Is it ok to hate McConnell for the courts AND for (giving us) Trump? I certainly do. He had a chance to bury Trump after J6 but proved to be a coward. I wonder if he regrets that decision now.
I doubt Mitch McConnell regrets shit, given he got what he wanted—power.
I hope his eternal torment is being ineffectual at everything he does. If I were Lucifer (I'm not, because I can't rock stubble like he does nor play the piano!) I'd kill him over and over in every nasty way imaginable—but that would be for me, not him.
He is/was absolutely a consequential politician. And, to be sure, being “consequential” can also be a bad thing. In his case, I would submit that his career will be defined by two things: The overturning of Roe v. Wade, and his “no” vote on impeachment. Had he voted “yes”, other Republican Senators would have followed and the menace of Donald Trump would have been ended in early 2021.
1. There has not been any discussion of the most likely real reason Mitch opted to announce this week he was stepping down from the Republican Leader of the Senate position - Trump’s team was reported early in the week to be in negotiations with McConnell’s team to have McConnell endorse Trump. The result of the negotiations - McConnell announces he will step down in November, after Trump becomes President Elect. My sense is this was a negotiated settlement after McConnell said he was not ready to endorse Trump, and Trump’s team then said they would push for new leadership ASAP.
2. To me, McConnell will be most remembered for his impact on the courts, and his giving Republican Senators an out so as not to convict Trump in the second Impeachment, I think he must also be remembered for two additional items: a) ushering in hyper partisanship when he declared he would work to ensure Obama’s first term as President would be a failure; and, b) McConnell was instrumental to the passage of a bunch bipartisan legislation, including everything passed during Biden’s term.
So much is known and we keep on expecting different things from known entities.
Why did Mitch ditch Merrick Garland?
Because he could.
Did any sane person seriously expect the one person who COULD give him a chance to do so?
He had no reason to give him a bit of consideration. Yet millions of us acted shocked.
Folks, on the very NIGHT Obama won the election, Mitch declared that his job was to make Obama a one-term president.
He told us what he was going to do. Elections have consequences.
In early 2021, did any sane person expect that Mitch was going to give the Democrats the 2/3 majority they needed to convict Trump?
He told us what he was going to do. Elections have consequences.
Nobody should be shocked at anything Mitch does, or says, or votes on. He has one stated and dead-on objective, the furtherance of GOP goals.
He can crack that little smile, send that lovely note, but in the end, the GOP is all he cares about. He hasn't done a single thing for the American people if it didn't align with his GOP agenda.
With any luck the dog will finally catch the car and Mitch's court picks and WOMEN and their healthcare will be the best (and possibly ONLY) thing to save America.
Good riddance Mitch, the next guy won't be as collegial or quiet, but the results will be the same.
Thank you for sharing your exchanges about McConnell. McConnell's hypocritical two-step concerning the SCOTUS haunts me. First, you point out that with @1 year before the 2016 election, then Sen. Majority Leader McConnell unilaterally declared that he wouldn't hold confirmation hearings for President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy left by Antonin Scalia's death because the voters deserved to decide such a momentous shift in ideology with their votes for POTUS at the ballot box. Then, with @one month prior to the 2020 POTUS election, McConnell unilaterally decided to deprive voters of this momentous choice by ramming through President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death. Both break norms. Both are horrible. In combination, they're an abomination; a total disregard for our Constitutional norm that nominations for SCOTUS vacancies are a prerogative of the POTUS and confirmation hearings and votes an obligation of the Senate. Prior to Trump winning the POTUS nomination in 2016, I'd been a consistent conservative GOP voter from the time I was 18 and cast my first vote for POTUS for Ronald Reagan. I'm appalled and ashamed by McConnell's pure power politics manipulation of the Supreme Court's justices. In addition to McConnell's legislative SCOTUS justice packing, I also consider his pledge on the evening of President Obama's first inauguration to be another low light. In a private dinner before a who's who of conservative and Republican policy makers, McConnell said that his highest priority as Senate Majority Leader would be to deprive Obama of re-election. McConnell proceeded to sacrifice legislation that would benefit all Americans, our country and "promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity" if it would politically benefit a president of the opposing party. That is unconscionable. I hope McConnell's court-packing, hyperpartisanship to rival Newt Gingrich as well as his precipital refusal to convict Trump for his second impeachment seriously tarnishes his reputation among future historians despite his legislative tactical brilliance.
