At this point, the focus should be on November and what scenario best helps Democrats... [View all]

[Drunken Irishman]

Because we've got an 82 year old justice on the Supreme Court currently who could also die between now and the end of a Trump term - plus everything everyone thinks needs to be done can only be done if the Democrats win back control of the Senate.

The battle isn't to stop this seat from being filled. It's going to be filled. There is nothing Democrats can do to stop it outside working like hell to get enough GOP senators to give a strong no - but does anyone really believe that's likely to happen? Of course not. Maybe one or two Republicans will have the backbone needed to stand up to McConnell.

Maybe.

So, that means our focus still is November 3rd. We've got to win this election. If we don't, it'll also mean we probably don't take back the senate and that'll be that.

With all that out there, what scenario helps the Democrats the most?

1. A delay until after the election - forcing a confirmation during the lame duck period?
- Optics wise, it would look terrible for the GOP senate, after, say, losing the senate, confirming a GOP president's pick, despite the fact he just lost reelection, during a lame duck session of congress. Of course, the GOP can care dick about optics and if they're now the minority party - they've got nothing to lose. Especially if people like Collins and Gardner are on their way out of office. Maybe even Graham. The thing is, one of the GOP's main argument right now for getting a justice approved is that we can't have a potential split court ruling on election issues during a contested election. That argument dies if they wait. They also will have to somewhat telegraph this move, as if they don't confirm between now and essentially election day, it'll be pretty clear this is their plan. They will have to concede they'll confirm after the election. That's not a good look for incumbent senators as they try to explain how they can justify the potential of confirming justices during a lame duck period when they may have already been voted out of office. That also raises questions with McSally's current seat. If Kelly wins, technically he can be seated in November. Technically only because the Republicans still control the swearing in. Of course, the Republicans can LIE and say they won't move on the nominee in the lame duck, dangle the nomination for their base (which could fire up Trump fence sitters), and if Trump wins, they can do it in January, no damage done - but if he loses, still push through the nominee during the lame duck period.

2. A vote before the election - forcing it as an election day issue?
- This could impact the presidential race. For those tepid Trump voters, maybe they don't feel as inclined to support Trump in November if the seat has already been filled. That's been their justification for supporting him all these years. With that out of the equation, maybe they stay home or vote third party. Conversely, it could fire up Democrats even more and they not only win the presidency, but expand their potential majority in the US senate - winning Arizona, Montana, Iowa, North Carolina, Georgia, Maine, Colorado and South Carolina. That would absolutely give Biden a mandate to push through some pretty aggressive legislation (first thing firs: recognize Puerto Rico and DC as states). On the flip side, taking the Supreme Court issue, the need to fill RBG's seat, might discourage fence-sitting liberals who were only going to vote Biden to keep the seat. Now what's the point? Sure, you can point to just what I said: expanding the Senate majority, which will allow for a more aggressive agenda (maybe even an expansion of the courts) but will it be enough?

To be honest, I think option two is the best. I don't trust the GOP, even if they say they'll defer until after the election, won't push through a nominee in the lame duck period. I do think there could be potential voters who stay home if RBG's seat isn't the issue, and I think the blowback from ramming through the confirmation is going to fire up Democrats and turn off a lot of suburban women.

But there's one caveat: Trump is going to nominate a white woman to the Supreme Court. The optics have to be good for the Democrats. They cannot risk looking angry toward this woman because most people are not going to blame her for what is happening. There was a temporary backlash to Kavanaugh's hearing in the sense Trump actually saw an approval bump during the hearings. We can't risk that in 2020 with how close we are to the election. IF this goes to hearings before the election, the Democrats have to be professional and hold the hearings like they would if it were 2019. I know that goes against everything we think should be done but at that point, it's too late anyway and the last thing we want to do is turn off white suburban women who are poised to deliver the White House to the Democrats.

(all bets are off, tho, if Trump nominates another man)