Third Senate Democrat announces support for Gorsuch

[Fast Walker 52]

Source: CNN

Sen. Joe Donnelly announced Sunday that he will support the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
"After meeting with Judge Gorsuch, conducting a thorough review of his record, and closely following his hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, I believe that he is a qualified jurist who will base his decisions on his understanding of the law and is well-respected among his peers," the Indiana Democrat said in a statement.
Donnelly is the third Senate Democrat to support Gorsuch, joining Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

CNN's whip list has 36 Democrats saying or suggesting they will filibuster Gorsuch's nomination. Another two Democrats say they'll oppose Gorsuch in the final confirmation vote, but it's unclear where they will stand on a potential filibuster.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/02/politics/donnelly-gorsuch-democrats/

---

I'm VERY disappointed in this from my Senator. I know he is up for re-election and Indiana went big for Trump. But still unconscionable, in my book.

[nycbos]

1. Chill everybody

I think Schumer strategy is to give people like Donnolly cover by having them vote yes and having 41 votes to sustain a filibuster.

[Fast Walker 52]

2. I am hoping that is the case

I wish Donnelly could vote no on the merits, but I'm sure he thinks it is too risky for re-election

[elmac]

6. if its a house of cards thing so be it

but if any Dems make his nomination happen they won't even be able to get elected to dog catcher.

[harun]

34. Amen

[still_one]

20. I think you are absolutely right ny

[AwakeAtLast]

21. I was hoping that this was the plan

[Chasstev365]

33. If the shoe was on the other foot, would any Republicans vote "for cover?"

It should be a united vote FOR Garland and AGAINST Trump and his looney, extremist pick Goursch!

[wordpix]

38. anyone watching Sen Judiciary Comm hearing now on CSPAN2?

Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar were stellar

[notdarkyet]

3. Boo. No money for you, but maybe a primary challenge.

Now is the wrong time to say "elections have consequences." So do bad votes, like yours. Dean said it, you will not get another penny from the dnc.

[nycbos]

4. A primary is a stupid idea

A progressive can't win a primary in Indiana. He is still a million times better than a Republican

[Me.]

8. Not That Progressive

if he thinks putting Gorsuch on the court for life is just fine.

[nycbos]

10. I never said he was a progressive.

He is the best you can do on Indiana though. He is still a million times better than a Republican

[Demsrule86]

32. That is correct.

All this talk of a primary is foolish. We need to take back the Senate...at the very least keep what we have. We are vulnerable in 18. And if we use Trump's unpopularity against him and we manage to take the Senate...we can shut down his court picks for the next two years. An illegitimate president doesn't deserve SCOTUS picks and at the first opportunity we need to stop him. Since Gorsuch will be approved one way or the other. We don't have the votes to stop him. I see no point in risking any red state Democratic senator.

[LiberalLovinLug]

12. If we can't stand up against a POS like Trump now, who or when can we?

He has the lowest approval in presidential history.

While Sanders and Warren, along with their message of the unfairness of the policy direction of the Trumpublicans is still very popular. That message can reverberate and leap frog over Republican politicians to the average moderate conservative. All they need is to properly explain how Republicans are taking away so much from them. Healthcare insurance loss, internet privacy loss, public parks protections loss, air and water protections loss, redistribution of wealth from the less well off to the very wealthy...

I just think we sometimes underestimate how a shift can take place, so we give up completely. Dean's 50 state strategy was working, but DWS dismantled that and had then overseen a record collapse of Democratic representation at all levels by her cowardice.

The iron is hot.

[mvd]

7. I agree

We don't send the right message by giving in. Red or blue state, I do not care. How could he think someone bred by the Federalist Society could be independent? How could he vote for someone who rules against our values almost every time? You see the progressive Buttigieg won in Indiana. Instead of not deviating too much from the Republican side, how about trying to teach them a different message? I am not willing to concede our principles anywhere.

A primary depends on who is available. We still need to keep the numbers.

