote on the nominee. ... The Republican majority responded by changing the rules to allow for filibusters of Supreme Court nominations to be broken with only 51 votes rather than 60."

[TwilightZone]

6. No worries.

So much has changed in the past 12 years. Hell, everything has changed.

[Eliot Rosewater]

3. GOP will do this unthinkable thing and we will reverse it later. Increase court, alternative

is the entire country in a constant state of war.

All rights gone, everything...people will not like that and the patriotic thing to do is to respect precedent and if the only way to do that is increase the court, then so be it.

Our leaders will quickly see that permanent chaos and violence is what will happen if we dont.

[PTWB]

4. No.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

7. In theory it could be done.

I am just sorry the votes needed to end a filibuster was changed. A real filibuster is what needs to happen, where the members actually stand up and talk and talk for as long as it takes.

[Bev54]

8. I am waiting for idiot Trump to

shut down government if he doesn't get what he wants in the funding bill, then they will not be able to hold hearings.