The dataset you present conveniently does not include the 211 days and counting for Merrick Garland, the longest period of Senate inaction on a Supreme Court nomination in American history, and approaching twice as long as the next longest (Brandeis at 125 days).

I can't tell if you're ignorant of the fact that his current nominee has been blocked for months and will continue to be blocked for months, or if you conveniently want to avoid talking about it.

I just don't understand how someone invests themselves into a conversation like this without having the first clue about the territory.