You're either going to abide by the constitution or you're not. If you believe it should take 60 or 67 votes to confirm a judge, then amend the constitution accordingly. In the meantime, I believe a simple majority is all that is required.
Uh . . . because no real existing person could get 67 votes in the Senate as currently (and in the foreseeable future) constituted?The Democrats
have journalism on their sideare on the side of establishment journalism. And they think that one man andGodestablishment journalism makes a majority. And the Democrats refuse to cede the right of the president to name judges who will enforce the Constitution and laws of the United States, without regard to laws and treaties which the President and the Congress of the United States have not affirmed.They do so on the grounds that the Constitution is not what it says it is but what Democrats say it is. In that melieu there cannot be a 60-vote supermajority, say nothing of a 67-vote one, for any conceivable nominee to the Supreme Court.