Select Page

It’s so convenient for Democrats and their buddies in the media to completely ignore precedent or forget the circumstances surrounding the hardly infamous 2016 Supreme Court pick of former President Obama.

When the Senate majority is held by the same party as the president, Supreme Court vacancies are almost always voted on during a presidential election year.

That is what’s happening now, and why U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner says he will vote and support a qualified nominee. 

Read my full statement on the Supreme Court vacancy ⬇️

— Cory Gardner (@SenCoryGardner) September 21, 2020

When government is divided and separate political parties hold the Senate and White House, confirmations go down in flames.

That’s what happened in 2016. That’s what has happened throughout history in five out of seven confirmation attempts when the government was divided in election years. 

The last time a Supreme Court nominee was voted through favorably when the government was split is 1888.

So spare us the false sense of outrage. 

Some Democrats are trying to convince voters a president should no longer even be allowed to make nominations in an election year. You know, like Obama did. 

While Gardner’s stance is principled and consistent with Senate precident, the same cannot be said for Colorado Democrats.

John Hickenlooper wanted the Senate to confirm Obama’s nominee during a split government in 2016, but now thinks the Senate should just throw the game and go home while Republicans are ahead on the scoreboard.

Hickenlooper in 2016 vs. 2020

— Derek Draplin (@ddraplin) September 21, 2020

Hickenlooper even wants to change Senate rules to effectively kill the filibuster and force a vote on every Supreme Court nominee put forth by every president except President Trump.

As recent as a few months a go Hickenlooper said he supported reforms that would require the Senate to vote on all Supreme Court nominees #cosen #copolitics

— Kyle Kohli (@CompassKohli) September 21, 2020

Hickenlooper = Hypocrite. And he’s not alone.

In the heat of the 2016 presidential race and split government, U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet specifically cited the possibility of a contested election for being an important reason the Senate needed to confirm a new justice.

A 4-4 decision on the #SCOTUS in a contested presidential election could lead to more confusion and chaos #DoYourJob

— Michael Bennet (@SenatorBennet) February 26, 2016

Now that Trump is president and we have a united government, Bennet’s reversed course and wants to hold the seat open.

A spokesperson for Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Denver, says he believes a new SCOTUS justice should NOT be confirmed by the Senate before the election or during the lame-duck session. #copolitics

— Justin Wingerter (@JustinWingerter) September 19, 2020

Even Hickenlooper’s own staffer tweeted out their thoughts on Senate procedure in 2016.

[email protected] says Senate must #DoYourJob & vote on SCOTUS nominee. Unprecedented obstruction to block. #Club20 #cosen #copolitics

— Alyssa Roberts (@alyssaaroberts) September 11, 2016

This seems to be a reoccurring problem for Hickenlooper. Neither he nor his staffers have the first clue about Senate precedent, being a senator, or running for Senate.

And it shows.

This content was originally published here.