There would seem to be a significant qualitative difference between a pipeline to transport Canadian crude across multiple States for processing in American refineries, thus securing a North American strategic supply of oil creating employment for thousands of people, and using eminent domain to forcibly evict someone from their home for a casino parking lot extension. I don’t see the former as Democrat ad material next October, but the latter? You bet.
Not if you're talking about transferring private property into the hands of private entities in order to enrich said private entities. If you're okay with the premise, all you're debating is which private enterprises should be the recipients of eminent domain benefits.