Reply #12: He will certainly vote with Democrats on procedural votes for all judges, and that is basically the

[BzaDem]

ONLY important function of the Senate that will happen for the next 2 years and likely the next 6. (Even Ben Nelson, who is much more conservative than Manchin, never filibusters a judge.)

That alone is reason to RUN to the polls to vote for him. The right-wing turn in the courts has the potential to do much more long-term damage to progressiveism than any single election, and allowing Mitch McConnell to become majority leader means most if not all of Obama's nominees basically die before even getting a hearing. This will have implications for a generation -- there is still a nominee from President Lyndon Johnson on the bench.

You should also note that he is likely much more progressive than he acts. When asked about the healthcare bill right before it passed, he said he would vote for it. It is only now that he is making noises against it. The former statement is a much more likely barometer of his real views than the latter statement. Furthermore, cap and trade is dead for at least then next 6 years, which makes campaigning against it very easy and of no policy consequence. Same with gun control, abortion, etc. They all produce easy campaign ads, but the Senate has very little effect on these policies (especially when Republicans have the House).

You should realize that elections are really about party, and not at all about individual candidates. Politicians try to manipulate voters into thinking that individual candidates are at all relevant, but by and large they are not. They vote with their party 90%+ of the time, and usually only vote against their party when their vote isn't decisive (for show). Ben Nelson was making the same noises about Healthcare that Manchin is now, but when it became clear that his vote was THE decisive vote, you magically saw him voting to pass the bill (likely sealing his defeat in 2012 in Nebraska).