It's looking like the R's have a very real chance to hold the Senate.  And now at least three Republican Senators have said they will block ANY nominee Clinton puts forth and leave the SCOTUS at eight members indefinitely.

Double-edged sword here.....I really think the majority of voters are tired of the general obstructionism. But is there a way for Clinton (or Senate candidates) to play that aspect with certain voting groups now without equally motivating those who want her to be kept in check by a Republican Congress? Hmm, maybe it's a better play for the Democratic Senate candidates while Clinton stays out of it. And I see the double-edged sword for them as well.

Or are the Republicans just using the issue for their own purposes now and will back off once the election is over, and approve Garland in a lame duck session?

I have a hunch SCOTUS nominees may once again be a major 2018 midterm issue, but the map is much more favorable for the Republicans to keep in control of the Senate and House in that election.

I hope you've all enjoyed me arguing with myself.

He's qualified, and would undoubtedly be a less volatile choice than whomever Hillary comes up with. They should have approved him months ago. There will be bigger fights ahead with the NEXT vacancies, and they're just pitching a fit in the grocery store because they can't have candy.