"I think there are a handful of Democrats who will vote for Kavanaugh, maybe more," Graham added.

[Miles Archer]

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is likely to get the votes he needs for confirmation as long as he does as expected at Tuesday’s Senate Judiciary hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham told Chris Wallace on Sunday morning on “Fox News Sunday.”

“If he does well at the hearing, I believe he’ll get 55 or higher,” the South Carolina Republican said, referencing the minimum, 50 votes, that would be needed for Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

“I think there are a handful of Democrats who will vote for Kavanaugh, maybe more,” Graham added.

Graham is one of 47 Republicans who have either openly voiced their support for Kavanaugh’s confirmation or indicated that they are likely to support it. Forty-one senators — all Democrats — have announced their opposition to his confirmation, according to recent numbers.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/02/graham-kavanaugh-supreme-court-confirmation-806114

[sakabatou]

1. Ugh...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Unfortunately he's probably right.

[Maven]

3. Eat shit, you compromised, traitorous old ninny.

Can’t wait till this asshole gets his comeuppance.

[brooklynite]

5. Why does his saying something factual bother you?

[aeromanKC]

4. Kavanaugh lied under oath

And you wonder why only 6% of his WH records have been released.

[jalan48]

6. This really begs the question of how "Democrat" these folks really are if they will vote for someone

who will be in a powerful position to counter the work of Democrats for decades to come.

[oberliner]

8. Every single Senate Democrat voted for Scalia to be confirmed

All 47 of them.

[jalan48]

11. Makes one wonder what our strategy is.

[oberliner]

13. I am not sure there is one

And maybe there shouldn't be.

[jalan48]

18. I agree.

[ooky]

19. Probably not, if there are already 50 Republican votes.

[LiberalLovinLug]

7. but but but we NEED to run blue dogs to.....

....to.....uh.....vote with the enemy?. Hey, that's ok, as long as we can say we won a seat over a Republican right? na na na na na. Why take a chance that enough voters might actually pleasantly surprise us if they are given a real choice? coughOcasio-Cortezcough

[dsc]

15. well if we had 52 senators instead of 49

we could have had no hearings like they did

[onecaliberal]

9. Any so called Dem who votes for that guy needs to be replaced.

We don’t need DINOS voting for the repuke agenda. If Kavanaugh gets on the court we are fucked no matter how many Dems are in the congress, the right wing evil pricks can declare any law unconstitutional. Women, blacks and Mexicans will be second class citizens even more so than we are now.

[Awsi Dooger]

14. Any Democrat who votes for him is probably in danger of being replaced

By a Republican. So you may get what you ask for

[onecaliberal]

16. When they still vote republican it doesn't matter does It

[chowder66]

10. Any one willing to work with the criminal that is still working to undermine our democracy

should be replaced and should be called out non-stop for any actions they take (or even hint at) that support this unindicted co-conspirator.

No democrat should vote for any Trump nominee. Trump is not a legitimate president.

[Hekate]

12. Is Chuck Schumer as effective as Nancy Pelosi at corralling minority Dem votes?

If the Dems can just stall it until after the midterms, we might have a chance...

[john657]

17. How are they going to stall it?

The pubs have a simple majority, that's all it takes to confirm a nominee.

There are no procedural moves the Dems can make to stop or even slow it down.

[wiggs]

20. Why is it too late for dems, or PP, or ACLU to sue congress or McConnell personally for

depriving a POTUS of a scotus pick? But then change the 'rules' when time for their own nomination? There's something inherently unfair about the process and it seems like there should be at LEAST a delay while we figure this out, get all the Kavanaugh docs, and decide what the rules are going forward. Or is it just what you can get away with?