Resisting Trump’s Supreme Court pick isn’t worth Democratic Senate seats

The San Francisco Chronicle ^ | July 14, 2018 | Willie Brown

[TBP]

Please vote no, Democrats. I double dog dare you.

[sitetest]

There are 10 Dems running for re-election in Trump states. It would be nice to scoop up as many as possible.

[Henchster]

"My advice is the same I gave to Assembly members when I was speaker and a vote like this came up: Go with whatever will get you re-elected."

How far politics has fallen. Decades ago, even the sleaziest politician would never admit he didn't vote for what was legal, ethical, or fair, just whatever would get them elected.

Now, forget just admitting it, today's sleazy politician brags about it.

[centurion316]

Dick Durbin is doing what Chuckie has told him to say. They have no intention of demanding any Democrat Senator sacrificing his or her seat. Even though they are stupid, they are not that stupid. Kavanaugh will be confirmed and several Democrat Senators will lose their seats. It’s a bad year for the Democrats to hope making the playoffs.

[Intolerant in NJ]

No one vote — not even for a Supreme Court justice — is worth costing your party a Senate seat for six years...good thinking, Willie - get 'em to vote for Trump's Supreme Court pick to appease Republicans and try to save their seat - and get their base so riles up they don't show up to vote and lose the seat anyhow - good thinkin'.....

[CurlyDave]

These aren’t mutually exclusive options. There’s no reason several Democratic senators can’t support Trump’s nominee and still lose their Senate seats.

From your keyboard to God's eyes.

[Nothingburger]

Agreed.

Once upon a time, it was possible to respect your opponents.

Not any more.

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

Was Willie married at the time that he had his affair with Kamala? Don’t know much about it but I’m sure it is interesting.

I always like to know where “Little Willie” has been, and with whom.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

There are 10 Dems running for re-election in Trump states. It would be nice ^{is important} to scoop up as many as possible

. . . considering the (granted, lesser) extent to which the shoe will be on the other foot in ’20 and in ’22.

It is not actually as simple as “Red State, Blue State” - but to the extent that that model is useful, the Republicans have a structural advantage in the fact that most of the states with small populations are “Red States.” Thus, “Red States” are more numerous than “Blue States,” and it should be easier for the Republicans to hold the Senate than it is to win the White House.

A similar dynamic actually pertains to the House of Representatives - Democrat voters are more concentrated in cities, producing natural districts which Democrats win overwhelmingly - and leaving more numerous districts elsewhere to be won more narrowly by Republicans.

[Hardastarboard]

No matter what one might think of Willie Brown, he’s a better, smarter politician than Dick Durbin.

[Pollster1]

Of course it’s worth it. Democrats in conservative states should vote against any Trump nominee. We still get the SCOTUS pick, and the extremists lose their seats once voters see what they stand for. What’s not to like?