Would it be an automatic defeat for Manchin, Heitkamp, and Donnelly if they voted against...?

[kentuck]

Last edited Tue Jul 3, 2018, 02:41 PM - Edit history (1)

...Trump's choice for the Supreme Court?

How can they be sure that their Democratic supporters will not vote against them if they vote for someone that wants to kill Roe v Wade?

Do they have more Republican supporters than Democratic supporters?

Their rationale seems to be that if they don't vote for what the conservatives want, they will be kicked out of office?

That must be a helluva situation to be in?

[mrs_p]

1. I'm moving to ND in the near future

I think the chance of Heitkamp’s re-election is very low. I’ll be able to vote and do my part, but have little hope. She should do the right thing and vote no. But, alas, she probably won’t.

[AlexSFCA]

2. I think if she votes for it, then her chances will be lower

she would alienate already small dem base and trump folks will never vote for her. By voting against she will at least energize the base and may attract independents.

[lagomorph777]

18. That makes more sense to me than the conventional wisdom.

Why can't our folks think these things through?

[JI7]

3. Becsuse people there know it's a deep red state

And even many democrats are racist there.

That's why over 40 percent of democrats voted for a prison inmate over Obama.

[dawg day]

4. I don't think swing voters necessarily care much about SCOTUS

Trump's base and the GOP base will vote GOP. Trump could probably nominate Mephistopheles for ScOTUS and they'd vote for the GOP candidate.

The Dems will vote for the Democratic incumbent.

Those not pre-committed will probably make their decision based on whatever is important to them. If anti-choice were important to them, they'd already be voting GOP.

If they are pro-choice, they're already voting Democrat.

If they actually don't care that much, then they certainly wouldn't make a voting decision based on Trump's desire to stack the court with right-wingers.

Swing voters in this election are probably going to be more, um, "irrational" in the sense of not deciding on any policy, but rather emotional preference. If they are disquieted by Trump's chaos, they might vote Democrat. If they are still chortling at his 4th grade bullying, they'll vote GOP.

[Tatiana]

5. Donnelly... hate to say it, but probably.

Manchin, no. His popularity is solid in WV.

Heitkamp could go either way. But she did support Hillary in the wake of a lot of negative anti-Clinton sentiment in her state.

[kentuck]

16. I agree.

But I think Heitkamp will vote with the Democrats.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

6. They are in deep red states and require some cross vote to win

WV went for trump with 42% margin.
ND by 35%.
IN by 20%.
With margins like that, there is no way any of them win without drawing votes from those who voted for trump as well.

[kentuck]

7. Would that mean that Democrats would still vote for them if...?

...they voted for a candidate that would overturn Roe v Wade? And they could afford to lose Democratic votes but not Republican votes??

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

8. In my opinion, they can't afford to lose any votes

They are between a rock and hard place. Simply, they may depend on dems holding their noses and voting for them even if they vote to confirm simply because the Dems need to hold onto these Senate seats in order to have any real chance of retaking control of the chamber. Manchin may have enough personal popularity to hold his own in WV, but I doubt the other 2 do. Maybe if there is a massive boost of dem voters or indies/gop who are disgusted with trump, donnelly holds. Heitkamp I think is in trouble regardless of what she does. Trump is still popular in North Dakota so there may not be that many crossover voters disgusted with the gop.

[kentuck]

9. I suppose they would make a simple calculation?

Which will lose the most votes? Since conservatives are willing to vote for a Democrat in the first place, they probably understand that there is a chance they may vote pro-choice on women's rights? If I were in their shoes, I would vote the Democratic position.

[FBaggins]

10. Keep in mind that regional variations are not just in relative number of Democrats/Republicans

It's also in the makeup within the parties as well.

For instance. Pew polling indicates that roughly one in five Democrats thinks that abortion should be illegal in "all or most cases". My guess is that number is pretty close to zero in New York or DC... but closer to 50% in Indiana.

So yes... I'd imagine that many Democrats in IN would continue to support him if he backed such a judge (and in fact HAVE done so for years)... and that the rest would almost certainly still vote for him because the alternative is farther right.

Add independents to the mix and that further complicates the issue.

[kentuck]

12. Yeah, Indiana would be a wildcard and could go either way....

would be my guess?

Also, Mike Pence is from Indiana and that might be a factor in Donnelly's vote? I could see a tie vote with Pence casting the tie-breaker. That would be something Pence would have to defend if he ran for "higher" office.

[SharonClark]

11. Red state Dems should be smart enough to create a strategy

that lets them vote against a Trump nominee on many issues, not just Roe.
If a nominee is from Trump, you know he's bad on many issues. Why not vote against a nominee based on education, the environment, the military, etc. Dems need to learn how to spin.

[fallout87]

13. Heitcamp and Manchin were already in danger of losing their seat

so this puts them moreso in a bind. It MAY be a better strategic decision to vote for the nominee and try to retain the seat. If they vote against, they will likely lose in November, and the repugs will have gained additional seats in the senate.

[pwb]

14. No. We win in all states when we vote.

If all democrats voted there would be no red states.

[still_one]

15. We wouldn't be in this mess if those supposed self-identified progressives who refused to vote for

the Democratic nominee, in spite of being told repeatedly that if nothing else the SC is more than reason enough to vote for Hillary, but refused, so as far as I am concerned this OP is meaningless, unless it is an excuse to give those self-identified progressives who didn’t vote for the Democratic nominee a vehicle to trash blue dog Democrats in red states because they don’t fit into their ideological purity, when all they have to do is look in the mirror if they are looking for someone to blame

Some may not appreciate or comprehend but at this stage having the majority in both houses is paramount, and they should do not only what their constituents want, but also what gives them the best chance of getting the majority

[kentuck]

17. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink...

And good luck when you get the majority.

I'm sure it will be defended vigorously and will be long-lasting.

I was proud to have voted for Hillary. I thought Bernie could have done a little more to get the "independents" behind her, but maybe that was just my impression?

We are where we are and it probably doesn't do a lot of good to re-hash everyone's mistakes?

[bluecollar2]

19. They won't...n/t

[kentuck]

20. Are you sure about that?

[bluecollar2]

21. Yes...n/t