For those happy with Heitkamp but unhappy with Manchin and Bredesen

[ProudDem314]

Keep in mind that Heitkamp only came out as a NO because she is down digits in the polls and is likely finished. She admitted if this was a political decision (if this was a close race), she would of voted YES. Manchin did what he needed to do to insure his reelection, and his vote was meaningless anyway. He would not have been the decisive YES vote had Collins voted NO. As far as Bredesen, we have a very real chance to win this race. I know Beto is getting all the attention, but Bredesen's odds are a lot better than Beto's. Democratic super PACS should not abandon him because of his support of Kavanaugh. Manchin will be okay without them because of his lead in the polls, but Phil needs all the help he can get. The reality is we are not going to able to elect far left candidates in every state. If you truly believe in the 50 state strategy you have to embrace these candidates. Why? Because the alternative is Marsha Blackburn and Patrick Morrisey. We are already starting this election down one Senate seat. Now is not the time to get greedy when it comes to candidates that do not completely align with your views.

[redstateblues]

1. Great post. Bredesen can win in TN. It's time to focus on winning in November

We lost this battle and it’s time to move on. What it takes to win in TN Is a lot different than in blue states. Phil is running a smart campaign. If the powers that be bail on Phil he may have to spend his own money. He is not an ideolog-he is a problem solver.

[still_one]

2. Where the hell did you come up that she admitted it was a political decision. In fact she stated

her reason very clearly, because she believed he lacked the temperament.

Your assessment that she voted NO because she is down in the polls is not valid. If her decision was part of a political calculation she would have voted yes in either case, especially in a red state like North Dakota.

She voted this way because of his behavior during his so-called testimony, and unbecoming behavior of a SC nominee writing an editorial in the WSJ. Lack the temperament. It is exactly as she said it was.

As for your other points, they are valid ones since the midterms is upon us, and in spite of the rants of some here the Democratic party is not going to abandon any Democratic candidate this close to the midterms when there is even a chance to gain seats

If enough folks don't like the position of some of these Democrats, you challenge them during the primaries. It is self-defeating and cutting one's nose off to spite your face to do it now

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

3. Spot on!

[SharonClark]

4. Good analysis.

[kcr]

5. Heitkamp: If Kavanaugh Vote Was 'Political Decision,' I'd Vote Yes

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/if-kavanaugh-vote-was-political-decision-i-would-vote-yes

[Bfd]

6. It wasn't a political decision for her. It was a moral & ethical decision

She'd have voted yes to save her political skin in ND if she considered that the most important thing.
But she didn't. And it isn't.

[kcr]

7. Fine. Let's cut off our noses to spite our faces then.

It's not like she's an actual politician or anything

I'm not trying to downplay what she did. I'm grateful for every no vote. I just think it's a tad naive to pretend she wouldn't try to save her own skin if she had the chance, just like any other red state Dem.

[Bfd]

9. ? Would you prefer she have voted yes?

Manchin voted yes to save his political skin and now he's been villified.

Damned if you do, etc.

It is a shitty deal to even be in this spot at all.
Grassley, Graham etc ignored & ran right over the rule of law that got us to this spot.

[kcr]

11. I would prefer Dems take back control

You know, the whole thing about how if Kavanaugh is rammed through the GOP will pay with the vengeance of the voters? Well, how in the hell is that supposed to happen if we're punishing some of them? One of them didn't even actually vote. We need that Tennessee seat to flip. I'm sorry, but it's so fucking stupid.

[Bfd]

15. It'll get a lot stupider.

Who the F wanted Trump in the first place.
We shouldn't have to be clawing our way outta this disaster at all.

Later

[ProudDem314]

8. The only reason it was not a political decision is because of her standing in the polls

If she were in razor tight race, do you really think she would of voted NO? She was able to vote her conscience because she is down double digits in the polls in a ruby red state. Let's not be naive here.

[Bfd]

10. Right. So her decision was moral & ethical. Good for her.

She will leave the Senate, which she had little chance of winning, with her conscience in order.
Unlike Collins the day she retires or is replaced.

Collins will drag her yes vote around her neck like a weight for the rest of her life.
Whatever decent thing she ever did in her political career is now irrelevant. Kavanaugh the molester will be stamped on forehead forever.

[ProudDem314]

13. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem what she did considering her situation

I am glad she Voted NO considering her situation. I would of rather of her been the in position to vote YES which would of meant her seat was still in play.

[Bfd]

12. Irrelevant. She's not in a razor tight race.

[ProudDem314]

14. Yeah, no shit. That was the point of my original post

Her situation was a lot different than Manchin or Bredesen. Hence, the No vote.

[Bfd]

16. Lol. Then there's no argument. We agree to agree.

[jxla]

17. The contraction for would have does sound like would of,

but it's spelled would've.

Sorry to nitpick, but this is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.

[Ell09]

18. There are some issues you have to take a stand on

I am not happy with Heitkamp, but I am unhappy with Manchin and Bredesen. Voting "no" on a judicial nominee who has been accused of sexual assault by multiple women, suggested a partisan conspiracy in his prepared notes...then suggested he would be out to settle the score (as a JUDGE!), lied multiple times during his testimony under oath, and displayed a lack of temperament in these same hearings is not a high bar.

The Senators had plenty of cover for voting against Kavanaugh, that had little or nothing to do with the sexual assault allegations. They could have said they didn't believe he could be impartial after his statements in the hearings. They could have said that he lacked the temperament that they look for in a judge. They could have said that they were following the lead of retired CONSERVATIVE Judge Stevens in rejecting his nomination. They could have said that he lied under oath and would always have a credibility problem after that. If Manchin wanted to vote against Kavanaugh there was plenty of cover and for Bredesen, things were even easier...he didn't have to make a statement or he could have simply stated that he would need to see the FBI report for himself before he could comment.

Lets look at the other side of the aisle. How could Dean Heller who is currently involved in a tight re-election campaign (much tighter than Manchin's) afford to vote to confirm Kavanaugh? He didn't even attempt a Jeff Flake/Susan Collins style con job, he was just a yes for Trump's nominee. Lets also remember that Kavanaugh is WAY under water in the polls as the most unpopular nominee since Bork. How about Gardner from Colorado, Portman from Ohio, or Johnson from Wisconsin? All 3 have a lot of time left on their terms, but all 3 are in states that are swing states at best for the Republicans and none of the 3 wavered.

I am not one to ask for "far left" candidates in every state, but Manchin's vote today was not even one of the center (and I am skeptical of how much of the center actually exists) but one of the right. Does it do anything for Democratic causes when someone like Manchin jumps to the other side and they can claim "bipartisan" support for something as radical as putting Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court?