Talk Elections

My guess: Collins, Gregg, Hatch, Lugar, Snowe, Voinovich. That would be five of the seven who voted for her in the 90s plus Voinovich, who has supported nearly all of Obama's appointments so far (I think Kagan was his only no vote). As to the other two from the gang of seven, I'm sure Cochran will switch, and Bennett will probably do so as well, more because of his primary challenge than anything.

Yeah, sounds about right. Probably a few more too, though there's not that many moderate Republicans left of course.

I found it interesting that Cochran voted for her last time, as well as Santorum.

RINOS only like SNowe and Collins.  Maybe Voinovich because he's on the way out anyway and he can be pretty pc.

Why would a moderate Republican vote for her, other than out of fear of being labeled anti-Hispanic?

Snowe already put out a statement where he anounced her support for Sotomayor.
It's hard to imagine that Collins won't follow her.

Well there is the traditional belief that Supreme Court nominees shouldn't be opposed for ideological reasons. To the victor goes the spoils.

Agreed, also the fact her nomination doesn't do anything to change the balance of the court since she is replacing another liberal in Souter.  If she was replacing Scalia it might be a different story, but even in that case I don't think Snowe or Collins would be against the nomination.

Constitutional not ideological.

I expect quite a few supporters actually.

Martinez
Gregg
Snowe
Collins
Voinovich
Bond
Murkowski
Hutchison

and possibly, but not expected:
McCain
Kyl
Cornyn
Hatch
Bennett

Snowe
Collins
Gregg
Voinovich
Lugar
McCain

Will vote to confirm:
Snowe
Collins

Will probably vote to confirm:
Voinovich
Lugar
Gregg
McCain
Martinez
Murkowski

Possible votes for confirmation, and will probably vote against a filibuster:
Hutchison
Hatch
Bennett
Graham

The only Democrats I can see voting against confirmation are Nelson and Landreiu, and even they'll probably vote against a filibuster.

i think hutchison will be interesting, if only for the primary battle she's in for in a few months.

Hutchison is definitely in a tough spot. A yes vote hurts her in the primary, while a no vote hurts her in the general.

Ensign and McCain have similar political calculations.

Not too bad. The best move for her is to vote no on cloture but yes on the confirmation. She can tell the conservative Republican primary electorate that she tried to stop the nomination at the only juncture where it could be stopped, and she can tell the Hispanic GE electorate that she voted for Sotomayor.

I think they'll both vote to confirm.  Nelson is extremely safe, and Landrieu has 6 years before she needs to run again.  There's no point in voting no.

Nelson has already done everything short of saying he will vote no. He's going to vote no. Landrieu has been silent, but she will probably vote yes. (She can justify it on gender rather than racial grounds if she wants/needs to.)

I figured KBH would vote "no" because it would help her win the primary. She'd be a lock to win the general anyway.

Edit: Nelson put out a statement that looks a lot more positive than his previous comments:

"President Obama is to be commended for selecting a nominee with a significant breadth and depth of legal experience to replace retiring Justice David Souter," Nelson says, "I look forward to learning more about Judge Sonia Sotomayor's background, record and qualifications -- and to meeting with her to discuss her judicial philosophy -- as this important United States Supreme Court nomination moves forward."

I suspect he'll vote yes. I don't see problems with any other Democrats. Landrieu did vote yes in 1998.

We have to see how things develop, but on a random but bold guess, these guys will vote against the filibuster or at least not vote for it:


Lugar,
Snowe,
Collins,
Cornyn,
hmm
Burr,
Murkowsk,
Gregg,
Corker,
Alexander
Graham
Hatch

Lugar ( <---- i'm with retard)
Snowe
Collins
Ensign (<--- I'm with unelectable-for-prez)
Voinich (<--- With "hard to spell name" guy)

Bump since the hearings are starting tomorrow. Schumer apparently thinks it'll be 80+ "aye". I'm skeptical.

