We all know that the real reason Democrats are opposing Judge Gorsuch has nothing to do with Judge Gorsuch. It’s about Judge Garland. Republicans broke the rules in 2016 by refusing even to consider Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, and Democrats are not going to let them get away with it. If Democrats don’t oppose Judge Gorsuch, they’re letting the cheaters win, and that is bad for everyone.
So why not say so?
That argument, unlike the flimsy bias claim, has the benefit of being true. It also is effective: It doesn’t matter how nice and smart of a guy Judge Gorsuch is, he shouldn’t be there in the first place—there shouldn’t be a vacancy to fill.
And, helpfully, this true and effective argument doesn’t further damage the democratic process. On the contrary, it is aimed at repairing it.
I am frankly mystified as to why the Democratic leadership has chosen a disingenuous, destructive, and ineffective argument over an authentic, beneficial, and effective one.