the tite of these articles, one , and the delay other, senate republicans lose their minds on a supreme court seat. likewise, senator charles grassley led a leader to majority leader signed by all republican committee members confirming their resolve to not have hear organization a vote on a nominee. this is ludicrous. republicans cannot and should not use the supreme court to push their radical political agenda. the constitution is clear, mr. speaker. article 2, section 2, he shall have the power by and with the advice and consent of the senate shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers, councils and judges of the supreme court. nowhere in the constitution does it say except in an election year or except when the president is a democrat, or when republicans have spent the last seven years actively working to subvert every policy the president elected by nearly 70 million americans. constitution doesn't say that. this is simply unacceptable. the american people deserve better. for more than a century, every single supreme court nominee has received a vote on the floor of the unit

senate right now. republican senators have said they don't want to confirm any nominee now. that that should be up to the next president. the white house either hopes to embarrass republicans into doing what they have said they won't do, or at the very least, persuade them to confirm this choice of merrick garland if a democrat is elected president in november, and then the basic pitch would be, merrick garland is a moderate by anybody's measurement. and he would be more moderate than any nominee that a democratic president would put forward, so the senate republicans should cut their losses. that would be the pitch to the senate then. we knew it was either going to be him or suvee srinivasan, and now we know. >> if you go back to who the president has nominated successfully in the past, kagan and sotomayor, women, in one of the cases, a latina woman. you remove that aspect of it, this is someone who on paper is imminently qualified. harvard, harvard. you know, clerked with brennan. a guy who clearly has been in

why do the republican senators think there any different? and joining us today, we have someone who gets up and does her job every day, who will talk about what happened to her if she tried to do what republicans are doing now. so i would like to thank dr. , sharma for joining us today. >> thank you. good afternoon. i'm an every day doctor for every day people. i take my job very seriously. my patients' lives depend on our health team to fulfill our duty. my patients' families depend on our team to take responsibility and to do our jobs every day. , in order for our patients and communities to achieve good health, everyone on our health team must work together. we have a duty to be held accountable for peoples' lives, to serve our patients and our community as a team. even in the most adverse i can't -- even the most adversarial situations, everyone does their job together and not divided, because that is what is best for our patients. if a doctor doesn't want to see a patient or a nurse chooses not , to do vital signs or a specialist doesn't

republican colleagues. we're kind of reading between the lines. when senatorssley says well, we called together the republicans on judiciary committee, some were reluctant to sign the letter say we're not going to neat with these people, tells me a lot are having second thoughts. >> i saw a number of reactions today of disappointment. people feeling that judge garland who is acclaimed and respected and obviously has tremendous experience, is a judge whose both judicial philosophy particularly on criminal defense is perhaps not as in line with what liberals would like to see and who is at the older end of the scale in which presidents tend to make these nominations. is this essentially a compromise before the negotiations start? >> no. i think what the president set out to do is to look through the potential nominees and find the person, the most solid candidate he could find, so it became difficult, if not impossible, for republicans to argue he wasn't qualified or ready for the job. and merrick garland, he found that person. now those who are hoping that we'r

senate republicans pledged to obstruct doesn't even make sense to the republicans' own base. the senior senator of iowa's blind adherence to the dictates of leadership doesn't stop there. the chairman of the judiciary committee was too intimidated to even meet with president obama without the republican leader's consent. he refused to go to the white house without the republican leader by his side. when all finally did meet with president obama on tuesday, the republican leader, the democratic leader, chairman of the judiciary committee and the ranking member of the judiciary committee. at that meeting, the chairman wouldn't commit to meeting the nominee even then. holding hearings, he wouldn't do that. he wouldn't give the nominee a vote, as we told the president. this is not what senator grassley advocated before his party assumed the majority. in january, 2015, the senator from iowa came to the senate floor and said, and i quote -- "we must get back to what we call in the senate regular order i would say do things the way madison intended." close quote. so everything the ch

day theom line, every playing field tilts more and more against senate republican leadership. momentum is on the side of having hearings and of having a vote. in, it is growing. dam holding republican senators back from doing their jobs is starting to show >> -- cracks.g to show more and more say they are judgeg to sit down with garland. problem was it was a nominee outside the mainstream or someone with a bad mark on their career. of the president's election is tossed out yet the window. the kind of justice he will be, the kind of person he is, the per -- the kind of great legal mind teen has and the kind of following below position he so firmly believes in, that lifeline that he would be problematic is thrown out the window. even if they throw the kitchen sink at him, republicans will not be able to lay a blow on judge garland. the second lifeline judgment, -- judge mcconnell had was a public. and as the poll i just talked about has shown, the american people into the senate could not issue.her apart on this the american people believe there should be hearings. the american p

