Thread by @AJentleson

Bennet is very naive to think Dems could have prevented McConnell from nuking the filibuster long before Kavanaugh was nominated, or during his nomination at the latest. Bennet’s approach would’ve resulted in fewer Obama judges confirmed and the same outcome for Trump/McConnell.

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1125064679611564034

It’s important to remember two things: 1) Dems going nuclear on nominees in 2013 allowed Obama to get many more judges confirmed than he would’ve gotten otherwise. More here via @jeffreytoobin newyorker.com/news/daily-com…

And:
talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/senate-nucl…

And: washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-l…

2) The idea that if Dems hadn’t gone nuclear in 2013 *or* hadn’t filibustered Gorsuch, McConnell would not have been able to go nuclear on Kavanaugh is silly. That’s what Bennet believes and he’s fooling himself. Here’s why.

Procedurally, you can go nuclear at any time based on any nominee - not just judges, you can do it on any nomination that requires Senate confirmation. (Technically you don’t even need a reason but pragmatically you usually do.)

McConnell would’ve found a peg to go nuclear early in the Trump admin. All it would take was one Dem filibuster of any nominee - say, Sessions. If the 60-vote threshold still existed & Dems filibustered him, McConnell would’ve happily gone nuclear for *all* noms including judges.

This is it in a nutshell. Senate rules are whatever a majority of Senators want them to be. McConnell would never pass up the chance to reshape the judiciary and SCOTUS. He would have easily found a peg to go nuclear and he would’ve had the votes.

https://twitter.com/nbeaudrot/status/1125246936691298304?s=21

In conclusion, here’s the Wire scene I think about constantly when I think about the state of the Senate (and politics in general).

So many Dems like Bennet want it to be one way.

I understand & sympathize with that yearning.

But it’s the other way.