I never understood why Reagan was so adamant about explicitly appointing O’Connor (I believe he expressed in his own diary such feelings about doing so, despite being counseled that it was a bad choice). Surely there was another female Conservative sitting on the bench (or in another elective office) that could’ve done far better.
Reagan sometimes made some really odd choices that ultimately backfired (for one, he should never have chosen Bush as his running mate when he should’ve chosen Paul Laxalt. He had similarly harmed himself in 1976 when he picked liberal PA Sen. Dick Schweiker to be his running mate, which may have been enough to narrowly cost him the nomination over Ford).
Had Jus. Lewis Powell retired a year earlier, we might’ve gotten a better pick. As you’ll remember, the Democrats got the Senate back in 1987. That allowed them to do their number on Robert Bork (had Bork gotten the votes of all the Republicans, he still would’ve lost — had it been a year earlier, he might’ve gotten on the court — though the downside is that he’d have died while Zero was in office allowing his replacement).
Douglas Ginsburg would’ve done well on the court and might’ve gotten through (might), but the marijuana thing did him in (oddly it didn’t come out a year earlier when he was confirmed to the DC Court of Appeals). After 2 trials with those, Reagan was probably weary and went with a “safe” Ford judicial appointee. Ultimately, he might’ve had a difficult time with getting another Scalia or Rehnquist on the court, and after their ‘86 victory, the Dems were hell-bent on stopping another Conservative judicial appointment. I still remember how ugly it was with elevating Rehnquist, where the media/Dems accused him or implied he physically blocked Black people from voting in Arizona, a scurrilous lie.
Bush was a bad choice for VP, but certainly not an odd one.
Schweiker, that was odd. Damn odd.
As was his *ardon for O’Connor, I suppose.