While McConnell played the long game, with regard to the judiciary, he has not been loyal to the country and the Constitution; therefore he violated his oath of office. He put party and personal power over the good of the country. Just because he acted in a courtly manner, Mark, to your family does not make McConnell a gentleman.
I generally respect McConnell as both a skilled legislator and as an institutionalist --two attributes now almost entirely lacking in the Republican party. As a country, we will likely miss having those attributes in whoever the next Senate Republican leader is.
Although I am moderately conservative (but *very* anti-MAGA), I have occasionally disagreed with McConnell's tactics - most notably in refusing to consider Garland's nomination to the Court.
I think the biggest thing history will remember him for is declining to marshal Senate Republican votes for Trump's second impeachment. He had the best (and I hope it isn't the last) opportunity to excise the Trump cancer from American government, and he declined to act. That was a monumental, historic error, with consequences to the country continuing to compound. I hope he realizes that, and chooses to atone in some small way by declining to endorse Trump. (I am not optimistic about that.)
Unfortunately, as many have written, there’s every likelihood that whomever replaces him will be worse (though precisely how one could be “worse” is a bit confusing to me…)
Imagine a full-on MAGAt who'd rather grandstand than accomplish anything.
Thankfully, Marjorie Taylor Greene lives in Georgia, not Kentucky.
EDITED TO ADD: I spoke too soon—James Comer's from Kentucky. I would argue he's too STUPID to be a Senator, even a Republican one...but I thought the Republican Party was too smart to elect Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Donald Trump as President!
One of his main goals was to make the courts more conservative. He certainly did that. That's politics. But his failure to act in Trump's impeachment was a huge mistake. He just could not go against the Republicans. And putting his party ahead of the country is something he, and us, will continue to live with.
Also- to all of the MAGA dupes who label EVERYONE who in not in thrall to Dear Leader Trump a RINO...get a clue. NOONE has been more "Republican" than Mitch McConnell.
Some have asked what could be worse than McConnell. I'm afraid I know. But first, I acknowledge McConnell's shameful legacy is abusing the process & violating norms respecting the SCOTUS: denying Garland a vote w/ 9 months left in Obama's term&then giving Coney-Barrett a vote w/ the 2020 election already in progress was an act of unmitigated hypocrisy& partisanship. So what could be worse? McConnell isn't crazy. He wants government to work. The new breed of R is about performance, not results. The are isolationists: no R Senator under 55 voted to support Ukraine in the last vote. In the short to mid-term, they'll do whatever Trump wants. The next R leader- perhaps Thune or Cornyn- might not be crazy, but will he or she have the resolve to stand up to the MAGA crowd & help govern?
McConnell is probably nice to people it's expedient for him to be nice to—I would imagine he treats Bernie Sanders better than most "Hillary Liberals" (a misnomer if I ever said one!) in the Senate do.
After all, if he wanted to look good at "supporting the troops" (something Republicans before Trump at least paid lip service to!), he could bank on that Old Commie to push the more Progressive Democrats in that direction....
I think McConnell's primary goal has always been making America more Republican, and continued focusing on this even when Republican came to mean people who hate both America and McConnell.
To me, Mitch McConnell will be remembered as the person who cared about one thing: power. He didn't care for his country, for the rule of law, or really much of anything else. He used and abused his power for the accumulation of more power. It was the end to itself. To me, no one has done more damage to the country and its politics in my lifetime than Mitch McConnell, and that includes Donald Trump.
Is it ok to hate McConnell for the courts AND for (giving us) Trump? I certainly do. He had a chance to bury Trump after J6 but proved to be a coward. I wonder if he regrets that decision now.
I doubt Mitch McConnell regrets shit, given he got what he wanted—power.
I hope his eternal torment is being ineffectual at everything he does. If I were Lucifer (I'm not, because I can't rock stubble like he does nor play the piano!) I'd kill him over and over in every nasty way imaginable—but that would be for me, not him.
