Hillary on Supreme Court?

Matt Lewis

5/8/2008 8:56:00 AM - Matt Lewis
... To paraphrase Thad Cochran, that idea sends shivers down my spine.

But it's a real possibility.  Getting rid of Hillary will presumably require some sort of deal -- and I still don't buy the premise that Obama will go for the "dream ticket" -- not so long as Bill Clinton is hanging around.  Even if Obama wins the nomination, having the Clintons subtly undermining him -- and hoping he loses to McCain -- won't do him any good.  So maybe, just maybe, Obama promises to nominate her.

That's why I am occasionally writing about senate races here at Townhall.  Granted, these posts elicit very little attention or comments -- but that doesn't diminish their importance -- if you care about nominating and confirming good Supreme Court Justices. 

... If Barack Obama wins the presidency, every Senate seat will be vitally important to keeping liberals off the Supreme Court. 

... John McCain's recent speech on activist judges gives us a lot of hope -- but even if he picks strict constructionists -- they will still require senate approval.

If you believe John McCain will win, there is an argument that says we will really need to help elect good senators.  It's based on a psychological phenomenon called "switch-back."  This theory essentially says that if voters want to vote for Obama, but they can't bring themselves to pull the lever for him (because he has been demonized for one reason or another) -- they will vote for McCain, but vote Democratic on all the down-ballot races.  Presumably, voters do this in order to "make-up" for their presidential vote.

But getting involved in senate races has become even more of a challenge for conservatives, because almost all of the vulnerable Republicans this year are moderates.  So it becomes a pragmatic choice as to whether or not the stakes warrant your involvement.  When one considers that one of Bush's accomplishments was in nominating Justices Roberts and Alito, the prospect of allowing the court to lurch leftward, once again, is unappealing (why willingly surrender one of the few vitally important positive accomplishments we have gained in recent years?).  As such, supporting moderate Republican senators becomes a more appealing proposition.  (Getting involved in House races is another thing altogether, since they don't have a voice in Supreme Court confirmations).

One appealing reason to get involved in senate races is that you have a real chance to make a difference.  While it is difficult for one person to make a significant impact on a presidential race, "maxing-out" to a senate campaign can have a real impact.  And when it comes to the supreme court, you could make a good argument that good senators are just as important as a good president ...