Confirmed "nay"s:

Sam Brownback
James Inhofe
Pat Roberts

Leaving us with 37 (I'm assuming unanimity among Democrats/Bernie/CfL). This is what I'd break them down to [edited]:

"Aye"s:

Susan Collins
Lindsey Graham
Judd Gregg
Dick Lugar
Olympia Snowe
George Voinovich

Swing voters:

Lamar Alexander
Kit Bond
Orrin Hatch
Mel Martinez
Lisa Murkowski

"Nay"s:

John Barrasso
Bob Bennett
Jim Bunning
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Tom Coburn
Thad Cochran
Bob Corker
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Jim DeMint
John Ensign
Mike Enzi
Chuck Grassley
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Johnny Isakson
Mike Johanns
Jon Kyl
John McCain
Mitch McConnell
Jim Risch
Jeff Sessions
Dick Shelby
John Thune
David Vitter
Roger Wicker

I would say that, unless Sotomayor says some really stupid things, you can move Hatch to Aye.

Ultimately he will probably vote aye, but his opening remarks sounded pretty pessimistic (although I guess that was more in a general sense).

Question - Will anyone running for President vote against Sotomayor?    I highly doubt it.

It may cost a GOP potential the nomination, if they do vote for her.

People are becoming upset about the abuse of the Constitution (lately), and that trend is generally among Republicans (although not exclusively).

Sotomayor is associated with severe bias in judgment (and rightly so). She doesn't see different ethnicities as equals in judgment.

Definitely :

Collins
Snowe
Voinovich


Most Likely :

Graham
Lugar
Murkowski
Hatch

Small tilt to voting yes :

McCain
Gregg
Hutchinson
Martinez
Bond
Alexander
Sessions

100% Hell no :

DeMint
Coburn
Brownback
Inhofe
Shelby
Thune
Cornyn
Chambliss

I don't think this issue alone could do it, but who knows.  I'm thinking in terms of the 2012 general election it will have a backlash, and candidly the GOP nominee can't afford to lose too many votes.

Cornyn is not a "100% hell no" vote.  He's the head of the NRSC and seems to take that job more seriously than he takes his own job as Senator, as of late.

I have a similarly hard time believing McCain has a small tilt to voting "yes" given his current worship of his left-over mailing list from 2008 or Hutchison who has a Republican primary she's trying to win against Perry.

Cornyn votes along the lines of DeMint, Coburn, and Bunning, so I'd count him as a 100% hell no.

McCain won't vote for her, he didn't vote for her last time.

This AP article says Bunning is a confirmed "no" (shocking, I know):

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_sotomayor_senate

Lugar is now a confirmed yes.

Republican playmakers privately predict 8-12 Republicans will vote for her...

I don't know but it would provide a handy list of names we should be sure to primary at the next possible moment.  A little RINO plasty is in order LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

()

I feel very sad for you that you are so afraid of debateing the issues that you have to respond with offcolor insults.  <IGNORE>

Most of the Republicans that will vote for Sotomayor's confirmation are either: a) not even close to RINOs (Graham and Hatch come immediately to mind) or b) moderates that would be replaced by Democrats if they were to be primaried by a more conservative Republican (Snowe, Collins).

So explain to me how it helps your cause to primary these people. If anything it would weaken the Republicans even more. Of course, I have no problem with this, but your logic seems to be counter to what your final objective would be (which I assume is a Republican controlled Congress).

Mel Martinez anounced he will vote for Sotomayor.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SOTOMAYOR_MARTINEZ?SITE=CONGRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SOTOMAYOR_MARTINEZ?SITE=CONGRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)

Snowe has also (unsurprisingly) announced her support. Bunning, McConnell and Bennett (damn primaries!) have announced their opposition. Updated list:

Confirmed "yea"s:

Dick Lugar
Mel Martinez
Olympia Snowe

Confirmed "nay"s:

Bob Bennett
Sam Brownback
Jim Bunning
James Inhofe
Mitch McConnell
Pat Roberts

Predicted votes:

"Aye"s:

Susan Collins
Lindsey Graham
Judd Gregg
George Voinovich

Swing voters:

Lamar Alexander
Kit Bond
Orrin Hatch
Lisa Murkowski

"Nay"s:

John Barrasso
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Tom Coburn
Thad Cochran
Bob Corker
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Jim DeMint
John Ensign
Mike Enzi
Chuck Grassley
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Johnny Isakson
Mike Johanns
Jon Kyl
John McCain
Jim Risch
Jeff Sessions
Dick Shelby
John Thune
David Vitter
Roger Wicker

I suppose all of the Republican senators who supported Ginsburg and Breyer were "RINOs" too.

