3 ms·

Of course he also said if Hillary won that he would refuse to confirm Garland for the entirety of her presidency...

• krferriter 8y ago
  I mean that's due to a disagreement in politics. He wasn't calling her a demonic satan-worshipping child trafficker like some on that side of the spectrum were.
  • snuxoll 8y ago
    Certainly, but that doesn't make it okay. In general things weren't rosy with his political career, his reputation for being a "maverick" that would buck party leadership was laughable since he ended up toeing the party line more often that not, even when he decided to speak out against {X} idiotic move they made he would still put a "Yea" in for the vote. With that said I think he genuinely wanted what was best for the country, even if we never saw eye to eye on what "best" actually was.
• greglindahl 8y ago
  Yep. There's good and bad in there. When people die, it's usual to recall the good more than the bad.
• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
• fastball 8y ago
  And? That's the entire point of checks and balances.
  • selectodude 8y ago
    That isn't checks and balances. That's partisan bullshit.
    • fastball 8y ago
      His reason was not "because you're a democrat", so I'm not sure how you can make that claim.
      • selectodude 8y ago
        “McCain spokesperson Rachael Dean later said that McCain "believes you can only judge people by their record, and Hillary Clinton has a clear record of supporting liberal judicial nominees."‘