There are 36 Senate Dems against Gorsuch. We need 41.

[CousinIT]

CALL YOUR SENATORS BEFORE THURSDAY & ask them to OPPOSE Gorsuch: 1-888-877-2040

AFTER we get 41 Senators opposed to Gorsuch, then call and demand that your GOP senators NOT change the 60-vote rule. Change the NOMINEE, not the rule.

Gorsuch was chosen by the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation - Trump allowed them to choose the nominee THEY wanted. He's dangerous, FAR too extreme and his being seated on the USSC will all but ENSURE that Trump gets away with EVERYTHING.

[sharedvalues]

1. Call call call - administration is going down but GOP trying to steal seat

Gorsuch is pro-big business and anti-middle class.
Old white rich guys will do great under him.
And he's very likely to increase the flow of money into politics giving the rich and corporations an even bigger advantage over average Americans.


If Heritage likes a judge you know that judge will help the rich and hurt the middle class.

[CousinIT]

3. Worse, that SOB on the USSC will help ensure Trump GETS AWAY with everything.

And that just can't happen!

[LaydeeBug]

2. kick

[Starry Messenger]

4. K&R

[still_one]

5. We should oppose any SC nomination until we know the extent of involvement regarding

trump and the Russians period.

[spooky3]

6. Virginians: Kaine will vote to filibuster; Warner is undecided.

Please contact Kaine to express your support and contact warner to urge him to vote against Gorsuch.

[pangaia]

7. How could ANY Democrat vote for the POS?

[LiberalLovinLug]

11. Their DINOs

[iluvtennis]

12. Agree

[spooky3]

16. McCaskill said she believes the Repubs will pass the

Nuclear option to change the rule to a simple majority rather than 60 votes. This will enable them to nominate and confirm even worse judges.

However, I'm not sure this is a good argument. First, Gorsuch is hardly moderate so how much worse can they get? Second, if the Dems give in on Gorsuch, the Repubs will simply make the same threat on the next nominee. Third, once the rule is changed, the Repubs know that the Dems can use it once they have returned to power. Fourth, if Repubs do nominate more baby Scalias, then there is a chance that eventually enough voters will become aware of and incensed by these nominees and throw Repubs out of office.

[WoonTars]

22. So give them what they want, or they'll get what they want anyway?

No thanks. Make them go nuclear. Enough with the threats, let's make them actually pull the trigger. Enough caving to a simple bluff.

[spooky3]

23. That's my thinking, too.

[still_one]

33. It isn't a good argument spooky. They are going to nominate the worst anyway. The republicans

are NOT going to have the majority forever, and frankly it may occur in a shorter time than they can imagine

[spooky3]

34. Agreed -- and my thinking is that their doing this just may speed up

that eventuality.

[still_one]

37. I think your analysis is right on

[Binkie The Clown]

8. Remind them that history does not look kindly on collaborators. n/t

[Cha]

9. Thank you for Shining the Light, IT

[zentrum]

10. He's to the right of Scalia!!!!!!! nt

[tenorly]

13. Exactly. What more do these 5 stragglers need!!

Besides which, Trump has no future anyway - and they know it.

My guess is that corporate lobbyists have been working overtime to cajole and twist arms among some Dems in order to get their toadie Goresuck into the Supreme Court.

[diva77]

14. Here is list of undecided dem senators (what more do they need to know??) as of 4/2/17

Here's how senators plan to vote on Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/27/politics/neil-gorsuch-whip-list/

snip...
Democrats who are unclear on both the filibuster and confirmation
1. Sen. Mark Warner (Virginia) -- He told reporters on 3/28/2017 that he was still reading up on Gorsuch but was concerned about his "evasive answers."
2. Sen. Chris Coons (Delaware) -- "He will get an up or down vote. Senator Schumer, our minority leader, has said it's going to be a 60-vote margin. I doubt he's going to get 60 votes. The question then becomes what do we do? There's a lot of finger pointing; a lot of Democrats justifiably still very mad about the treatment of Merrick Garland....I don't think he's going to get 60 votes." -- Interview on MSNBC on 3/27/2017
3. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (California) -- "Well let's wait for next week, OK? And then I'll make myself very clear." -- To reporters on 3/27/2017
4. Sen. Bob Menendez (New Jersey) -- "Still deciding...I've said all along that when I come to a conclusion on how I'm voting on Gorsuch, I'll decide on how I'm voting in the whole process." -- To reporters on 3/28/2017
5. Independent Sen. Angus King (Maine) -- He told CNN on 3/30/2017 that he still hasn't decided.
6. Sen. Michael Bennet (Colorado) -- He has not announced his decision.
This story has been and will be updated as CNN receives updated information...snip