the senate under republican leadership can do no less. mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. a senator: thank you, mr. president. i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: i ask that i be permitted to speak for up to 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: thank you, mr. president. mr. blumenthal: i'm pleased to be here today to speak again in support of the comprehensive addiction and recovery act which the senate will consider and i hope approve this week. it is a long overdue measure to address the public health hurricane, a crisis that we face in this country every bit as real and threatening as threats there abroad. in fact, i've come today just now from a hearing at the armed services committee where i had the opportunity to question some of our nation's leading military experts

that's the tradeoff that senate republicans are facing. it certainly seems at the moment that they are happy to just kick the can down the road, think that a republican may be elected president, something that has happened. they have put their line in the sand about this nominee. so this is a very interesting ceremony coming up. but the idea that merrick garland will be on the supreme court anytime, perhaps ever, seems remote. >> that's a fair point. dana, you spent time looking at the various contingencies out there. it seems extremely doubtful after all the public comments, since antonin's sudden death, that they are going to change their mind at all. this is going to be a nice ceremony but it probably won't be much more than that. >> that would be an about-face of epic proportions at this point. and talking to the republicans up until the time i came on with you, it doesn't seem like there's any desire to change. in fact, one senior senate republican, who i just spoke with, said that their take on it is that the president knows he has no

[laughter] >> senate democrats denounced their republican colleagues for holding up merrick garland's nomination to the court in a conference court of the conference today. senator reid said the majority leader mitch mcconnell cannot prevail on his vow to not hold a hearing or vote for the nominee. from the supreme court steps, this is about 20 minutes. >> merrick garland is a fine man in every way. his character is impeccable, his record in public service is surpassed and his time on the bench has been exemplary. all we are asking is for the republicans to do their job. now, mitch mcconnell set out and he did it publicly. his number one goal was to make sure that president obama was and wreak elected and he failed miserably. we are going to have a supreme court justice. it's the right thing to do. he is leading them over the cliff and they will rule the day that they threw him over the cliff. >> [inaudible] >> good afternoon. let me first say that we all know one of the most important constitutional duties as a u.s. senator is to come for justices of the supreme court which is right

here is republican senator jeff flake? >>> republicans are fully justified in doing with we are doing, waiting. but if we happen to lose the election we we ought to push him through quickly, if we can. >> senator, is jeff flake wrong? >> i think so. look, president obama calling this judge a moderate does not make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he is enthusely supported by www. moveonorg. i don't thing they would be enthusiastic about a liberal judge. the principle is the same whether it is before or after the election, the principle is, the membership are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this supreme court nominee >> final question you are saying no consideration of judge merrick garland by this conditioning even if hillary clinton wins the election, no consideration by this conditioning you are going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> i cannot imagine a republican majority in the united states senate with want to confirm in a l

you and i were told six years ago, he is the perfect pick if they ever have to have one with a republican senate. lo and behold, president obama has to deal with a republican senate. probably the best way to compare him, this is the democratic party's version of kennedy, center left. as we were discussing, he didn't check a political box with this one. being 63, this is the president not trying to change the court for an entire generation. he is putting real pressure on the republicans to stick by the pledge, that they're not going to even have a hearing. >> not even have a hearing, not even have a courtesy call meeting. what, pete, does judge garland do? does he go up to capitol hill and knock on doors? >> he'll probably do that, yes. there's been -- he will be well-coached now by an entire white house operation with outside support to try to push this nominee through the senate. anyway. that'll be an extra -- of extra importance with this one. republicans won't meet with him, much less hold a confirmation hearing or a floor vote. they'll try to get the difference. maybe pictures of him knockin

that's what identifies them as extremists and why republicans, republicans in the senate are breaking apart over this. yet, what if republicans in the senate been doing since the very day that barack obama was sworn in. they have given in to their extremists. they have nursed their extremists along so there's been fights and delays over the basic things that happen in government. the president tries to get his team out. starting this 2012, after he had been reelected by five million votes. we all come back and first thing that happens is the republicans in the senate want to shut it down. they don't want anybody to go forward to be the head of the nlrb. why? they are trying to shut it down. they don't want anybody appointed to the head of consumer protection financial bureau to function. they don't want a secretary of labor. they don't want anybody confirmed over the environmental protection agency. they don't want the president of the united states to be able to fill any, any of the three vacancies then on the d.c. circuit court of appeals. the second most important court in the unit

