Who do we like for SCOTUS?

[DireWolf]

[B]...But he is giving cover for Collins and Murkowski. It has always been about them...

Correct me if I'm off on this, but didn't Murkowski lose a primary a while back and then win the in thr general as a write-in, or force a recount and come up with a bunch of votes that "got missed" originally? I seem to remember it being one of those but can't recall which offhand...

[Skip]

Correct me if I'm off on this, but didn't Murkowski lose a primary a while back and then win the in thr general as a write-in, or force a recount and come up with a bunch of votes that "got missed" originally? I seem to remember it being one of those but can't recall which offhand...

I don't remember but I do know that she is in a very delicate position.

The problem these Senators have is trying to read how this Kavanaugh thing will complication their elections. And they won't know until midterms (even if they aren't up, they'll know). They are going to have to vote first.

It's like a different level of politics!

[DireWolf]

Correct me if I'm off on this, but didn't Murkowski lose a primary a while back and then win the in thr general as a write-in, or force a recount and come up with a bunch of votes that "got missed" originally? I seem to remember it being one of those but can't recall which offhand...

I don't remember but I do know that she is in a very delicate position.

The problem these Senators have is trying to read how this Kavanaugh thing will complication their elections. And they won't know until midterms (even if they aren't up, they'll know). They are going to have to vote first.

It's like a different level of politics!

Finally had a few minutes of down time to check this, and voila:
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/pol...e24606637.html


Maybe it's just me (and I try to keep the tinfoil hat buried pretty deep), but I just find this a bit interesting in-light of recent perspectives and hindsight...

[hollohas]

By Wednesday next week the Dems will march out a new accuser. They already know who this person is. Then they'll demand another investigation and delay. And on it goes until November.

[Martinjmpr]

By Wednesday next week the Dems will march out a new accuser. They already know who this person is. Then they'll demand another investigation and delay. And on it goes until November.

Well, really, wouldn't delaying until after the mid-terms be a smart move by the GOP?

Think about it: The ELECTION is in November - but the new Congress that is going to get elected doesn't get seated until January.

The democrats aren't stupid (despite all the evidence to the contrary.) They know they have very little real chance to stop a SCOTUS nomination with the Republicans holding a majority in the senate.

What they're doing now is trying to use this to mobilize their base. Dems always do poorly in mid-terms because their base usually doesn't care enough to come out and vote unless there's an Obama or a Bill Clinton to vote for. What percentage of dem voters can name even one of their senators?

Right now they're trying to whip up the narrative of "Republicans is the party of rapey white males! Stop the rapey white males before they rape us all!" It's a stupid narrative but if it gets 5% or 10% increase in turnout then it benefits them.

I haven't looked at the projections for the senate races (since only 1/3 of the senate gets elected each election cycle) so I don't know if it's even possible for the Republicans to lose control of the senate. But let's assume arguendo that they do. Let's assume that November 6th is exactly the "blue wave" that democrats have been having wet dreams about for two years.

So what? Even if every republican that is up for election loses and the senate flips to the Democrats, that won't take place until January. Meanwhile, the still-republican controlled Senate could meet on November 7th or 8th and confirm whoever they wanted and the dems could do f*ck all to stop them.

Could they scream their heads off? Jump up and down? Yell "it's an atrosmissy?" Well, that wouldn't be much different from what they've been doing over the past 2 years so I don't know that anyone would even notice.

Voting for the SCOTUS nominee AFTER the election deprives the Dems of the value of the current circus.

[hollohas]

So what? Even if every republican that is up for election loses and the senate flips to the Democrats, that won't take place until January. Meanwhile, the still-republican controlled Senate could meet on November 7th or 8th and confirm whoever they wanted and the dems could do f*ck all to stop them.

I don't disagree with your assessment at all. Makes perfect sense. However, if they vote for confirmation after a possible blue wave but prior to Jan, I wonder how many of the sitting GOP congressmen would turncoat and vote against confirmation just to please their new upcoming donkey shaped majority?

[Bailey Guns]

Well, really, wouldn't delaying until after the mid-terms be a smart move by the GOP?

Absolutely not. It gives democrats time to do everything they need to do to stop this nomination. If they win the senate in Nov you can forget about this seat being filled by a conservative. There won't be time and there will be even less incentive for chickenshits like Flake to do their jobs.

Democrats will use this week to energize their base even more than the frenzied condition they're in now. There is no good that will come of more delays.

[Gman]

FFS, an amateur can see through this BS character assassination. The other side won't agree to anyone that's remotely conservative. You have a majority, make it happen.

-or-

Earn the title "do nothing Congress" and lose in the next general election.

[68Charger]

Or how many that are going to lose their seat could be lured into changing their vote by a nice cushy job opening that will conveniently be available when they vacate office?

[Bailey Guns]

Trump just ordered a new investigation into Kavanaugh.