Is having the next president fill Scalia's vacancy a better bet for Democrats?

[tritsofme]

Is any nominee Obama puts forward that could actually be confirmed, worth confirming? Any Obama nominee would face a 60 vote test in a Republican controlled Senate.

Waiting until after the election means there is a real possibility there will be a Democratic Senate, enabling the new Democratic president to make a much bolder pick, that could redefine the Court for a generation.

Obama might be better served by putting forward a nominee he knows has no real chance of confirmation, to throw down a marker for what could be the real show early next year.

There is certainly risk Republicans will sweep next year, but there could be real upside to waiting. And in the end, the Republican Senate may not give any other choice.

[edhopper]

1. Yes

because there a good chance they face a Dem Senate next year

[arcane1]

2. Both parties would get to highlight their "The future of the Court is at stake!" angle.

I'm not sure who would benefit most from that.

[Kip Humphrey]

3. Until they figure out the next President will be Bernie Sanders. At which point the

Republicons will embrace Obama's nominee.

[MrScorpio]

4. Actually, I'm all for President Obama to give it a shot.

He has 11 months in office to go, so why not?

No time like the present.

[gwheezie]

5. I think dems have a slim chance of keeping the wh

Obama is the president. He won 2 elections that prove it. It is sheer foolishness to suggest that maybe the next president will be a democrat. We already have a democrat president.
The supporters of the democratic hopefuls are delusional to bet a sc justice on dems keeping the WH. And tipping the Senate dem is a fantasy.
It's all well and good to insist your candidate will win for primary spin, but I'm not willing to put women's rights, voting rights and gay rights on the line for the snowballs chance in hell we keep the WH.