DevoHusker

Those are not the only choices.

Yes, hard to believe it developed organically into a concerted effort at a recall.

Insightful. Thanks for the read.

Doh Yes, I misread your reply. I think you are correct.

Yeah, this is my take

All 200 empty seats...? Umm, okay. scotus seats, then I agree

I agree with your stance 110% But there is a LOT of prognosticating on these pages as to what the "other side" would do, would have done with the courts, Covid etc. I wish that decorum would become a trending thing again in Politics but, alas, I don't think it will happen any time soon.

But knapp just said that Presidents should be allowed to seat their nominees, right? McConnell blocked Obama. Trump is doing what you want(ed) Obama to do. If Democrat held the senate they would do the same.

Should be criminal, but just more proof the rich are not like the rest of us

Ah. So why skirt your actual point. Thanks, and absolutely I am not okay with McConnell's actions. But my post, such a long long time ago, pointed out that Obama really isn't sitting all that bad in comparison, and if he and HRC would have made it more of a priority they would be even better. They, wrongly, assumed they would have at least an4 year extension.

Man, maybe @knapplc is right and I am completely dense. Of course we have to discuss recency. Washington has no sitting judges. I get that. I would say the last 2 Presidents would have the most impact. Clinton, W, and Obama all had 8 years. So a 16 year stretch for 2 recently, and 12 (hopefully) when you add Obama to Trump. So if Obama still, after being gone 4 years has 39% and Trump has 24% then Obama still had greater impact on sitting judges. Not year for year or 8 vs 4 years in office, but impact currently.

Why wait? Lead me where you want me to go.

Thanks. And, I called out the turtle previously. But how is the total and/or percentage a "trash statistic". Through hook or crook, that is the number of judges that each President had input in seating. 39% seems high, when considering the total, for any single POTUS. And, @commando @knapplc say Obama total would be much higher without McConnell's devious ways...but they weren't complaining obout the makeup of the judiciary then. Only now when it is trending opposite of their beliefs.

Up until this post, you never mentioned percentages , or year for year, or "on place to" or ratios over hypotheticals.

I truly don't follow your logic. It actually says actual percentage of current sitting judges

I am in much the same boat.

by all means, please enlighten me

How is 194 a larger number than 312? (or 219 larger than 329 using your numbers)

Pretty sure you are incorrect