senate. republicans have a one seat advantage. democrats are looking to target a couple of races they think they can be competitive in. there is one see in arvada they like to go after. the want to make sure they hang onto the ones that are also open this year but senator white , who won this seat in 2008 as a republican, this gives him an opportunity to pick up another seat or not worry so much if they lose one of the ones they arr trying to protect. ththesese e crcreaeamemeryry s shahakekes s araree soso r ricich h anand d crcreaeamymy.. i i knknowow. . fifinanalllly y a a shshakakee fofor r anan a afificiciononadado o lilikeke m mysyselelf.f. wawaitit.. yoyou'u'rere a a s shahakeke a afificiciononadado?o? nonott aa shshakake e afaficicioionanadodo.. ththee shshakake e afaficicioionanadodo.. -w-whohoa.a. -(-(chchucucklkleses) ) yeyeahah.. wewellll, , peperhrhapaps s yoyou u cocoululdd bebe o onene t toooo. . gogo a aheheadad.. mmmm.. ththerere'e's s a a cocoololnenessss. . cocoldld, , itit's's c colold.d. okokayay. . icice e crc

republicans. it wasn't long ago that senator hatch described him as a consensus nominee. the only thing that's changed is republicans are now in the majority in the senate and they are prepared to block president obama's nominee no matter who that person is. >> you've heard senator mcconnell and other republicans including senator hatch and they're holding the line. how do you plan, as the white house, to break this log jam? >> i think what we will do is we're just going to move forward on principle. the president has put forward a nominee of principle, somebody of unquestioned legal -- with unquestioned legal credentials, somebody that has more experience than any supreme court justice. >> you understand it's an uphill battle? >> i would acknowledge that but i would acknowledge that what we are seeing here is unprecedented obstruction from senate republicans. that's not just my description. that's what senator lindsey graham has said to describe the situation. you noted the exit polls from yesterday's elections. republicans are dissatisfied with the way that republicans a

here is republican senator jeff lake. >> i think republicans are fully justified in doing what we're doing. waiting. but if we happen to lose the election, then i think we ought to push him through quickly if we can. >> senator, is jeff lake wrong? >> yeah, i think so. look, barack obama calling judge -- this judge a moderate this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he's enthusiastically supported by moveon.org. i don't think they would be signing up and have all this enthusiasm about a liberal judge. the principle is the same. whether it's before the election or after the election. the principle is the american people are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this supreme court nominee. >> so, final question. just to make it clear. you're saying no consider -- no consideration of judge garland by this congress even if hillary clinton wins the election? no consideration by this congress? you're going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> yeah. i can't imagine that a republican majority in the united states senate would want

but the senate has an absolute right to determine when that should be brought up and i think almost all republicanst should be brought up after the election. >> senator -- >> to avoid the politics. >> senator, in 2010 you actually specifically addressed the possibility that president obama would nominate judge garland. you said there was no question that he would win confirmation with bipartisan support. >> and he did. as a matter of fact, i led that fight for him. he's a fine man. i have no problem with liking the judge. i mean he's a good judge. now, i haven't looked at his decisions for 19 years and we're not talking about a circuit court after peels judgeship. we're talking about the highest court in the land, it's the court of final appeal in this country. so it's a much more serious thing. i can quote you democrat after democrat who when republicans were in control said you can't do this. so now that the ox is gored, they of course would like to be able to run right over you and the republicans aren't going to let them do that. >> of course theoretically if hillary clinton gets the nomination

