Originally Posted by Ataturk
As should be obvious, I am saying that your positions here and there are inconsistent.
Obama promised to be a compromiser when he was running for office. Then he immediately shoved through legislation (stimulus, Obamacare, etc.) that between them were only able to garner what, two votes from Republican legislators? The idea that every single one of them (along with all the voters who "shellaced" Obama's accomplices out of office in the next election) just hated his guts from the get go is absurd.
Anyway, what I tried to argue before was that the senate considering a nominee from the other party's president in an election year would be exceptional and would have to be the product of an exceptional relationship between the president and the other party. Certainly, the Democrats would never have done it for either of the Bushes, as prominent Democrats are on record saying.
He was never going to garner significant Republican votes on any issue, even if he were to copy a Heritage foundation proposal and try to use that as the basis of his legislation. The GOP senators and legislators needed to politicize any issue and vote no as often as possible in order to save their jobs. Any GOP incumbent who voted yes on anything was going to get a primary challenge and get voted or forced out like Specter, Lugar, or Bennett.