1/2 of dems in Senate Vote for Roberts

beta1607 · #1 09-29-2005, 11:45 AM

as did the chambers independent who caucuses with Dems. Over 3/4ths of the chamber voted for Roberts as well - talk about a consensus nominee...

Colonel Kataffy · #2 09-29-2005, 01:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
talk about a consensus nominee...

[/ QUOTE ]

No, not really. Check out the Scalia and Ginsburg votes, then we'll talk about consensus.

PoBoy321 · #3 09-29-2005, 01:25 PM

75% of the vote is actually relatively low.

beta1607 · #4 09-29-2005, 01:26 PM

The country was a lot less partisan during the Scalia and Ginsburg nominations. Comparing the votes is like comparing athletes from different eras, it is impossible.

beta1607 · #5 09-29-2005, 01:28 PM

Not given recent history of court all nominee. See "the gang of 14" for more information. The country is a lot different then before in terms of partisianship divide, more senators these days would never vote for an opposing party nominee then ever before.

Colonel Kataffy · #6 09-29-2005, 01:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The country was a lot less partisan during the Scalia and Ginsburg nominations. Comparing the votes is like comparing athletes from different eras, it is impossible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that prior to robert's, it was the rule for confirmations to be as overwhelming as Ginsburg's and Scalia's, again this is: no, not really.

And if you aren't comparing the roberts vote to other supreme court nominations, then what votes are you comparing it too. Everyday senate votes on ordinary bills?

#7 09-29-2005, 01:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Not given recent history of court all nominee. See "the gang of 14" for more information. The country is a lot different then before in terms of partisianship divide, more senators these days would never vote for an opposing party nominee then ever before.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about lets wait for the next nominee voting. If the vote is much closer to 50-50 then we can decide this one was a landslide. If it's 78-22 again then it wasn't.

beta1607 · #8 09-29-2005, 01:59 PM

Other Judicial nominees in the last 5 year.

Dotson · #9 09-29-2005, 03:41 PM

Dems were smart. Roberts didn't come across as an ideologue and probably isn't. They would have looked like complete clowns having a party line vote against him. They have also played the John Roberts is the smartest man alive card well. Everyone kept saying he is so smart, qualified, and able that whoever is put up has alot to live up to. Roberts was tight lipped but the yes-Dems gave him a pass because of the stated qualities. They were willing to take a gamble. These guys are not going to gamble again. If the next person takes the same line as Roberts and is as conservative or more a filibuster will ensue. Republicans will start talking about the nuclear option. It will come to a head but this time no one will blink and it will be time for the republicans to pull the trigger. The dems will say we did what we had to do and the repubs will say the same.

Looking to 08, it will be interesting to see how Frist plays it. If his SEC thing picks up steam the nuclear option could bring back in the social conservatives that may stop supporting him or it could be used by the dems to show how it is all about power. Probably both.

Autocratic · #10 09-29-2005, 06:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not given recent history of court all nominee. See "the gang of 14" for more information. The country is a lot different then before in terms of partisianship divide, more senators these days would never vote for an opposing party nominee then ever before.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about lets wait for the next nominee voting. If the vote is much closer to 50-50 then we can decide this one was a landslide. If it's 78-22 again then it wasn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

The next is far more likely to be contentious. After all, Dems basically backed off Roberts in preparation for a more conservative choice by Bush in the future.