Dems should confirm Kavanaugh as soon as possible

We can’t keep Trump from nominating an ultra-conservative who wants to overturn Roe v Wade. We can’t stall a confirmation for two years. So Trump is going to get someone he picks confirmed.

It could be a lot worse than Kavanaugh. At least he’s on record as saying under current law, the President is not protected against subpoena or indictment (he famously said he thinks Congress should pass a law that does just that).

And the sooner, the better. Study after study shows that it’s easier to energize angry people than satisfied people when it comes to voting. If the confirmation is still pending in November, more Republicans will go to the polls than if it’s already done. And if it’s already done, more Dems will be angry.

We can’t stop Trump from appointing a justice. We CAN stop Trump from otherwise ruining the country if we take over both houses of Congress this November. And the best way to do that is to get this confirmation over as far before the election as possible.

Ah, yes. The roll-over-and-play-dead strategy. Works every time.

Snark is easy, but tell me:

a) how you can postpone a confirmation until after a new President is in office
b) what good it would do if the new President is Pence
c) how postponing the confirmation until after the election would help Dems win seats in either house

From the “Kav’s going to be a new Souter” and “Why couldn’t we have gotten someone who is truly pro-life” comments I’m reading from some disgruntled conservatives on FB and elsewhere, it seems that liberals may be fearing Kavanaugh a bit too much.

Always read what the opponents are saying, that will say a lot.

They probably can’t stop it, but if they go over his entire record with a fine tooth comb, there’s the possibility they’ll find something disqualifying, and more importantly, they’ll show Democratic and progressive-leaning voters that they’re willing to fight, even when the chances of success are low. Giving up (which is a common Democratic tactic) will just mean some portion of angry voters will give up in believing that the Democrats might fight back.

“When I hear his steps outside my door I lie down on my bed, open my legs and think of the Donald."

In a word, no. The Democratic Party has a good chance of taking a majority in the House with the current status quo, and opposing Kavanaugh, whose rulings and positions pretty much fall along partisan lines, will not change that. The Democrats have a negligible chance of winning control the Senate where they would would have to retain ten out of twenty-six seats (including two independent candidates in caucus with the DNC) up for contention in ostensibly pro-Trump states and gain two more in unfavorable races against the nine Republican-held seats, seven of which are incumbents, which would be a historical upset. This isn’t wholly unprecidented—it’s the same numerically as happened in 2008–but holding that number of seats up for election hasn’t been shown since 1982, and in the post-WWII era there has never been that combination of holds and gains by Democrats. The Democrats actually be statistically fortunate not to lose a seat or two in this scenario.

Regardless, with a Supreme Court appointment for life, there is good reason to take a principled stance, even if it is a losing proposition in the short term. And the supposed strength of the anti-abortion contingent as single issue voters with a chockhold on swing elections is not as firm as it is often made out to be, nor is the issue as rigidly partisan as often presented by political wonks. Kavanaugh should get his hearing and and face scrutiny, and moderate and progressive elements of both the Republican and Democratic parties should vote in opposition of the appointment if Kavanaugh does not demonstrate a commitment to upholding legitimate prior decisions made by the court, especially with regard to providing cover to a sitting president in the argument that the holder of the office should be shielded from prosecution, which is arguable an even more pressing and long term danger than overturning Roe v. Wade.


Presumably the best outcome for the Democrats would be to turn out as many of their voters as possible in November. To that end, the best thing for them would be a gradually increasing storm of Trumpian buffoonery/fearmongering that peaks a few days before election day. They probably can’t delay confirmation that long, but they could turn it into part of the buildup.

But what if they succeed? Suppose the Democrats find something to pin on Kavanaugh and put enough pressure on his nomination that he drops out.

Do you think the next nominee will be better? Kavanaugh’s probably the least bad choice that Trump is going to put forth.

Trump’s doing a lot worse things than this. The Democrats should pick a better hill to make a stand on. This is when the Democrats should remind the voters that they’re the reasonable party.

I don’t think there’s much to gain from blocking Kavanaugh’s nomination unless you buy into the notion that Democrats must do this to avenge the GOP’s decision to block Merrick Garland. They had their chance to do that already - the ship has sailed.

