In other words you’ll vote yes. Yes?
Why fight this? Kavanaugh is getting in. It’s better to give her constituents what they want (“fair and balanced”) with the rewards of getting re elected. No suspense here.
Wish we could drain this particular swamp.
Giant rubber stamp: YES…next.
How are they “swing votes”? That’s just dumb. ALL Republicans will vote for this guy, so he will be approved. This can’t even be debated. If some red state Dems need to vote for him to ensure they get re-elected (instead of beaten by a republican), that’s fine by me.
I would submit that the effect of approving an unqualified conservative ideologue to the Supreme Court, where he will potentially inflict damage on the United States of America for decades, is far more significant than whether Heitkamp, Manchin, and the other swamp Democrats are returned to office. The Senate, even if nominally controlled by Democrats, is incapable of returning us to a normally operating polity if these senators are always capable of voting against the best interest of the country on the grounds that they must appease Red voters to keep their seat.
I have no problem with them taking this position out of the gate. In fact, I think it’s the best tactic. My understanding is that there’s a wealth of rulings that can be used to justify voting against him. It also makes political sense to me to wait to announce a “no” vote until after the hearings where he’ll undoubtedly get raked over the coals by their fellow Democrats. Afterwards they can either use any information gleaned to vote against him, or wait until after Murkowski and Collins vote to see if it even matters if they oppose him.
“Just as I did when Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch were nominated,” Manchin noted, “I will evaluate Judge Kavanaugh’s record, legal qualifications, judicial philosophy and particularly, his views on healthcare.”
Excuse me, Sen. Manchin! Merrick Garland never got a hearing on his record, legal qualifications, judicial philosophy, or views on healthcare. Try again.
Very odd bedfellows. North Dakota has the fourth highest GDP per capita, while West Virginia is 49th, just above Mississippi.
they arent guaranteed a win.
“I have no doubt that many members of Congress and outside groups will announce how they stand on the nominee before doing their due diligence and instead just take a partisan stance—but that isn’t how I work,” her statement read. “An exhaustive and fair process took place for Justice Gorsuch, who I supported, and it should and must take place again now.”
I don’t have a problem with this preliminary answer.
Who are their primary opponents?
He knows that…mentioning Garland is a bit of an FU to the Republicans, he’s pointing out that Garland got the same fair hearing from him that they never gave Garland.
And if all the Republicans are going to vote for Kavanaugh, no matter what, then he gets on the Court…in which case the Dems in the red states make their chance at winning that much harder. If they lose, then the Dems have no chance at holding the Senate, which means two more years of right wing ideologues on the benches of the courts of the US, more unqualified government officials appointed by Trump, no investigations of the administration’s activities.
If the red state Dems go to the effort to evaluate Kavanaugh fairly (and, that is actually what should happen in every single case, no matter the nominee), point out all of the issues with him, and still can’t get the Republicans to put up another candidate, then they have done everything they can and should vote in the way that best keeps them in office. Because the alternative, where we replace them with a Republican, is far worse than if they are there in 2019 and can vote with the Democrats for a few years.
Perfect is the enemy of good enough, and any red state Democrat is more than good enough for the last two years of the Trump administration.
I agree completely. Well stated! When it comes to the SCOTUS these people have to fall on their swords, put country before career. They managed to get elected before. Just do that again. Fearlessly. Kowtowing won’t win them any votes. Not in this climate.
Why fight this? Merrick Garland. That’s why. A rigged court stacked with “conservative” ideologues. That’s why.
It doesn’t matter if you think it’s over before the game has even started (a clear sign of depressed surrender). We must fight this. Because too much rides on it to not fight. Even if it seems hopeless.
Do you think her constituents will vote for her if she completely walks away from her principles? I sure wouldn’t. They might not agree with her vote (if she voted against, standing on principle), but I think they’d respect her more for it, and likely vote for her because of it. American voters are funny that way. I’ve heard it time and again. “I don’t agree with all her policies, but she’s principled and honest… I’ll vote for that.” That’s how to win over her constituents.
Just one opinion.
The most important thing for Democrats is to never offend those who will always hate them, regardless.
Exactly right. If Democratic senators in red states can’t defend their decision to vote against Kavanaugh as a real threat to overturning Roe v. Wade, then they’re simply weak, self-serving and complicit in the damage this new SC nominee will do to women’s rights.
I see it more as an opportunity than a threat to keeping their seats. But Democrats refuse to take a stand and fight today when they can comfortably plan tomorrow’s fight, hoping it never comes.
Bullshit. Sometimes you have to put your country over your career, sometimes you have to fight, even if you know you’re going to lose, sometime you just have to show that you have the courage to stand up for what you believe. They may or may not lose their seats over this vote, my personal opinion is that if Democrats started showing some fight they’d actually do better at the polls, but I don’t like voting for cowards, so that just may be me.