So DUers, tell me again why we should give Senators in Red States slack for a Kavanaugh vote.

[rufus dog]

If today hasn't opened everyone's eyes to the unprecedented place we find ourselves in history then we will continue to be beaten by these slime balls.

[JI7]

1. what is "we" ? i don't live in a red state.

[rufus dog]

4. Many our stating that Dem Senators from Red states shouldn't face abuse for confirming Kavanaugh

I strongly disagree, we must do everything to stop tRump from getting a judge confirmed on the SC.

[JI7]

6. but "we" don't all live in red states. why not help purple state democrats win ?

it's not like most people will do much outside of voting.

[onenote]

10. We may not be able to stop Kavanaugh, but if we control the Senate, we can stop the next one

By simply not allowing the nominee to get a vote -- to "Garland" the nominee.

Leaving the senate in the hands of the republicans simply ensures more Trump nominees get confirmed.

[Kaleva]

2. Unless you live in one of those red states, ain't much that can be done.

[rufus dog]

5. Really, how about not a dime for any Dem Senator that defects.

Might they switch to R's, YES. Today a line that can't be crossed was crossed. The way for Dems to win is to fight.

[LisaM]

3. The goalposts have moved.

I wouldn't be surprised if he lost some Republicans on this one. With the NRA ties and other stuff surfacing, Kavanaugh may have a bumpy ride ahead if they can connect him or Kennedy to any of this.

[FBaggins]

7. Because Kavanaugh isn't the last appointment to be made?

If we don't take back the Senate, things can get even worse.

Their fear is that if they vote against a nominee that most of their constituents (including some Democrats) support, they're going to lose their seats.

Even if Kavanaugh is defeated... the loss of those seats very likely locks up the Senate for the Republicans - which means Kavanaugh's replacement is even further to the right and we wouldn't be able to stop it.

If they vote with their constituents and KEEP their seats then we might take back the Senate. Then all of the remaining nominations can be voted down.

This calculus becomes even more compelling if none (or one) of the Republicans votes against him... in which case a "no" vote on their part gains us nothing and still hurts their electoral chances.

[onenote]

9. +1

Any Democrat facilitating the republicans continued control of the Senate is no better than those supposed Democrats that didn't vote for Hillary.

Yes, red state democrats may vote for Trump's nominees, but if the Democrats gain control of the Senate, we can stop those nominees from even getting a vote.

[Lee-Lee]

8. Do you want to control the Senate or not control the Senate on 2018 or 2020?

Because if we don’t take back control of at least one, if not both, houses of Congress than we will remain powerless to do anything about any of it.

And even when we get him out of the White House in 2020 if we can’t control at least the Senate than our President wont have the power to do much to reverse all Trump has done. If we get at least the Senate we have bargaining power to get bills up that start fixing thing in exchange for stuff the House wants. And we have a much better chance to getting the Senate- if we don’t blow it.

[FBaggins]

11. Exactly... and beating Trump in 2020 isn't a sure thing

5-4 with Roberts as the swing vote is definitely worse than having Kennedy as the swing vote... but it isn't MUCH worse. There are at least three SC justices that might make it through two more years... but not six more.

A court with Alito at the center point would be a catastrophe.