I'm sure the culture of various firms is widely different, but it seems to me that a hiring partner would have very little problem writing off a well-qualified candidate (GPA, Rank, Journal/Moot Court) as "not a good match" or "didn't interview well," or another sort of subjective phrase. She might not have any oversight at all from within the firm anyway.
Is this also true within the government? Or is government hiring more based on objective factors with less room for the "hunch?" Obviously we all know the answer in the Ashcroft DOJ, but what about more generally?
Asking because I have solid objective factors but didn't get the warmest reception for whatever reason at a government panel interview.