Should Obama Pick Nominee? Your Answer May Depend on How Much History You KnowBreaking News
tags: Scalia, SCOTUS
The Senate is preparing for a no-holds-barred battle over whether it should even consider President Obama’s choice to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. Not surprisingly, Americans are divided by political party about whether Mr. Obama should be the one to nominate the replacement, a new online poll shows. But there is also a fascinating wrinkle.
The more people are told about the history of Supreme Court nominations, the more they tend to agree that the Senate should consider the president’s nomination, not delay it....[W]e asked Morning Consult to add a small number of questions to the survey, about whether respondents’ views would change if they knew more information, like the average number of days from the time of nomination to a vote on a successor (25), the longest number of days for that process in a nominee’s confirmation (125) and the length of Mr. Obama’s remaining term in office (340).
When given more historical context, respondents were more likely to say the justice should be nominated this year. This new information persuaded Democrats most and independents somewhat less so. But it does suggest a little history may be a persuasive tool for Democrats in the nomination battle to come.
comments powered by Disqus
- Documents: U.S. Embassy Tracked Indonesia Mass Murder 1965
- Tufts Project Maps The Landmarks Of Black Boston
- Asp – or ash? Climate historians link Cleopatra's demise to volcanic eruption
- The JFK Document Dump Could Be a Fiasco Say These Two Scholars
- The book Mattis reads to be prepared for war with North Korea
- Digital map helps historians get granular with holocaust research
- Historian Keri Leigh Merritt defends activist scholars
- Historian digs into the hidden world of Mormon finances
- A historian who became a business professor?
- Allan Lichtman's response to critics of his book that makes the case for Trump’s impeachment