by Ruth Marcus
Maybe sometimes, even in this crazy town and in this crazy season, the best policy turns out to be the best politics. In the context of the Supreme Court vacancy, President Obama’s choice of Merrick Garland may be the hardest for Republicans to reject — or, as they would prefer to have it, ignore.
Not that Garland’s confirmation is by any means likely; I’d rate his chances for the high court higher than John Kasich’s for the GOP nomination, though that’s not saying much. Still, I think Garland’s nomination comes the closest to making Senate Republicans an offer they can’t afford to refuse.
On the merits — and this is no slight to the other finalists; Garland simply has the longevity — he is the best qualified. He is the most moderate nominee Republicans could reasonably expect. His downside, in the view of Democrats, his age, should be a confirmation plus in the eyes of Republicans.
There was a lot of insider talk, before Obama chose Garland, about clever nomination strategies based on energizing demographic groups, deploying compelling narratives and putting certain senators in the uncomfortable position of opposing nominees they once endorsed.
Yes, Supreme Court nominations have increasingly taken on the aspect of political campaigns, but this was all a tad silly. And yes, the key to getting Garland confirmed, at least before the election, will be putting pressure on Republican senators up for reelection.
But perhaps the best way to put pressure on those senators is to pick a nominee they can’t fault — except for the fact that he was nominated by this president. The more reasonable, the more qualified, the more judicious the nominee appears, the harder it will
zbe for voters to stomach the notion, and for senators to stick to the position that he doesn’t even deserve a meeting, much less a hearing.
Click here to continue reading…
SOURCE: The Washington Post
BCNN1 WP 