[Lyford]

but it keeps coming back to the fact that the Dems can still filibuster at will, and we cannot stop them, for the next 20 months (if not longer).

It's not that bleak. They agree not to filibuster except in "extraordinary" circumstances. We agree not to change the rules.

But if they filibuster in circumstances that we do not agree are "extraordinary" then they've broken the deal, and the "constitutional" option becomes viable again. Nothing's changed that makes it un-doable, except that the GOP has agreed not to do it. In exchange for which, the Democrats have agreed to certain behaviors. If they don't, the option goes back on the table...

[howlingmule]

the dems WILL filibuster a supreme court nominee because they can. and the reps will sit on there hands.

[torchthemummy]

"But if they filibuster in circumstances that we do not agree are "extraordinary" then they've broken the deal, and the "constitutional" option becomes viable again. Nothing's changed that makes it un-doable, except that the GOP has agreed not to do it. In exchange for which, the Democrats have agreed to certain behaviors. If they don't, the option goes back on the table...

Bingo. Both sides have an out and it puts the RINOS in a tough position. Being an optimist this would put the ball back in the RINOS court where they would then have the duty to break the deal if any nominee with top ABA ratings and strong homestate approval got nominated. One thing is for sure - all nominees will come from states that do not have a RINO due to the hold possibility by a home state senator.

[tanknetter]

But if they filibuster in circumstances that we do not agree are "extraordinary" then they've broken the deal, and the "constitutional" option becomes viable again. Nothing's changed that makes it un-doable, except that the GOP has agreed not to do it. In exchange for which, the Democrats have agreed to certain behaviors. If they don't, the option goes back on the table...

With all due respect, re-read the text of the agreement. Each Senator is allowed to make his own determination when it comes to the definition of "extreme". There's nothing in the agreement that allows the GOP Senators to back out of the deal if they don't agree that the situation is "extreme" ...

[BobL]

"But if they filibuster in circumstances that we do not agree are "extraordinary" then they've broken the deal, and the "constitutional" option becomes viable again."

No they closed off that escape - by saying that each Senator can define "extreme" as he or she wishes. So if Patricia Owens is nominated to the Supreme Court, the Dems will, of course, call her extreme (for that level of the judiciary), and we will not. But what we think has no bearing, as we have no clause in the agreement that gives us the right to nuke the filibuster if we disagree with the Dem definition of extreme - in other words, if 51 Dems consider her extreme, then she is still extreme.

They've still got us. They had good lawyers for this deal.