>> senator republicans best friend on this issue, ironically. the senate judiciary committee in 1992. he was addressing an issue then, of course, in an election year, but there was a hypothetical. there was a thought that perhaps harry blackman would retire that year and there could be a vacancy in an election year. that didn't end up happening but joe biden addressed the possibility and he made a very unequivocal statement which was, you know, i as chairman of the judiciary committee do not believe that president george h.w. bush should in this election year make a nomination and if he does i am -- i believe he said we should seriously consider were his words that the committee should not hold hearings on that nominee. so, obviously, that's republicans today see it as a perfectly amalagous situation and quote the words back to anybody that suggest they owe president obama's nominee consideration. and the democrats have in turn said, well, you know, that was a hypothetical. we're talking about an actual vacancy and this is not a planned vacancy o

and that's what identifies them as extremists and why republicans, republicans in the senate are breakingd, yet, what if republicans i in the senate been doing since the very day that barack obama was sworn in. they have given in to their extremists. they have nursed their extremists along so there's been fights and delays over the basic things that happen in government. the president tries to get his team out. starting this 2012, after he had been re-elected by 5 million votes. we all come back and first thing that happens is the republicans in the senate want to shut it down. they don't want anybody to go forward to be the head of the nlrb. why? they are trying to shut down the nlrb. they don't want anybody appointed to the head of consumer protection financial bureau. why, because they don't want anybody to be the or the consumer protection financial bureau to function. they don't want a secretary of labor. they don't want anybody confirmed over the environmental protection agency. they don't want the president of the united states to be able to fill any, any of the three vacancies the

senate republicans at 10:15 eastern this morning are going to take to the senate floor to actively campaignfore he's even announced. >> well, from the republican perspective, democrats will be able to say, look, this guy has been a federal appeals court judge for almost 20 years. he is the chief judge of the second most important court in the country. he has a long judicial record, impeccable credentials. but the political calculation here is quite clear. president obama is saying to the republicans, look, you can take my 63-year-old now or wait for president hillary clinton to bring up a 45-year-old in ten months. that's a political box. >> but they will still control the senate even if hillary clinton is elected it president. >> maybe yes, maybe no. the question that republicans are going to have to answer is, how is merrick garland unqualified in a way that he can't even get a hearing? and it's just an implausible argument. the only argument that they have to make is we just don't confirm people in the last year of a president's term. vice president biden gave a speech when he was a sena

the senate republicans who control the senate have said they don't see that happening. to hold meetings. they don't want to do hearings. there will be a fight outside the senate with outside groups on both sides of the aisle, making their argument, taking their argument to the voters and trying to press the senate republicans. at this point, we have not seen any signs the senate republicans will move even though the president says he is nominated a consensus candidate. >> coming up more high-level political conversation with canada's prime minister. plus, more reaction to the trio of central bank decisions. that is also to come on "bloomberg best." ♪ alix: welcome back to "bloomberg best." i am alix steel. among the most intriguing interviews on bloomberg television this week, a chat with the c.e.o. who led jcpenney's turnaround and blackstone's tony james explains why his company is bullish on energy investing. let's begin with our exclusive conversation with justin trudeau who sat down with john micklethwait. john: a lot of people look at canada's economy. you have a

it is time for the senate republicans to do their job. e president and the senate must fulfill their constitutional responsibility in times of war, economic depression, yes, even in an election year. last week majority leader mcconnell reportedly told a group of house republicans there isn't -- quote -- "a snowball's chance in hell" that he would back down from his plan of obstruction. nevertheless, today president obama has invited majority leader mcconnell to meet with him in the white house to discuss the supreme court vacancy. they have also invited the chairman of the senate judiciary committee, senator grassley; the ranking democrat, senator leahy; and of course the minority leader of the senate, senator reid. why did the president offer this meeting? because that's what always happens. when a president is about to consider filling such an historic vacancy, he brings together the leaders of the senate to discuss his thought process and perhaps to solicit names from them of potential nominees. even when we disagreed in the past and ha

majority and 12 new republican senators, including myself. american voters made it clear they were sick and tired of the bitter partisanship and inaction of the then-democrat-controlled senate, and they were frustrated with the president's overreliance on executive orders to bypass attempts at compromise and cooperation with congress. for the good of the nation, i hope the president and the democratic leadership do not repeat their mistakes of the past. i hope they'll accept, however reluctantly, the fact that the american people will have a voice in this supreme court decision, and start focusing on the issues that concern hard-working americans. i hope the president's final months in office will be spent working with both parties to do great things for our nation. that's what the american people want. that's what the american people deserve. thank you for your time, god bless you, and may god continue to bless the united states america. -- united states of america. has 48 hoursok tv of nonfiction books and authors every weekend. here are so