He is/was absolutely a consequential politician. And, to be sure, being “consequential” can also be a bad thing. In his case, I would submit that his career will be defined by two things: The overturning of Roe v. Wade, and his “no” vote on impeachment. Had he voted “yes”, other Republican Senators would have followed and the menace of Donald Trump would have been ended in early 2021.
McConnell will be remembered as an enemy of democracy and of average Americans and a key player in the ascendency of Trump.
Chris - couple of thoughts.
1. There has not been any discussion of the most likely real reason Mitch opted to announce this week he was stepping down from the Republican Leader of the Senate position - Trump’s team was reported early in the week to be in negotiations with McConnell’s team to have McConnell endorse Trump. The result of the negotiations - McConnell announces he will step down in November, after Trump becomes President Elect. My sense is this was a negotiated settlement after McConnell said he was not ready to endorse Trump, and Trump’s team then said they would push for new leadership ASAP.
2. To me, McConnell will be most remembered for his impact on the courts, and his giving Republican Senators an out so as not to convict Trump in the second Impeachment, I think he must also be remembered for two additional items: a) ushering in hyper partisanship when he declared he would work to ensure Obama’s first term as President would be a failure; and, b) McConnell was instrumental to the passage of a bunch bipartisan legislation, including everything passed during Biden’s term.
He is, to say the least, an enigma.
::McConnell was instrumental to the passage of a bunch bipartisan legislation, including everything passed during Biden’s term.::
Are you SURE? His record on getting stuff passed isn't all that great, especially recently.
I always enjoy when my mailbag questions get turned into columns.
So much is known and we keep on expecting different things from known entities.
Why did Mitch ditch Merrick Garland?
Because he could.
Did any sane person seriously expect the one person who COULD give him a chance to do so?
He had no reason to give him a bit of consideration. Yet millions of us acted shocked.
Folks, on the very NIGHT Obama won the election, Mitch declared that his job was to make Obama a one-term president.
He told us what he was going to do. Elections have consequences.
In early 2021, did any sane person expect that Mitch was going to give the Democrats the 2/3 majority they needed to convict Trump?
He told us what he was going to do. Elections have consequences.
Nobody should be shocked at anything Mitch does, or says, or votes on. He has one stated and dead-on objective, the furtherance of GOP goals.
He can crack that little smile, send that lovely note, but in the end, the GOP is all he cares about. He hasn't done a single thing for the American people if it didn't align with his GOP agenda.
With any luck the dog will finally catch the car and Mitch's court picks and WOMEN and their healthcare will be the best (and possibly ONLY) thing to save America.
Good riddance Mitch, the next guy won't be as collegial or quiet, but the results will be the same.
Thank you for sharing your exchanges about McConnell. McConnell's hypocritical two-step concerning the SCOTUS haunts me. First, you point out that with @1 year before the 2016 election, then Sen. Majority Leader McConnell unilaterally declared that he wouldn't hold confirmation hearings for President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy left by Antonin Scalia's death because the voters deserved to decide such a momentous shift in ideology with their votes for POTUS at the ballot box. Then, with @one month prior to the 2020 POTUS election, McConnell unilaterally decided to deprive voters of this momentous choice by ramming through President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death. Both break norms. Both are horrible. In combination, they're an abomination; a total disregard for our Constitutional norm that nominations for SCOTUS vacancies are a prerogative of the POTUS and confirmation hearings and votes an obligation of the Senate. Prior to Trump winning the POTUS nomination in 2016, I'd been a consistent conservative GOP voter from the time I was 18 and cast my first vote for POTUS for Ronald Reagan. I'm appalled and ashamed by McConnell's pure power politics manipulation of the Supreme Court's justices. In addition to McConnell's legislative SCOTUS justice packing, I also consider his pledge on the evening of President Obama's first inauguration to be another low light. In a private dinner before a who's who of conservative and Republican policy makers, McConnell said that his highest priority as Senate Majority Leader would be to deprive Obama of re-election. McConnell proceeded to sacrifice legislation that would benefit all Americans, our country and "promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity" if it would politically benefit a president of the opposing party. That is unconscionable. I hope McConnell's court-packing, hyperpartisanship to rival Newt Gingrich as well as his precipital refusal to convict Trump for his second impeachment seriously tarnishes his reputation among future historians despite his legislative tactical brilliance.
