I will agree with your stance on the merits if you replaced the slightly Lib Garland with a mildly Con _____. Even though there are still many within the base who remain disgruntled by the perceived party backstabbing from Kennedy.
By that I mean there would be many who would disapprove of any choice that has the remotest chance of flipping sides. Which is why DT gained immense credibility with the base over his list of highly Con SCOTUS options.
Appointing a mildly Con choice who's within range of a centrist would ruffle some of the base, but they could get over it off the heels of Gorsuch.
However, DT would destroy all credibility within a vast amount of the base appointing Garland or any other choice who could even been construed as a potential Lib lean.
You don't win a contentious election which many felt represented the last gasp of traditional American values only to select a SCOTUS nominee that IS or MAY lean towards the opposition party.
This is the constant mistake the clueless Reps always make. Believing appeasing the new left will earn them points later.
Every single time they make strong concessions the left returns just as cold and vicious on the next issue. The last two budgets are a prime example of caving with no reward.
It would be easy to assume the left would view this as a peace offering and alter future behavior, but it's simply dead wrong. They do not and will not start operating this way.
While I appreciate your position, the base would go apesh*t on DT if he pulled such a weak, forfeiture move in this climate of constant obstruction of his presidency by them.
One of DT's strongest selling points to hold support of the base is Gorsuch and he touts him constantly as being in the conservative mold of Scalia.
Good luck selling that as a raving success in 2020 when he tries to rally the base over appointing Gorsuch and Garland. His greatest success to date would fizzle out.
If anything, DT must retain his appointment successes to stoke the base in 2020. This guarantees the next one is at least mildly Con.
Last edited: Jun 16, 2017