[cogitator]

I think Bush didn't expect to get her in, but knew that it would be harder for the dems to oppose two of his nominees. So he used a decoy to draw the worst of the dems fire.

The only problem with the strategy is that he drew too much fire from the conservatives on Miers. As someone else has pointed out, if he nominates a very strong conservative now, the immediate spin will be that Bush is being controlled by the "far right wing".

What he needs is another Roberts. Conservative, qualified, and "under the radar" enough to be hard to oppose. So MY prediction (which is probably unlike many other FReepers) is that the next nominee will not be a name with which we are familiar, but someone with outstanding scholarly credentials. Meaning: not a lot of rulings to examine, but a lot of conservative thought. That's harder to argue against because the nominee can demonstrate the necessary judicial intellectual rigor to be on the SCOTUS, but wouldn't have a record of actual pronouncements.

I therefore predict a conservative legal scholar from a law school, not a sitting judge.

[Trust but Verify]

Diane Sykes.

[mosquitobite]

I'll take a Constitutional Law professor with speeches showing they're originalist, not activist. I don't need a paper trail, but I sure as heck want more than "trust me".

[cogitator]

I'm replying to myself, and I don't know who'll read it, but here is an interesting echo of something I said earlier in this gigantic thread (so I'm self-congratulating my perception):

I said: What he needs is another Roberts. Conservative, qualified, and "under the radar" enough to be hard to oppose. So MY prediction (which is probably unlike many other FReepers) is that the next nominee will not be a name with which we are familiar, but someone with outstanding scholarly credentials. Meaning: not a lot of rulings to examine, but a lot of conservative thought. That's harder to argue against because the nominee can demonstrate the necessary judicial intellectual rigor to be on the SCOTUS, but wouldn't have a record of actual pronouncements.

SCOTUSblog says:

"The solution to this array of dilemmas perhaps would be for Bush to find another John Roberts, an individual with undoubted qualifications, an intimacy with constitutional doctrine, and a most affable personality. The lesson of Roberts' relatively easy confirmation as Chief Justice seems more vivid now. With all of the President's other troubles now, that may be quite an attractive prospect."