[Wounded Bear]

17. Feinstein just declared "NO" at her opening remarks of today's meeting...

One less

[diva77]

19. Whew!! And NYX says she supports filibuster as well!!

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/03/30/us/politics/gorsuch-senate-filibuster.html?_r=0


Benjamin L. Cardin Md.
Angus King Me.
Robert Menendez N.J.
Michael Bennet Colo.
Chris Coons Del.

I hope people call these holdouts!!!

[CousinIT]

21. Thank you! Those are the ones to target. Keep in mind...

...they care most about their own constituents. So if these are your senators, CALL NOW!

[BigmanPigman]

24. Thank you

for posting this. It saved me time.

[diva77]

36. Glad it helped! Welcome to DU

[spooky3]

35. Warner said today that he is voting to filibuster, with most Dems. n/t

[synergie]

15. Call the ones that have said they're supporting him anyway.

Heitcamp, Manchin and the 3rd one.

It's about the man himself, his poor judgements in the past 10 years and his troubling history of voting against basic rights of women, of employees etc. His judgements are overturned, he's a terrible candidate, on his own merits.

[crazycatlady]

18. Just called Bob Menendez

Still on the fence about it and you can get through to his DC office.

202-224-4744

[CousinIT]

20. THANK YOU!

[eleny]

25. We've been contacting Bennet again and again

We've told him that if he doesn't vote with the majority of Dems on this then we'll throw all our support of contributions and elbow grease into anyone who opposes him in the next primary should he decide to run again.

Who knows if it'll help. All I do know is he's a dirty rotten louse if he votes for Gorsuch.

[FBaggins]

28. Did you pay any attention to the tea party a few years ago?

Is that really what we want?

[eleny]

30. This is blue Colorado - He's in no danger

Since you asked, what I want is a progressive Dem senator who isn't afraid of being true blue and a Party loyalist in a state with a Dem governor and whose majority voted for Clinton.

Get real, please. What will help us lose elections is having Gorsuch on the SCOTUS bench.

I'm done. Please take the last word.

[still_one]

26. Senate Dems reach filibuster threshold on Gorsuch setting up 'nuclear option' change

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/03/politics/neil-gorsuch-filibuster-senate/index.html

[FBaggins]

27. Crud

Just like the last nuclear option... We're going to regret this one.

[still_one]

31. I disagree. This is going to come back and bite the republicans in the ass, not us. It was only

a matter of time anyway. The filibuster has been used for a lot of bad things, including preserving slavery for far too long.

Time is on our side, not their side.

[spanone]

29. Democrats have votes to block Gorsuch, but 'nuclear' showdown awaits in Senate

mitch is gonna invoke the nuclear option and blame it on the democrats...

"This is a new low," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in response to Democratic opposition. But he also reiterated his vow that Gorsuch will be confirmed by Friday despite the likelihood of a filibuster. That's because McConnell is prepared to invoke what is known as the "nuclear option" - a change in rules allowing Supreme Court nominees to be confirmed with a simple-majority vote. With 52 seats, Republicans would then have enough votes to secure Trump's first selection for the high court.

The procedural vote known as cloture has long set the Senate apart from the House of Representatives - and it has long been hailed by members of the upper chamber for requiring bipartisan cooperation, and forcing consensus, on major legislation or confirmation votes.

If that step is eliminated, the Senate is "headed to a world where you don't need one person from the other side to pick a judge," warned Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "And what does that mean? That means the judges are going to be more ideological, not less. It means that every Senate seat is going to be a referendum on the Supreme Court … The damage done to the Senate is going to be real."

McConnell won't be the first to go nuclear, however. Now-retired Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., first invoked the option in 2013 when he was majority leader, allowing non-Supreme Court presidential appointments to be confirmed with a simple majority.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-gorsuch-senate-committee-vote-20170403-story.html

[still_one]

32. just as long as the Democrats make it clear that McConnell decided that a President in his last term

should not be able to appoint a SC justice, the Democrats need to make it clear that a President and his administration who are under investigation for possible involvement with a foreign power to interfere in our election, shouldn't be allowed to nominate a SC justice until the full detail of the investigation our known.