You people need to stop living in a fantasy universe where Dems will ask good questions at a confirmation hearing and voters will suddenly be educated and something will come of it. It will be vaguely reported as “heated” and nothing will come of it.
Attending the hearing won’t sway anyone, very little will come out of it, it would normalize the process as politics as usual. The public already opposes the nomination and it doesn’t really matter. Doing something dramatic and splashy is better politics.
Because I’m old enough to remember the Kavanaugh hearings, I realize that asking tricksy questions in a confirmation proceeding actually makes no difference at all and will be barely be reported.
People are arguing that the Kavanaugh hearings helped Dems, because they've forgotten there were TWO sets of Kavanaugh hearings, and the first were total nonentities that had no impact and were forgotten, despite Kavanaugh theoretically being skewered by Harris and others.
It doesn't matter what happens in a confirmation hearing; barely anyone is watching. To extent any of this matters at all, it's the secondary coverage - i.e., how does it get reported in the evening news. A boycott makes more difference there.
Which headline is better for Democrats? Which conveys crisis versus normality?
"Senators from both parties asked contentious questions as they weigh Trump's Supreme Court nominee"
or
"The GOP pushes forward with hearings as Democrats boycott the process as fraudulent"
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.