The OP and his agree-ers in this thread are the primary reason that the Democratic Party is seen as a bunch of spineless idiots. Geez…RESIST EVERYTHING! Or lose in November. Find something to cling to as a principle, even if it’s just “Trying to mitigate the Trumpian destruction of the USA”. The time for civility and amity and collegiality are OVER. If we’re the only side holding to those things, we’re dead.

THAT is where they should have shown they were willing to fight the good fight. It was absolutely outrageous to allow Turtle Boy to wipe his ass with the Constitution, especially when Republicans bray about wanting Justices who follow the Constitution. Dems should have been screaming to high heaven about following the Constitution, every day, until McConnell gave up. They should have opposed every bill that came up on the grounds that they had a higher priority issue, they should have talked about it every time they were on TV.

Instead, they made a couple of speeches and gave up. Instead, they’re now gearing up for a completely futile battle, and they’re on the wrong side. They are putting themselves in the same shitty position as McConnell, without being smart enough to have the votes to make it stick.

And you and your agree-ers are the primary reason the Democratic Party is watching its policies being dismantled, even though most of the country agrees with them. The time for standing on principle, only to lose to unprincipled assholes, is OVER. If we’re the side holding the high moral ground, but no power, we’re dead.

I agree. Put up a “good fight.” And mobilize like hell around the inevitable loss. We’ve lost this seat, use that stinging feeling to really rally the Dem voters to the voting booth. Dragging it out past the election will only anger the Pub voters and mobilize them.

But the “good fight” part is critically important. So far, Chuck S. seems to be leading the fight pretty well.

…We can’t stop Trump from appointing a justice. We CAN stop Trump from otherwise ruining the country if we take over both houses of Congress this November. And the best way to do that is to get this confirmation over as far before the election as possible.

(post shortened)

NOOOOooooooooo… Say it ain’t so, Joe (or Tony). The Democrats best chance to be all they can be is to drag out every appointment, every confirmation, every election, every everything, until the DNC gets around to actually deciding who the next Democrat candidate for President will be. Then, it will be an entirely different ballgame.

What precisely do you think that Mitch McConnell did to block Merrick Garland’s nomination hearing that was in violation of the Constitution? The procedural wrangling was at odds with long-standing norms of democratic practice, or course—even Robert Bork got his hearing despite severe reservations on both sides of the aisle—and was as self-servingly unethical as, well, everything McConnell does, but nothing was done that, strictly speaking, violated Constitutional requirements.

That the GOP has turned into the party of obstructionalist dickweeds should be a surprise to no one at this point, and there is little that can be done to force such people to just do their fucking jobs like actual adults instead of bratty toddlers other than to remove them from the stage. Which, of course, is the duty of the electorate. We almost never get better elected representatives than we hope for, and most are worse…which is why Democrats need to start demonstrating that they actually have a message and plan that they will strive to live up to instead of mealy-mouthing protests and then tucking tail to a actual challenge.


If I thought he had violated the letter of the law, I would have advocated an attack on that ground, rather than advocating a PR campaign against his hypocrisy.

Calling out Mitch McConnell for being a hypocrite is like accusing a pig of wallowing in mud. Except, of course, that the pig has a better grasp on hygiene than McConnell does about ethics.


On Monday (before the announcement) I decided to listen to Rush Limbaugh to see if he was going to speak out for or against a particular justice.

While a lot of what he said was just the Limbaugh brand of Democrat/liberal bashing, there was an interesting thread through his comments. Paraphrasing:

Don’t let them try to divide and conquer. Don’t let them tell you that this one won’t be pro-life, or that one won’t protect our borders. All four of the judges are the real deal and any of them will be a great addition to the Court. That’s the important thing. Don’t get distracted.

So what if Kavanaugh isn’t perfect in the fever dream of a single-issue loudmouth on Facebook. He ain’t Souter, either.

I’m sorry; could you run it by me again how this would be Democratic politicians advocating for their constituents? And then could you explain why you think this is the best way for Democrats to advocate for their constituents? Because I’m not seeing it.

Democrats should do the following:

  1. Refuse to vote for the must-pass spending bill that must pass by September 30th.
  2. Shutdown the government until further notice
  3. Deny Republicans quorum.
  4. Leave Congress entirely. Let the Republicans govern the government themselves. Alone.
    Rest easy, though. Democrats are too spineless to do any of this.