reporter: but the president has warned a senate republicans of failing to at least consider this nomineeo the court. >> if you do not, it is an abdication of the senate's constitutional duty, and will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair. it will mean everything is subject to the most partisan of politics, everything. reporter: the evident hurdles have not diminished in emotional moment for merrick garland. >> thank you mr. president. this is the greatest honor of my life. r than wife agreeing to marry 28 ye reporter: next, obama says garland is set to meet senators one on one in the days ahead. but filling the seat left by conservative antonin scalia will not be easy. anchor: let's talk to one of our correspondents in washington about this. tell us more about the reaction from the republicans. how are they planning to block this nominatioby president obama? reporter: right after president obama made the announcement, mitch mcconnell, the republican majority leader of the senate, went public, saying that we will not conduct any hearing regarding h

meanwhile, the republican led senate doubles down on a pledge to block president obama's supreme court pick. >>> nike may be changing the way we wear shoes forever. plus, old blue eyes' son frank sinatra jr. has died. >>> and president obama reveals his bracket busters and so much more. "first look" starts now. well, hello. i'm betty nguyen. president obama has picked merrick garland as his next supreme court justice. >> i have selected a nominee who is widely recognized not only as one of america's sharpest legal minds, but someone who brings to his work a spirit of decency, modesty, integrity, even handedness and excellence. >> garland, a federal appeals court judge is known for his more centrist and moderate views. he has the support of seven current gop senators including orrin hatch who said his intelligence and his scholarship cannot be questioned. garland is a former prosecutor who led the prosecution of oklahoma city bomber timothy mcveigh and unabomber ted kaczynski as well as the olympics bombing. his confirmation will not be smooth sailing. >> let's let the american people d

orin hatch, leader of the senate republicans said a long time ago, republicans couldn't do any better if mister obama is putting republicans on the spot with his nomination he will succeed. bill: is that what he is trying to do? >> reporter: i am sure he will say there is a constitutional duty to hold hearings. whether it is in the interest of the republican party is just a statistical question given we don't know who will win the white house and there are 34 senate seats up for grabs, 24 of those being held by republicans. if republicans lose the white house and the senate they know get anybody on the supreme court as moderate as garland. if they lose the election mitch mcconnell might call for hearings the very next day. bill: vulnerable senators might not want to be seen as obstructionists. the president and the nominee are stepping up to the microphone. let's listen to president obama. >> of the many powers and responsibilities the constitution invests in the president, few are more consequential than appointing a supreme court judge. particularly one to succeed justice antonin sc

ceremony at the rose garden at the white house, for republicans to state for them absolutely nothing had changed. mitch mcconnell was on the floor of the senate, there will be no hearing, the next president thought to be a republican will make the selection not obama. >> made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed but in order to politicize it for purposes of the election. >> reporter: in other words, if the senate doesn't give garland a confirmation hearing and an up and down vote it will become a 2016 campaign issue and a very big stick for democrats to hit the republicans with. well, merrick garland spoke by telephone this afternoon to mitch mcconnell and the majority leader refused to meet him face to face, said there was no point, the phone call was a matter of politeness and charles grassley the important around influential chairman of the judiciary committee, the long and the shot of this is that tonight it seems very difficult to see a path for this nomination to confirmation anyway. back to you. >> thank you john. so who exactly is the judge at the center of the confirmation standoff? how merrick garland

>> i was saying that first of all, senators on the republican side are going to have to think about what would a president hillary clinton do and whom would she nominate. who would donald trump nominate among those senators who are not supporting donald trump, and others who are very concerned about a ted cruz presidency. if he becomes the nominee and were to win the election. the other thing is that the white house is mobilizing. now, it may be fruitless, as kelly o'donnell was certainly w hillary clinton do and whom should she nominate. who would donald trump nominate among those senators who are not supporting donald trump and others who are very concerned about a ted cruz presidency, if he becomes the nominee and were to win the election. the other thing is that the white house is mobilizing. it may be fruitless as kelly o'donnell is certainly reporting, but they're thinking at any rate they could get a lame duck session. a lame duck session after november or even a lame duck session after -- if they are fortunate enough to elect a democrat president. so there are a couple of options

