By the time that republicnas would rue the day that they blocked filibustering judicial nominations, I submit that the filibuster would not be relevant because looking at the makeup of the courts as they will be slated, any judge appointed will be in no postion to undo what the prospective courts have already done.
Looking at the current trend most states are going red, and those that are going purple are going from purple to red not red to purple. The trend is for conservtives. Besides, if the donks held a workable majortiy they would deploy the nuke themselves, because they were the party who used filibusters to defeat conservative nominees in the first place, after being aginst such measures 6 or 7 years ago.
The GOP has every reason to pull the trigger here.
Good point. This will become a moot issue for decades. By then I probably won't care as I won't live to be 100+.
"By the time that republicnas would rue the day that they blocked filibustering judicial nominations, I submit that the filibuster would not be relevant because looking at the makeup of the courts as they will be slated, any judge appointed will be in no postion to undo what the prospective courts have already done."
Well, remember that we're now trying to undo what LIBERAL judges have done for the past 60 years. The pendulum may take a while to swing, but swing it may. Anyway, the argument for ending the filibuster of judges is not strategic, but principled. Every nominee should get an up-or-down vote. That's the constitutional part of the constitutional option.