@oralloy,
Quote oralloy:
Quote:I don't recall parts of the federal government shutting down due to lack of appointments during Bill Clinton's term.
That's because Clinton knew how democracy really works, which is that when an appointment is absolutely necessary to keep something from shutting down, the President clears it with the other party first so the appointment sails through.
The way it works is, the President says to the opposing majority party behind the scenes: "I have two candidates, one you'll be able to live with a lot better than the other. If you agree to vote for the one you'll like better, I'll nominate him or her. Otherwise, I'll nominate the one you'll like a lot less". Then the opposing majority party votes for the nominee they'll like more because they realize that if the position is going to be filled, that nominee is the best they are going to do.
That's how the Federal government has always functioned when the President was of one party and the Senate was of the other party. That's how it functioned under Clinton. If Bush 43 decided not to use that strategy to prevent the FEC was lacking a quorum, that's on him.
Both Bush 43 and Clinton had a similar number of their appointments rejected. But
only under Trump has a Supreme Court nominee not even received a discussion in committee because the majority in the Senate, (Republicans), were willing to wait a year to see if they can get a Republican president, which is unConstitutional.