IMO Obama made an unforced error with the appointment of this pro corporate, anti defendants rights judge.

The republicans may be ready to make a bigger error by refusing to confirm or even hold hearings on this guy. If they were smart they would schedule the hearings and rush the confirmation through and then boast to everyone who is paying attention that they forced Obama to nominate a right wing justice that was acceptable to them.

Of course, there's always the possibility that Obama was not playing umpteen dimensional chess, but he really believes this is the type of justice the country needs. That's actually more disturbing.

this is just an article that indicates that both Clinton and Sanders are united that he is a strong nominee and should be given Senate consideration.

I don't have to agree with everything Sanders says and I pretty much don't agree with anything Clinton says.

But Im actually more depressed that Obama is still, after all these years, letting the republicans in both houses of congress dictate his actions.

Obama is trying to force the GOP into a very tough spot. He is betting they will not budge and this will cost them in the election. Then Hillary will be free to nominate somebody else.

But if the GOP caves on this, Obama can live with this guy too. That is disturbing, but it really should come as no surprise. Obama has supported the 0.1% every step of the way. And this might be his parting gift to them, as in, "Sorry I couldn't get the TPP thing done, but here's somebody you can enjoy on the SCOTUS for the next 25 years."

First, there is a strong chance that the repubs will stick to their guns and refuse to confirm anyone. Rather than taint a more progressive, younger choice, putting Garland out there as a sacrificial lamb makes sense. It also undercuts the repubs argument that it would not be appropriate to replace a staunch conservative with a Ginsburg-like liberal. (That argument by the repubs is BS, but it tends to play with a significant portion of the public).

Second, for Garland, it makes sense to accept being a possible sacrificial lamb because at his age, he probably has lost the opportunity to make it onto the Court under a post-Obama White House. His only shot is if the Republicans lose not only the WH but also the Senate in November. At that point, the Republicans might decide to confirm Garland figuring he's better than what they would get under a Clinton or Sanders administration backed by Democratic Senate majority.

But even that slim chance is probably more theoretical than real. I just don't think the Republicans, if they lose the Senate, will confirm Garland. I think they'd prefer to let the next President make a nomination, probably of someone younger and more progressive and then mount an all out war on that nominee (which will be a good way to replenish their fundraising coffers after the 2016 elections).

So its a very low risk strategy by Obama.