Nomination Predictions
on Oct 28, 2005 at 9:59 pm
Tom’s Jan-Greenburg-prompted prediction that the President will nominate Judge Alito comes on something of a hot streak: Way back in November, he predicted that John Roberts would be the most likely nominee to replace Chief Justice Rehnquist; and immediately after her nomination, he went out on a limb that few others did at the time, and predicted Harriet Miers would not be confirmed.
While we’re at it, permit me to sheepishly add that I, too, predicted a Roberts nomination back in November (in a comment to Tom’s post, which apparently no longer exists online), and again in May –- see comments here — one of the rare times in my life when I’ve publicly made a correct prediction.
The point here isn’t to toot the blog’s horn. I wish I could say that the Roberts predictions reflected some great foresight or acumen on our parts — but the truth is that, once Judge Gonzales became Attorney General, Roberts was the logical and obvious choice for this Administration, basically for the reasons Tom gave in his initial post (reasons that seem fairly obvious in retrospect, now that everyone has seen more of Roberts).
For what it’s worth, in that same prediction back in May, Alito was my second choice. Again, that was only because it’s who I would pick if I were in the President’s shoes and shared what I assume are his commitments and interests. So, perhaps I’ll be fortunate to go two-for-two. Or two-for-three, anyway: After Roberts’s confirmation, I insisted (to all who would listen) that the President would nominate a White House Counsel to replace Justice O’Connor: a choice based on loyalty, trust, sticking-with-what-he-knows, and the assurance that the Counsel would be a safe vote in favor of Executive authority, especially on issues of national security. I was right about everything except which White House Counsel Bush would choose. (I also predicted Astros in six.) Oh well.