. >> a number of senate republicans say they present -- they plan to meet with president obama's supreme court nominee after match, has said there will be no meetings or confirmation hearings on judge merrick garland's nomination but now at least six senate republicans say they will meet with garland but mcconnell says the seat should stay vacant until after the presidential election. >> the american people need to weigh in and decide who is going to make this decision. not this lame-duck president on the way out the door, but the next president. >> reporter: the white house denies reports that president obama might nominate someone even more liberal if a democrat wins the democratic -- of the presidential election. >> we will stand by him from now until he is confirmed in sitting on the supreme court. >> to the end of the president's term. >> that's correct. >> those senate republicans agree to meet with garland in about two weeks after the easter recess. >>> a historic day in cuba as president obama and given present raul castro sign several agreements between the two countries after a

the misstep is an unprecedented decision by the senior senator from iowa and the republican leader to deny the president to fill the current supreme court vacancy. the editorial ends with this declaration -- and i quote -- "a few weeks back when the longest tenured senator from iowa passed a vote we lauded his service to us. we noted in casting votes on matters before the senate, he was doing what iowans elected him to do. we gave grassley an atta boy for that. we take it back. we take it back. that's a blistering statement. a revealing statement, a substantive statement. we take it back. there's a lesson that senator grassley and my republican colleagues should learn from this editorial. by refusing to give president obama's supreme court a meeting, a hearing, or a vote, they are banning the oath of office they swore when they became a united states senator. this abdication of their constitutional responsibilities will epitomize their work in the united states as a senator. whatever they may have accomplished through their careers will be secondary to their decision to place electora

republican senate majority leader mitch mcconnell does oppose the supreme court nominee. some republican senators may be starting to waiver with their own re-elections on the line. as teased by ferdinand amani on this program. of that's next. today's the day! oh look! creepy gloves for my feet. see when i was a kid there was a handle. and a face. this is nice. and does it come in a california king? getting roid rage. hemorrhoid. these are the worst, right? i'm gonna buy them. boom. i'll take them. impulse buy. ommmmmmmmmmm. american express presents the blue cash everyday card with no annual fee. it's all happening. cash back on purchases. here we go! backed by the service and security of american express. here we go! ♪ here we go! everything kids touch during cold and flu season sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. because no one kills germs better than clorox. feel like this. look like this. feel like this. with dreamwalk insoles, turn shoes that can be a pain into comfortable ones. their soft cushion

senator, let's start with you. this republican strategy, not to even take up the president's nominee. how does that work? would you have a chief judge show up at a senator's office and the senator essentially say i don't have time for you? >> well, the judge ought to show up because the senate ought to do its job and the constitution says the president nominates and the senate then advises and consents. and so, if we're doing our constitutional duty we certainly ought to receive the judge and have a hearing for him and bring him up for a vote. by the way, this seems to be a judge with an outstanding pedigree and on top of that in these fractious times, he is a moderate and a consensus builder. that's exactly what we need. >> donald trump, senator, the republican front-runner, he laid out his position on all of this a little earlier on "good morning america." take a listen to what he said. >> i think they should do what they're doing. i think the republicans should do exactly what they're doing. i think they should wait until the n

lot of vulberable senate republicans, kelly ayotte in n.h, toomey in pa, maybe rob portman in ohio. i think if someone like donald trump were at the top of the ttket. it would make life even more difficult for these incumbents."and political experts say many of the 24 g-o-p *senators* who rode the wave of a mid-term gop "win" in 2010; won't t ind it easy *this* time around."this year, they're not going to have the same underlying numbers that helped get them into office and they're going to be facing tremenously higher democratic turnout." as unpredictable as the trump campaign has been, some stratigists can't deny a trump ticket in november could *help* senateincumbents attract blbl-collar swing "reagan democrats". - in states like pennsylvania, ohio and illinois.most polical expertrtagree the g-o-p should *easily* retain its majority in the u-s house. and no matter *which* party controls the senate, john hudak says it'll be a slim majoritya& the next presidede needs to be

it won't get him anywhere with senate republicans. e senate majority leader instantly saying, it's the next president's pick. >> let's let the american people decide. >> reporter: in an interview with npr, obama shot back. >> well, in fact, the american people did decide. back in 2012, when they elected me president of the united states. >> reporter: and so, let the games begin. judge garland headed to the hill this week. here he is meeting with democrats thursday. some swing state republicans say they'll sit down with him, too. only a few are open to holding a vote before november. but, could there be a lame duck confirmation? what if hillary clinton wins the white house? >> i would rather have a less liberal nominee like merrick garland than a nominee that hillary clinton if she were president, would put forward. >> reporter: a final twist. the president may have public opinion on his side. americans by 63% to 32% said the president's nominee should get a hearing. but in this election year climate in washington, don't hold your breat