Not to mention all of those who voted for Sotomayor when she was nominated to her current post, including such RINOs as Rick Santorum.

All 40.

Okay, back that up with some arguments now. You are the one who loves intelligent debate, so let's go.

I don't mind some Republicans voting for Sotomayor.  She is qualified, and basically Souter 2 (not like that's a good thing, but whatever).

Souter is a Republican appointment.

The ones who did it are the ones who are upset with it?

If GOP Senators want the hispanic vote, then nobody will be dumb enough to vote against her. But hmm.. It'll mostl ikely be 29/ 40 GOP's voting for her or even more.

 

We've got another confirmed no: John Thune.

http://www.keloland.com/News/NewsDetail6375.cfm?Id=87518

Every Republican voted for Souter, so maybe this is the logic as to why all will vote for Sotomayor as well. :)

Huge surprise there.  I think he is running neck and neck with Tom Coburn for most extreme right wing Senator in the GOP. 

The Dems in general were uncomfortable with Souter, so that was a huge selling point for the other side.  I know, it sounds silly, but that is how politics works all too often.  Politics degenerates into a sports contest.

Last night I got a pre-recorded call on my mobile phone about this.  It started out with the long pause, the way recorded messages calls often do, and I was about to hang up because I don't need any more offers to have a longer, harder, more enduring erection.  Then a voice came on and said, "Hi, I'm Burpleboob Spinmeister (I forgot the guy's real name) with Some Organization (forgot that too) and I'm calling to inform you that the senate is considering confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor as Supreme Court justice.  Your constitutional right to keep and bear arms will be jeopardized if she is confirmed.  Please call Senator Grassley and let him know that this concerns you..."  It went on to tell me exactly how my right to keep and bear arms would be jeopardized, but I was getting bored, or maybe tired, or maybe hungry (I forget), but I do remember this much:  they wanted me to call Chuck and ask him not to vote for Sotomayor.

I didn't do it.  Honestly, I think it'll be okay if she's confirmed.  I don't think it'll be the end of the world.  I watched quite a bit of the hearings, and mostly I heard Democrats pontificating and Republicans pontificating, but what I didn't hear was Sotomayor acting stupid or unqualified.  And I also don't think Chuck's vote will make a difference anyway.  If he called me himself, I'd probably say, "Chuck, seriously, I have other shi()t to do.  This is what I hired you for.  Think about it and do what you think is best.  Okay.  You know she's qualified.  You know she'll get confirmed.  You know you probably don't always agree with her, but she's the one Obama picked.  Hearings?  All I'm hearing is a bunch of US Senators who like hearing the sound of their own voices.  Democrats talking up their agenda up and Republicans talking up their agenda.  What I'm not hearing much is Sotomayor's voice.  And that's okay because if she was a complete moron, or if she was unfit or unethical, Obama wouldn't have nominated her in the first place.  She's a fair judge whose decisions get overturned less than the average appellate judge.  About 25% less than the average, in fact, during the Rehnquist/Roberts era.  So just tell your buddies to stop wasting all this time pontificating and have a vote on her confirmation, so you can get on to important business.  We cool, Chuck?  Now get off the fu()cking phone and do what you can to stop congress from passing any more damaging legislation."

If he was nearby, I might also ask him to come over for a drink or two.  I'd say, "Chuck, I got a bottle of bourbon with your name on it.  Why not stop over for a spirited discussion about the current crises, both real and manufactured?"  And we could discuss health care, and how the current bill offered by congressional Democrats will only make things worse.  And we could talk about the Cap-and-trade con game.  And the "stimulus" bill.  And this hideous wall that some folks want to build between the US and Mexico that's supposed to solve all our immigration problems.  And some other pet peeves.  And maybe I could get him to get his caucus to stop worrying about Sonia and start worrying about the state of the nation's economy and the huge debt with which he and his colleagues are straddling the American public.  Or we might just play with Legos and tell off-color jokes.  Either way, we'd do something more constructive than fret over Sonia Sotomayor's appointment.

