And, if they end up voting for her and she ends up being another Souter or O'Connor, there careers could be over. What's a greater risk, angering an increasingly lame duck President or facing a voter backlash for supporting a liberal justice to the Supreme Court when you party held a 55-seat majority?
In fact, I see no downside to demanding a candidate with a proven track record.
I see no upside to accepting a candidate of stealth, and big trouble if that becomes de rigour. Everybody is gambling in that scenario. What a nutty way to run a serious government.