|
Obama had to nominate someone, but he probably thinks that there is a 50-50 chance at best that his nominee will be confirmed, so probably didn't want to "waste" a good liberal choice. (Anybody nominated and rejected now, even unfairly, will probably never get another shot later.) But they MIGHT be confirmed, so he is throwing someone out there that probably really isn't someone he'd really like, but someone he can live with. The other option would have been to nominate a highly controversial super-lefty that just wouldn't get confirmed anyway even in a non-election year (as a sacrificial lamb). Whereas Garland is sort of take-him or don't-take-him I don't care, but you're forced to look foolish if you grandstand about election years, etc. And Garland has been shown his due respect even though as a centrist probably neither party as they are currently operating really wants him. And the smart choice would be to go ahead and confirm him...
|
