Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Caliman73

(11,730 posts)

4. She would have done what she thought best.

Reply to Polybius (Original post)

Tue Oct 8, 2019, 02:44 PM

Oct 2019

If she had not been cheated out of her legitimate election, she would have chosen a nominee of her own, not someone else's and not a compromise nominee. McConnell would definitely try to hold it up. He actually said as much. It would likely have cost him his job and the Senate for Republicans. Holding up a nominee for years is beyond the pale.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Hillary Clinton had won and took office, do you think she would have renominated Merrick Garland? [View all] Polybius Oct 2019 OP

Think Mitch would have fast tracked the appointment before she took office bigbrother05 Oct 2019 #1

Plus he was 64 years old at the time BeyondGeography Oct 2019 #6

She should have nominated someone much younger (20 or so years) than Garland. LonePirate Oct 2019 #2

While Garland seems like an all around fine guy NewJeffCT Oct 2019 #3

She would have done what she thought best. Caliman73 Oct 2019 #4

Agreed. Buckeyeblue Oct 2019 #8

I wonder how 2020 would be looking at this point Polybius Oct 2019 #10

Or Rick Scott Buckeyeblue Oct 2019 #11

The only thing going against her would be 16 years of one Party rule Polybius Oct 2019 #12

Possibly, as she probably knew there would be more appointments down the road. Tommy_Carcetti Oct 2019 #5

To answer my own OP: Polybius Oct 2019 #7

Irrrelevant TheRealNorth Oct 2019 #9