Posted on 02/19/2016 10:43:36 AM PST by chajin
If Obama were really Machiavellian, there is one person whom he could nominate for Scalia's seat that would simultaneously confound his friends, confuse his enemies, completely change his optics, and throw the whole process into chaos--which, in Alinskyite thinking, presents an opportunity to continue the revolution.
Ted Cruz.
This would be a win-win-win-win-win situation for Obama.
win #1: if Cruz is nominated, he is either confirmed, or he is not. If Cruz is confirmed, the Court is no "worse" from the liberal POV: hard-core constitutionalist is replaced by a hard-core constitutionalist, who (like Scalia before him) would spend 30 years writing scathing dissents, while the Court continues to move the nation further and further leftward. If Cruz is not confirmed, however, he will never be able to get on the Court, and no GOP President will be able to nominate someone as far-rightist, meaning the Court would be more liberal.
win #2: Cruz is immediately pulled out of the Presidential race, and has to spend the 2016 campaign defending himself during the inevitable hearings, held before fellow Senators, all of whom hate his guts and would like nothing better than to destroy Cruz's reputation and future. The GOP Presidential race becomes a two-man competition between Trump and Rubio, with Rubio winning because the GOPe will coalesce around Rubio, Cruz supporters will stay home during the primaries, and Trump will be unable to obtain enough delegates. If Rubio becomes President, he'll be "pliable"; if he loses, Obama's successor will get to pack the Court with liberals.
win #3: Democrats will go into a huge tizzy. This will be sold by the media as Obama attempting to reach across the aisle for his legacy, but the reality will be different. The Democrat base will rush to Sanders, and the DEMe, scared of Sanders, will force Hillary! out of the race, replacing her with Biden/Warren, ensuring that the Chicago mob continues to run the party.
win #4: Obama, by nominating a conservative for the "conservative" seat, will set a pseudo-precedent that the GOPe will fully buy into: that "liberal" seats should be filled with liberals, regardless of who occupies the Oval Office. This will be important if Rubio or Trump were to become President, and one of the liberals on the Court were to die: if Obama were willing to nominate a Cruz for a Scalia seat, Rubio/Trump would have to be willing to nominate a Sri Srinivasan for a Ginsberg seat, which the GOPe Senate would of course approve.
win #5: by nominating Cruz, Obama will have taken off the table one of the stronger arguments for voting GOP in 2016, the necessity of having a Republican POTUS to nominate conservatives to the Court. If the Court becomes defined in the public mind as "having to have" four liberals, four (supposed) conservatives, and one moderate, then it wouldn't matter who the President was. A later Democrat in the Oval Office would almost certainly renege on the unwritten deal, and be unchallenged, because, well, that's what Democrats can do, the Court will be made liberal, and the fundamental transformation of America will be complete.
Lucky for us, Obama is many things, but Machiavellian is not one of them.
Valerie Jarrett would never let him do that.
So absurd it’s not worth contemplating. It might make for an interesting alternate history tale (if you like such fare) but isn’t even remotely possible in reality.
He would say "Too Late! You've already made a mess of it, and there is nothing you can do at this point to gain any respect from the people. You are a Clown, and you should just get used to the Idea that History is going to laugh at you."
But he would say it in Italian. :)
...Devil trumps Machiavelli
Too cute by half, but a good read!
Very interesting set of SCOTUS nomination scenarios you raised.
I personally don’t thing he’d risk elevating Cruz’s stature by honoring him with such a prestigious nomination.
Being gracious is not one of Obola’s virtues, and I can’t think of a single instance of him doing anything to permit, never mind promote anything that would benefit the conservative cause.
Obola is hard core Chicago thug who wants guaranteed results.
He’s going to push for a liberal minority to take Scalia’s place, IMHO.
Of course; his combined ideological purity and narcissism would preclude his doing anything else.
Now, if Obama really wanted to feed his narcissism, confound his enemies, and ensure that Hillary would never get back in the White House, there is one other person he could nominate for the Court: himself. The Senate wouldn't have the guts to block the nomination, Obama would be the most liberal, anti-Constitutional person on the court, and Biden would immediately both become President and the incumbent, virtually ensuring his nomination and his election in November. Liberal Court, Hillary squashed, Obama walking in the footsteps of William Howard Taft...what more could he ask for?
At a brokered Democrat convention, they could throw Hillary a bone and let her be Obama’s Supreme Court nominee. She just might take it.
Only if it came with a POTUS pardon attached.
‘Tis better for the Prince to be feared than to be loved - laughed at, not so much.....
It’s a pipe dream. Obama is going to round up the usual suspects. McCain, Hatch, Mikulsky and come up with some sort of gang of 8 type choice.
Just don’t do it.
Interesting thoughts, but this won’t happen...Cruz will never accept this deal from Obama...Bam is much more likely to nominate a squishy moderate Pubbie type (like a Souter) who can still be counted on for thumbs up votes on big ticket items like abortion or a perceived conservative Dim who can be bribed with compromising pictures of his pet sheep...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.