[Demsrule86]

31. The GOP is going to put in justices with conservative views...and we normally

put in justices with liberal views...Merrick Garland was a compromise and an attempt to get the GOP to vote for him. It didn't work. So the process has been turned on its head...and I am bitter and angry about it. However, primarying a red state Democrat always leads to a Republican taking his seat. We can't afford that. So the Dems in the Senate who face re-election can vote as they need to especially in a situation where we can't stop Gorsuch. He will get in. It is just a matter of if they use the nuclear option or not. No point in throwing yourself on your sword when you can't win. Not only do we need to win in 18 but we have to at a minimum keep what we have in the Senate...imagine a Senate where the GOP has 60 votes. Keep focused on what is important...taking back the Senate and/or the House. Consider if we take the Senate, we can stop Donnie's SCOTUS picks for the rest of his term. Consider we need to have strategy that helps us take Congress back...and as for why he won't get votes bah blah...maybe so...however, he won't lose votes unless Democrats are very foolish and don't vote for him. We have to play the long game. We will never have a majority without a big tent. Personally I want to win.

[TeamPooka]

5. I see stuff like this from Democrats and I think to myself: "Strike 1" If any of them get to 3

strikes there should be a primary.

[Fast Walker 52]

9. good way to look at it... Donnelly is a blue dog but better than

Manchin or Heidkamp, for sure.

[TeamPooka]

14. If the only times you vote against the party are the most important issues then consideration

must be given.
I don't need you on our side to name a post office.
I need you for the big fights that define our values.
If you are never there for me/us at those important times then I have to wonder who you really are.

[old guy]

51. Well said.

[Chellee]

16. Well, if Gorsuch strike one for Donnelly...

then you should probably know about KXL:

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/01/29/turning-back-american-people-us-senate-votes-approve-keystone-xl-pipeline

He also has an abysmal record regarding abortion rights, Planned Parenthood funding, and women's rights. Additionally, he voted for Rex "Official Friend of Putin" Tillerson for SOS.

So we are already in primary territory. Others will say, "It's Indiana, this is the best you can do!" I say I'm sick and tired of having to choose between the guy who's going to screw me 100% of the time and the guy who's going to screw me only when it really matters. Maybe the reason so many people stay home is because they think it doesn't matter, they get screwed either way.

I don't see how he thinks this is going to save him anyway. There is literally not even ONE Republican in the state of Indiana that will cross the aisle for Donnelly. The person he needs to please is me. I'm his base.

I'm not pleased.

[TeamPooka]

17. my post #14 in this thread stands.

[Demsrule86]

29. Not in a red state. We were lucky to get that state to begin with...so

no...he is a reliable vote for health care that alone makes him important.

[elmac]

11. any votes siding with the fascists is going to hurt the party

even if its a carefully laid plan. Not sticking together 100% shows weakness, I hope its worth it. Dem lite never works, even in the red states, and if the fascists nuke then that is their mistake, not ours.

[Fast Walker 52]

23. I agree... what people like Donnelly always seem to forget is how much things like this turn off

their base from voting for him.

[n2doc]

13. Fool

"base his decisions on his understanding of the law and is well-respected among his peers" Oh boy, what a no-content reason to vote for him. It is clear 'his understanding of the law' Is that corporations and the rich have special privileges and the hell with putting safety of liberty first if it costs a corporation even one thin dime. And there are plenty of his fellow jurists who have thought his decisions sucked.

The fact is, no repub voter will vote for him based on this vote. He could vote 100% along with trump and they still won't vote for him. Indies and dems are the reason he is in office.

[Demsrule86]

28. He is a sitting senator so someone obviously voted for him.

[hadEnuf]

15. 3 words: Primary his ass.

Who cares if he's "better than a Republican"? He's acting like a Republican.

Start making some of these turncoats pay a price for their actions.

