Says Ezra Klein:
I’m also of the opinion — though lots of others on Twitter aren’t — that the Senate is likely to be friendlier when confirming one of its own. But the real question, of course, is who? I
’ve always been partial to the idea of seeing Hillary Clinton appointed to the Supreme Court. She’s got a law degree, of course. She’s practiced law, practiced politics and practiced statecraft. She’s been present in both the executive and the legislative branch. She’s done an enormous amount of retail politics, which I think is useful. She’s smart and hardworking and has proven herself adaptable to a wide range of institutions. The counterargument I got on Twitter is that she’s controversial, but I’m not sure I really believe that anymore. She’s well-known, and many Republicans in the Senate like her personally.
And now this from Joe Scarborough on why Clinton should be considered for the Court:
“I think Hillary proved herself to be pretty darned mainstream when she was running against Barack Obama – they kept painting her as being TOO conservative.”
I’m not sure a Supreme Court confirmation hearing can ever be considered must-see TV, but a Clinton nomination might make it so.