Ian Millheiser has a pretty good breakdown of the types of nominee Obama could select....If Democrats controlled the senate Nina Pillard (or Pamela Harris, or David Barron) would be the best choices hands down without question...

But assuming GOPers won't confirm anyone, and they probably won't given the deep sense of entitlement Republicans have towards judicial nominations (remember the WW III fight Obama had to get those 3 DC Circuit nominees confirmed), I think Obama should nominate a Latino(a).....Since last election, House refused to take up Immigration after it passed senate w/over 60 votes, Trump entered race and made his "Mexicans are rapists and murderers" comments, then top it off w/a SCOTUS nominee whose denied a hearing, this should ensure the GOP candiate won't even get 25% of the Latino vote in Nov...(by comparison, Romney got 27% in 2012).......Thus, i think Obama should nominate Mariano Cuellar...

But there are a couple of wild cards here. If Obama nominates someone like  Sri Srinivasan and the GOP blocks him, the Dems could use that to their advantage, but keep in mind Trump is not the typical Republican, He could fuck up the whole things for the Dems and come out in support of him.

Now lets say Obama takes the other road and nominates someone hated by the right like laffy's pick Lorreta Lynch, this could actually backfire on the Dems and serve to rally the GOP's base instead.

One other thing that seems to be getting lost in the mix is that the GOP has quite a bit of leverage today. That leverage goes away if the Dems win in November, and both the polls and the oddsmakers find that possibility to be quite likely. If Obama were to nominate someone like Srinivasan, the Republicans should think long and hard before refusing to confirm as he might be the best option they will ever get.

is always regarding the seating of SC judges. So, I really don't think there will be that much of an uptick no matter who Obama nominates.

And, it's a very interesting one indeed. Orin Hatch! He would be seen as an 'olive branch appointment', but wouldn't last that long, due to his age, so would soon be replaced. It would be difficult for the Republicans to refuse a hearing for him. They still may not vote him in. But, that would show the nation what little respect the Republicans have for the Presidency and the SC.

Given that, since McConnell has said there would be no hearings for an Obama appointment, throwing in the first grenade, I see no reason for him not to throw it right back by choosing a nominee, who if not given a hearing, could blow up in McConnell's face, and motivate even more Dems. to vote. JMHO!

P.S. In my readings, there is a tendency to not differentiate between refusing hearings for a nominee vs. not having a Senate floor vote vs. voting a nominee down. The differences are huge. But, no matter what, if the Republicans do choose to vote for Obama's nominee, the Dems. can point back to McConnell's statement, rejecting hearings, as evidence that the arguments used to not approve the appointment are bogus.

than go on a care ride with Kennedy!

Teddy is the only person with a confirmed kill in the "War on Women"

a murderer as a lib icon - fitting.