The problem is: 1.) What percentage of that 45% are likely to vote relative to the 33%?
2.) What percentage of those likely to vote are in liberal “safe districts” where a candidate winning by 25 percentage points instead of 15 will make no real difference?
I don’t know the answer myself, so I’m not doom-crying. But absent more information on who those voters are, I’m not 100% sure that discrepancy you list will lead to concrete results.
I think two things were at work here.
There has been some strong speculation that the price Kennedy extracted to vacate his seat this year was a promise that only former clerks of his be considered as his replacement. Kavanaugh was one of two on a short list that met that pre-condition.
Kavanaugh’s rather expansive views on executive power is something Trump would very, very, very much want in a nominee. Trump could not give a rat’s ass about other conservative priorities when measured against that aspect of Kavanaugh.
Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight recently tweeted that the senate has more safe republican seats and the house has more safe democratic seats.
Take that FWIW.
Oh, I’m not trying to get inside of Trump’s mind. That’s like trying to psychoanalyze a box full of alley cats. I’m saying that Republicans generally, including those in the Senate, could have tanked the nomination and come out well ahead in the deal.
I don’t think so.
Trump is nothing if not vindictive.
If he told the senate he wanted Kavanaugh…period…I do not think he would be nice if republicans tanked his boy and would likely nominate a liberal in a fit of pique or some other crazy shit.
Are you referring to the political outcomes of the confirmation battle? I don’t think the Kavanaugh fight harmed Republicans all that much, if at all.
According to both RCP and 538, the Republicans chances in the House are either unchanged or slightly improved from Sep 11th (the day before Ford’s allegations came to light), their chances of holding the Senate are better now than they were then, and Trump’s approval rating is up slightly too. ETA: polls are also finding a Republican base that is more energized for the midterm elections.
The Senate seats are highly Gerrymandered compared to the House and the swing is still to the Blue side.
Democrats’ position losses have been in red states but has been mostly improving in purple and blue states. This is pretty expected especially as the Red states demographically have a higher rate of rape myth acceptance.
As biased as the Senate is to the Republicans protecting the body from a super majority is a win. We will have to see if the non-poll visibly factors play a big role or not but with the basic ignorance and continuing social issues around sexual assault this will be more of a long term shift than a subject voted on by this one mid-term.
I think we might understand the term “gerrymandered” differently.
I disagree. He’d just do a Luther Strange and say that he never really liked the guy and felt compelled to support him. It’s just another example of why the swamp needs to be drained, because those swamp-monsters didn’t realize how great Roy Moore was.
And then, when Roy Moore tanks, he was never in favor of Moore anyway.
No, that’s not my point. Republicans could have gotten the extreme right winger that they wanted, not the mushy compromiser who Susan Collins voted for. Besides, Kavanaugh is such a Bushie anyways. Why not nominate someone from outside the swamp?
(post shortened)
Which “Senate” are you referring to? Are you referring to the United States Senate? The one that’s housed in Washington, DC? Could you explain to me, specifically, how someone, anyone, could “Gerrymander” a U.S. Senate seat(s)?
Lacking that, would you mind telling me who told you that, “Senate seats are highly Gerrymandered”?
(post shortened)
It doesn’t matter who the Republicans nominated for the Supremes, they would have all been treated exactly the same way. Delay and slander are the only tactics still available to the Democrat Party.
How do you explain the fact that the Publicans’ other Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, was not treated in anything like the same way by the Democratic senators?
Eh, maybe next time.
ETA: have there been any candidates on any of Trump’s lists that you’d consider “from outside the swamp”?
Doh…ya didn’t think that one through very well when shifting from my voters guide for the state positions 
I was ridiculing Trump’s facile reasoning and his mercurial pattern of saying anything he wants to make himself look good; not weighing in on the substance of any nominee.
Huh?
Kavanaugh is very conservative. According to FiveThirtyEight he is just a tiny bit to the left of Thomas (the furthest right on the court).
If you want another opinion:
(Post doorhinged)
Garland.
I’m not an expert on this, but I understand that other names on the Federalist Society list, like Amy Coney Barrett, are even further to the right. The comparison of Kavanaugh to Thomas et al is helpful, but it doesn’t really disprove that there are others that would be even more conservative, which is my informal understanding.
“Garland” is a tactic?
Maybe you meant “Borking”.
Regards,
Shodan