While McConnell played the long game, with regard to the judiciary, he has not been loyal to the country and the Constitution; therefore he violated his oath of office. He put party and personal power over the good of the country. Just because he acted in a courtly manner, Mark, to your family does not make McConnell a gentleman.
I generally respect McConnell as both a skilled legislator and as an institutionalist --two attributes now almost entirely lacking in the Republican party. As a country, we will likely miss having those attributes in whoever the next Senate Republican leader is.
Although I am moderately conservative (but *very* anti-MAGA), I have occasionally disagreed with McConnell's tactics - most notably in refusing to consider Garland's nomination to the Court.
I think the biggest thing history will remember him for is declining to marshal Senate Republican votes for Trump's second impeachment. He had the best (and I hope it isn't the last) opportunity to excise the Trump cancer from American government, and he declined to act. That was a monumental, historic error, with consequences to the country continuing to compound. I hope he realizes that, and chooses to atone in some small way by declining to endorse Trump. (I am not optimistic about that.)
The world will be a better place with another enemy of democracy leaving Congress. So long Moscow Mitch.
Unfortunately, as many have written, there’s every likelihood that whomever replaces him will be worse (though precisely how one could be “worse” is a bit confusing to me…)
Imagine a full-on MAGAt who'd rather grandstand than accomplish anything.
Thankfully, Marjorie Taylor Greene lives in Georgia, not Kentucky.
EDITED TO ADD: I spoke too soon—James Comer's from Kentucky. I would argue he's too STUPID to be a Senator, even a Republican one...but I thought the Republican Party was too smart to elect Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Donald Trump as President!
I hate McConnell, but all you have to do is look at the House and worry about having two dysfunctional parties which can’t pass anything.
One of his main goals was to make the courts more conservative. He certainly did that. That's politics. But his failure to act in Trump's impeachment was a huge mistake. He just could not go against the Republicans. And putting his party ahead of the country is something he, and us, will continue to live with.
McConnell...Party over patriotism. Sad.
Also- to all of the MAGA dupes who label EVERYONE who in not in thrall to Dear Leader Trump a RINO...get a clue. NOONE has been more "Republican" than Mitch McConnell.
Some have asked what could be worse than McConnell. I'm afraid I know. But first, I acknowledge McConnell's shameful legacy is abusing the process & violating norms respecting the SCOTUS: denying Garland a vote w/ 9 months left in Obama's term&then giving Coney-Barrett a vote w/ the 2020 election already in progress was an act of unmitigated hypocrisy& partisanship. So what could be worse? McConnell isn't crazy. He wants government to work. The new breed of R is about performance, not results. The are isolationists: no R Senator under 55 voted to support Ukraine in the last vote. In the short to mid-term, they'll do whatever Trump wants. The next R leader- perhaps Thune or Cornyn- might not be crazy, but will he or she have the resolve to stand up to the MAGA crowd & help govern?
Enjoyed this email exchange even though Mark Preston should learn what defines a gentleman. McConnell is not a gentleman!
McConnell is probably nice to people it's expedient for him to be nice to—I would imagine he treats Bernie Sanders better than most "Hillary Liberals" (a misnomer if I ever said one!) in the Senate do.
After all, if he wanted to look good at "supporting the troops" (something Republicans before Trump at least paid lip service to!), he could bank on that Old Commie to push the more Progressive Democrats in that direction....
I think McConnell's primary goal has always been making America more Republican, and continued focusing on this even when Republican came to mean people who hate both America and McConnell.
Is there any chance that his sister-in-law’s death was somehow related?
To me, Mitch McConnell will be remembered as the person who cared about one thing: power. He didn't care for his country, for the rule of law, or really much of anything else. He used and abused his power for the accumulation of more power. It was the end to itself. To me, no one has done more damage to the country and its politics in my lifetime than Mitch McConnell, and that includes Donald Trump.