Collins, unsurprisingly, announced her support today, and Roger Wicker announced his opposition.

Time to update the list [edited to drop the "swing voter" category]:

Confirmed "yea"s:

Susan Collins
Dick Lugar
Mel Martinez
Olympia Snowe

Confirmed "nay"s:

Bob Bennett
Sam Brownback
Jim Bunning
James Inhofe
Mitch McConnell
Pat Roberts
John Thune
Roger Wicker

Predicted votes:

"Aye"s:

Lindsey Graham
Judd Gregg
Orrin Hatch
Lisa Murkowski
George Voinovich

"Nay"s:

Lamar Alexander
John Barrasso
Kit Bond
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Tom Coburn
Thad Cochran
Bob Corker
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Jim DeMint
John Ensign
Mike Enzi
Chuck Grassley
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Johnny Isakson
Mike Johanns
Jon Kyl
John McCain
Jim Risch
Jeff Sessions
Dick Shelby
David Vitter

Why does Wicker opposes her?
Did she mention that she considers pork unconstitutional?

Mississippi Sen.  Roger Wicker (R) just announced he would oppose Sotomayor, primarily because of her comments on the Second Amendment. "I have great respect for Judge Sotomayor's life story and professional accomplishments," Wicker said in a statement. "However, this appreciation does not change or hide the flaws in her record and judicial philosophy."

Yes! Well, Thune shouldn't be worried about a angry Hispanic population voting agianst him. So it's good!

Crist is an interesting hypothetical "no" vote, considering the importance of his state's Hispanic population and his Hispanic primary opponent.

Add Lindsey Graham to the list of Sotomayor supporters.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090722/ap_on_go_co/us_sotomayor_senate (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090722/ap_on_go_co/us_sotomayor_senate)

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25252.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25252.html)

Some interesting bits:

And Jon Kyl will vote no.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/legalities/2009/07/kyl-to-vote-against-sotomayor.html (http://blogs.abcnews.com/legalities/2009/07/kyl-to-vote-against-sotomayor.html)

Cochran also a no:

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/yb/133267726

Shocking, all of these announcements. Pure shock. It seems like every time a Republican says they'll vote yes, two come out against Sotomayor.

The list, once again, with 15/40 Republicans confirmed:

Confirmed "yea"s:

Susan Collins
Lindsey Graham
Dick Lugar
Mel Martinez
Olympia Snowe

Confirmed "nay"s:

Bob Bennett
Sam Brownback
Jim Bunning
Thad Cochran
James Inhofe
Jon Kyl
Mitch McConnell
Pat Roberts
John Thune
Roger Wicker

Predicted votes:

"Aye"s:

Judd Gregg
Orrin Hatch
Lisa Murkowski
George Voinovich

"Nay"s:

Lamar Alexander
John Barrasso
Kit Bond
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Tom Coburn
Bob Corker
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Jim DeMint
John Ensign
Mike Enzi
Chuck Grassley
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Johnny Isakson
Mike Johanns
John McCain
Jim Risch
Jeff Sessions
Dick Shelby
David Vitter

Graham...wow

Perhaps Crist concluded that Rubio's opposition to Sotomayor will give him cover in the Florida Hispanic Community.  He can say "Marco Rubio opposed her too."  Like Hutchison, he is trying to get through a GOP primary against a more conservative opponent.  Nevertheless, Crist's decision is questionable as he is in a stronger position than Hutchison.  This will likely cost him some Hispanic support.  And he had some cover if he had gone the other way as well, as Mel Martinez is supporting Sotomayor. 

While Crist is still highly likely to win the general election, his announcement is a modest boon for Kendrick Meek.

Why? Graham has always been very supportive of the Hispanic community, despite there being no Hispanics in South Carolina (and lots of hostility). My guess is that his secret male lover is a Mexican illegal immigrant.

