When it comes to choices for his White House Cabinet, Donald Trump has had one obvious disaster: He announced former Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz to serve as attorney general, and in the face of bipartisan revulsion, the former Florida congressman withdrew from consideration after just eight days.

Gaetz, however, was never formally nominated for the position — the fiasco unfolded early on during Trump’s transition period — and the president’s actual Cabinet nominees have all advanced rather quickly. The vote on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth couldn’t have been any closer, but even he managed to gain the necessary support from 50 Senate Republicans.

For the White House’s critics, it’s only natural to wonder: Will any of the president’s nominees fail?

As it turns out, two of Trump’s most outlandish choices are facing meaningful headwinds, which were unresolved by their Senate confirmation hearing.

Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, for example, is the president’s choice to serve as the director of national intelligence, which is utterly bonkers for a great many reasons. Over the last six weeks, there have been multiple reports from multiple outlets quoting Capitol Hill sources, each of whom said the same thing: Gabbard had met privately with senators, who were decidedly unimpressed.

The Hawaiian’s confirmation hearing was an opportunity to give her beleaguered and controversial nomination one last boost. As NBC News reported, it didn’t quite go as planned.

[Gabbard] faced tough questions Thursday from several Republican senators at her confirmation hearing over her past praise for intelligence leaker Edward Snowden and her shifting views on an electronic surveillance program supported by senators whose votes she needs. Gabbard, trying to reassure the GOP lawmakers while accounting for her previous progressive positions, struck a more critical tone on Snowden despite having held him up as a crusading whistleblower. But she declined to answer whether she viewed him as a “traitor.” … [She] also sidestepped specific questions from Republican lawmakers about her views on the surveillance program that Snowden helped expose.

Asked whether her answers complicated her prospects, Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma told NBC News, “I think there are a lot of questions after. Yeah.” Republican Sen. John Curtis of Utah added, “I leave today’s hearing with more questions than answers. Some of her responses, and non-responses, created more confusion than clarity and only deepened my concerns about her judgement.”

Soon after, Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, an apparent Gabbard supporter, told Fox News that he’d spoken to some of his GOP colleagues and he was “worried that her nomination may be in jeopardy.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee is narrowly divided between nine Republicans and eight Democrats, which means that if one GOP member balks at her nomination, and Democrats on the panel are united against her, Gabbard will not receive the committee’s endorsement.

Republicans could try to bring her nomination to the floor anyway, but if GOP leaders believe there are four or more Senate Republicans who oppose her, they almost certainly won’t bother.

As for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the conspiracy theorist Trump tapped to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, his Capitol Hill testimony apparently didn’t do his nomination any favors, either. As NBC News reported, the anti-vaccine activist tried to persuade Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana — a physician who chairs the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee — but ultimately struggled.

At the end of Thursday’s hearing, Cassidy said he was “struggling” with Kennedy’s nomination. “Your past of undermining confidence in vaccines with unfounded or misleading arguments concerns me,” Cassidy said. “Can I trust that that is now in the past? Can data and information change your opinion, or will you only look for data supporting a predetermined conclusion?”

During one especially memorable exchange, Cassidy effectively said he’d support Kennedy if the HHS nominee acknowledged the simple fact that vaccines didn’t cause autism. Kennedy refused to do so.

As is the case with the Intelligence Committee, the GOP has a one-member advantage on the Finance committee, which Cassidy is a member of, and which will vote on the nomination. If the Louisianan ends up opposing Kennedy, he will fall short (unless one or more Democrats end up backing the nominee, which seems highly unlikely).

Again, Republicans could try to bring Kennedy to the floor for a confirmation vote anyway, but there would be some procedural complexities, and if GOP leaders didn’t believe he’d end with the necessary votes, they’d probably just let Kennedy know it was time to stand down.

It’s worth emphasizing that White House critics shouldn’t get their hopes up just yet. After all, it was widely assumed last month that Hegseth’s nomination would be derailed by his many scandals, and 50 Senate Republicans ended up confirming him anyway.

That said, more than a month passed between Hegseth’s apparent collapse and his confirmation vote. Gabbard and Kennedy, meanwhile, don’t have the luxury of time. Watch this space.