[Fast Walker 52]

18. yeah... that would be interesting... I wonder if anyone with enough profile here would do it

I tend to doubt it, but it should be interesting

[Demsrule86]

26. Why would you suggest we should primary a Democrat in a red state and

then get a Republican. That is a bad idea...especially now...if we are not careful they could take a majority in 18. Many Dems defending seats.

[hadEnuf]

46. We either make a stand or not.

Dems caving to Republicans after what they have done and are planning to do is simply not acceptable anymore.

[Demsrule86]

50. Really...so you think making a stand and knowing you will lose and probably keep minority status in

the Senate is worth it? No, winning is not everything in this case, it is the only thing...we will have to run candidates in red states that can win...middle of the road candidates...it is the only way to regain the majority. And they will not always vote with us. Many people who post this sort of thing think people in those states agree with you; they don't. You have to consider the electoral reality that exists in a red or moderate state and choose candidates accordingly. I have no doubt that red state Dems were allowed to vote for Gorsuch...because this is a nothing vote...symbolic only. Gorsuch will get in. And there is no point in risking our chance to take back the Senate because then we can stop all the GOP SCOTUS nominees.

[Demsrule86]

27. Welcome to DU and no we prefer to try for a majority.

Dems will never be in control without a big tent 50 state strategy, and while that approach won't net you everything you want...you will get some and you will prevent the GOP from dismantling the government.

[INdemo]

19. You may be disappointed but Joe Donnelly is a moderate consevative Democrat

He voted with 11 other Democrats to stop prescription drugs from being imported from Canada, but the $270,000 campaign money from Drug Companies might have swayed his vote...so I assumed he would vote for Judge Gorsuch

So much for a filibuster...

[Demsrule86]

25. From what I hear they still have enough Dems to filibuster.

A smart party leader...doesn't let those who might be hurt by voting for something...with an election coming walk the plank. I think they have the votes.

[wordpix]

43. next, get some Rs on our side. Graham? McCain? + 3 Ds

NO to SCOTUS RWnuts who support Citizens United & won't answer q's

[Demsrule86]

47. That won't happen...both McCain and Graham support conservative judges.

[turbinetree]

22. There is a old saying

[Demsrule86]

24. It is likely they have the votes.

Red state voters can vote with the GOP...their job is to keep their seat...so we have a shot at the Senate and we stop the GOP from taking the Senate to 60.

[Fast Walker 52]

30. I certainly hope so

[Demsrule86]

36. I just read they have 41.

[Fast Walker 52]

37. woohoo!!!

[wordpix]

41. NO to handing all 3 branches of gov to DT-GOP & NO to dark $ million$

That should be the message to anyone voting for Gorsuch, depending on who your senator is

[Demsrule86]

48. It won't...Republicans will vote for Republicans and that is a fact.

They won't cross party lines and vote against Gorsuch who is actually the same as most of them.

[wordpix]

42. flood R offices: NO TO DARK MONEY SCOTUS CANDIDATES

[Demsrule86]

49. Do you really think this is an issue the GOP cares about?

Instead, keep up the pressure on the ACA.

[kooth]

35. I just emailed them ...

I gave them a piece of my mind, not that I had much to spare, but at least I vented.

[oldcynic]

39. How about a little party 'cleansing'

Why not toss dixiecrats out of the party and run someone else? Dixiecrats are politicians, formerly southerners, who hide under the rubric of the Democratic Party while enriching themselves and Republicans. We cosset them in case they might, maybe, one day help Democrats over some issue if properly bribed. Why can't the party get rid of them and run somebody else?

[Fast Walker 52]

44. problem is Indiana is fairly conservative, Trump won big there

Not clear a more liberal candidate would win.

[oldcynic]

45. Remember that guy with his arm trapped under a rock?

It was cut it off or die. He cut it off. He lived long and prospered. (at least for purposes of my argument)

[wordpix]

40. tweet/email/phone go to town hall mtings, local/DC offices

It's very important to not confirm Gorsuch