Two more no votes: cornyn, not a surprise, and hatch, who is a surprise. This will be the first time he's voted against a scotus nominee in his tenure on the judiciary committee.

Apparently Cornyn either is more tone deaf than anyone imagined or he has a political death wish.
What remains to be seen is what kind of signal that vote sends to his senate recruits.

And it's rather amusing the fact that Hatch had no problem with such diverse candidates like Bork, Ginsburg or Thomas, but somehow he thinks that Sotomayor is unacceptable.
Hypocrisy much?

Did Hatch release a statement saying why?

“I entered into the confirmation process of Judge Sotomayor with the strong desire to vote in favor of her nomination. Her credentials and experience are very impressive and her personal demeanor is pleasantly cordial and friendly. I found that the great respect I have for Judge Sotomayor’s heritage and history added even more to my desire to carefully review her record and opinions in hopes of finding them truly grounded in the rule of law and acceptable to earn the support and trust of the American people and myself.

“Arriving at a final decision was particularly difficult because I like and highly respect Judge Sotomayor and, in general, give a great deal of deference to any President’s nominee. The prospect of a woman of Puerto Rican heritage serving on the Supreme Court brought great excitement to me and says a lot about America.

“However, after thoroughly reviewing Judge Sotomayor’s record and being able to hear her testimony and responses during the hearing process, I reluctantly, and with a heavy heart, have found that I cannot support her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. In truth, I wish President Obama had chosen a Hispanic nominee that all Senators could support. I believe it would it would have done a great deal for our great county. Although Judge Sotomayor has a compelling life story and dedication to public service, her statements and record were too much at odds with the principles and the judiciary in which I deeply believe.

“As I said during the hearing, some of Judge Sotomayor’s critics have been intemperate and unfair. No nominee deserves that kind of treatment. I was grateful her confirmation hearing was both dignified and thorough, as they all should be. I was particularly pleased that Judge Sotomayor felt her hearing was as gracious and fair as she could have asked for.

“During my analysis, I focused on her record and applied standards and principles that define the kind of judge all Americans need. Qualifications for judicial service include not only legal experience but, more importantly, a nominee’s approach to judging. This make Judge Sotomayor’s judicial philosophy more important than her stellar resume. I thoroughly examined her record with the more exacting focus appropriate for a Supreme Court nomination. This included reading and studying Judge Sotomayor’s speeches, articles, and cases; meeting with and hearing from legal experts and advocates from different perspectives; and actively participating in the confirmation hearing.

“The duty of confirmation entrusted to all Senators requires we determine whether Judge Sotomayor has the legal experience and, more importantly, the judicial philosophy that properly equips her for service on the Supreme Court. I have done my best to leave politics aside and stay true to this standard during all twelve Supreme Court confirmations I have participated in. It saddens me to realize that after reviewing her record, I have reluctantly concluded that I cannot vote in favor of her confirmation. However, I wish her well in her future endeavors and believe she is a wonderful and talented American with much to offer this great country.”

If she wasn't raicst, I'd would support her.


I'm nonpartisan usually when it comes to Supreme court nominees.

But Sotomayor is racist, so no

I really don't understand why everyone thinks this vote is the kiss of death to Republicans in Latino-heavy states. Presumably the Latinos that vote for Republicans won't be dissuaded by this vote, as they're probably conservative in the first place. Cornyn won re-election by 55-43 while losing Latinos 61-36, so it's not like he's got that much further down to go among that constituency.

Indeed, people are overestimating how much everyday Latino voters are counting who votes how.  The vote could be subject to some Spanish-language ads, that, like any ad, could push the margins around a little, but not a lot.  Hispanic advocacy organizations aren't going to change their endorsements, but some GOP partisan groups, Hispanic and non-Hispanic, will be seeing who's got their back, but really it's not going to matter in all but the closest of races.

It's what the GOP does, or doesn't do, en masse, that matters

Well, maybe this won't be THE vote that will turn Latinos even more against the Republicans and Cornyn in particular (even though the Hispanic Republican operatives in Texas disagree).
But if you want to reclaim their votes, you got to start from somewhere.

