I’m a results kinda guy, so I look at the unhinged behavior of DEM representatives and Far Left activists during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, and over the weekend, and wonder what they thought they were going to accomplish. Unlike the Russians during the 2016 campaign, where sowing general chaos in our democratic process seemed to be the main goal, organized protests typically have more specific objectives. I’ve opined before that I believe the main concern of the Left has been that a conservative court, meaning one more likely to adhere to the Constitution and not legislate from the bench, will prevent them from pushing through policies they would otherwise be unable to via the ballot box; it’s bigger than Roe.
So, if you buy that, the goal would be to intimidate the Senate into voting down Kavanaugh, or doing the same to the nominee to force a withdrawal, or even pressuring President Donald Trump to move on to another candidate. Absent that, maybe delay was a decent second prize, hoping for a Senate sweep in November. And absent that, discredit, intimidate, and delegitimize Kavanaugh and the Court to make it less likely to rule against them — and then rally the troops to take back the House and/or Senate.
I can understand the intimidation tactic. It has essentially worked over the last decade as the GOP ran for cover from DEM attacks and media scolding. Even the Court was reluctant to stand on principle — witness the declaration that the Obamacare penalties were a “tax.” But the results at the ballot box, while fantastic for Obama, have been a disaster for the DEMs, with Exhibit A being the 2016 presidential race. So did the Far Left really think that its Kavanaugh conduct was a winning election strategy?
Until Kavanaugh, the DEM platform for 2018 consisted solely of “Resist Trump.” But with Dr. Christine Ford’s letter, DEMs saw an opportunity to play the gender card and they went for it. If Dr. Ford had been the only accusation, conventional wisdom seemed to have been that a he said/she said situation, even with the lack of supporting evidence, would have doomed Kavanaugh under “normal GOP cave” circumstances. It was only the absurd piling on accusations courtesy of the creepy porn lawyer that swayed opinion. Without discounting that and the DEM embrace of it that had the effect of discrediting Dr. Ford and every other accusation, it was more the willingness of Republicans to hold their ground that saved the nomination. And for that, look no further than Trump. Both behind the scenes and in his speech that cited the lack of evidence, presumption of innocence, basic fairness, and intent to fight, it was Trump who gave cover to McConnell to keep the Senate in line, including senators not exactly considered conservative icons, like Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins, to make forceful endorsements.
DEMs still don’t know what to do when attacks are returned in kind, and they’re now struggling. Trump is unique. Initial responses focused on impeaching Kavanaugh as the reason to vote DEM in a month, but I guess the overnight focus groups were fed up with the DEM-inspired/George Soros-funded mob scene and borderline violence incitement, so the tone shifted to downplaying impeachment and urging expression of displeasure by voting. But it might be too late to un-ring the bell of disgraceful DEM behavior in the hearings, betrayal of women, and encouragement of mob rule. Even the gender card is in jeopardy because women are looking at the prospect of having this crowd in charge and saying, “No thanks.” And it’s not just because of the argument that women would not want to see this happen to the men in their lives; it’s about basic fairness regardless of whether a man or a woman is accused of horrendous crimes without supporting evidence or due process.
Dems are desperately searching for another line of attack for November and are trying to rekindle the Trump resistance rationale, since they don’t have enough time to gin up a positive agenda. Trying to delegitimize a Court that is simply more likely to follow the Constitution is the height of irony. Taking the Court out of the legislation business and forcing debate into the legislature is far more likely to reduce tensions at the Court and enhance its effectiveness as the political impact is shifted back to where it belongs. And to show how far afield the campaign platform has gone in just two days, check out the latest rationale courtesy of the DEM go-to mouthpiece, the NY Times. It is urging a DEM sweep next month to prevent conservatives from imposing their white-supremacy agenda onto the country; Kavanaugh is only a small part of that.
You see, Supreme Court judges who are “originalists” are following a Constitution as written by old white guys who owned slaves. Their goal to preserve white rule will show up in biased rulings against immigration and people of color. Further, there will be Court decisions that will encourage young liberals to move from the suburbs into cities, which will concentrate liberal voting blocs in fewer locales, exacerbating the inequities inherent in the Electoral College, which must be abolished — and that can only be done with veto proof DEM majorities. No, I am not making this up, and no, I don’t think you can fit this one on a bumper sticker.
The disgraceful DEM actions and the revolting mob scenes may have helped galvanize GOP voters and unite the center-right with farther right conservatives. But it has done as much to alienate moderate DEM voters, particularly women who resent the way DEMs treated Dr. Ford and cringe at mob rule, and who are more likely to just stay home next month. Combine that with Trump’s more-of-the-same/keep-your-promises positive agenda, and the aura of winning, and you have a powerful platform. We still have 30 days left of news cycles that will move at the speed of Trump, so anything can happen, but if the GOP stays on message and lets the DEMs continue to flounder with too-clever-by-half rationales like the one above, and the prospects of holding both chambers is looking better and better.