And what better place to start than voting to confirm the first Hispanic Supreme Court Justice.
An eminently qualified nominee with a compelling life story and a mainstream record, who got through her confirmation hearings with no missteps.
What they did instead was to put a bunch of old white guys, with someone like Sessions of all people leading the charge, to show their hostility and condescension to her.

In that aspect I believe that Hatch's non-explanation explanation for his vote is rather revealing.   

It is not a huge problem in the short term, but the GOP is setting itself up poorly in the intermediate to long term.  The party is already in trouble with Latino voters over immigration and other issues.  If there is a solid GOP vote against Sotomayor, particularly from senators in heavy Hispanic states, perceptions of the party will continue to solidify.  Crist, Kyl and Cornyn have all come out against Sotomayor, I suspect Hutchison will as well.  At the rate the Hispanic population is growing, that 61-36 margin will loom much larger in the future.

Still, Cornyn's seat is basically his as long as he wants it. For a Republican incumbent to lose a senate election in Texas would probably require a scandal of the live boy/dead girl variety. That'll probably be different in 10-15 years, but Cornyn should have retired by then.

Perhaps. But even so he is a member of the Republican leadership.
When he and Kyl, who represent Latino-heavy states, cast a no vote, then the signal towards their colleagues, and his senate recruits, is pretty clear: bashing the browns is cool.

This is the same guy who thought that Harriet Miers was qualified to become Supreme Court Justice and supported Alberto Gonzales to the bitter end, for crying out loud.

Really?  He's only 57.  A large number of senators serve into their late 70s.

indeed, hell, even the Chamber of Congress endorsed her, but the GOP still has to balance their Pat Buchanans with their ... uh... Diaz-Balarts?

Sessions is a no:

http://blog.al.com/sweethome/2009/07/alabama_senator_jeff_sessions.html

Here's the list again (updated):

Confirmed "yea"s:

Susan Collins
Lindsey Graham
Dick Lugar
Mel Martinez
Olympia Snowe

Confirmed "nay"s:

Bob Bennett
Sam Brownback
Jim Bunning
Thad Cochran
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Chuck Grassley
Orrin Hatch
James Inhofe
Mike Johanns
Jon Kyl
Mitch McConnell
Jim Risch
Pat Roberts
Jeff Sessions
John Thune
Roger Wicker

Predicted votes:

"Yea"s:

Judd Gregg
Lisa Murkowski
George Voinovich

"Nay"s:

Lamar Alexander
John Barrasso
Kit Bond
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Tom Coburn
Bob Corker
Jim DeMint
John Ensign
Mike Enzi
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Johnny Isakson
John McCain
Dick Shelby
David Vitter

More no votes: Grassley, Crapo, Risch, and Johanns. List above updated. We now have over half the Republican caucus on record, as 17-5 against.

Any possibility of any Dems voting no? I know none have gone on record against her, and I doubt any will. Specter and Nelson would be the only ones who'd have even a chance of doing so I'd think, and I doubt Specter would dare vote no if he wants to survive a Dem primary.

Specter has said he'll vote for her. Nelson has been pretty tight-lipped about the whole thing, but I expect he'll quietly vote for her. I don't imagine he wants to rock the boat, especially when he can point out to his constituents that he voted for Alito as well. The "I support the president's nominees if they're qualified, regardless of party" defense.

More nos: Shelby and Hutchison. I'm sure everyone's more interest in Hutchison's reasoning: (http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/politics/entries/2009/07/28/hutchison_will_oppose_sotomayo.html)

Vitter also a no:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hArCPOGdKY39zYIZJs_V4GZxuD2gD99NPPR00

Vitter's the biggest surprise so far. 

ha...no

Burr and Demint also came out as nos. Meanwhile, Ben Nelson engages in a little hand-wringing: (http://journalstar.com/news/local/article_71f6c596-7c75-11de-a2e3-001cc4c03286.html)


Here's the list... (updated)

Confirmed "yea"s:

Susan Collins
Lindsey Graham
Dick Lugar
Mel Martinez
Olympia Snowe

Confirmed "nay"s:

Bob Bennett
Sam Brownback
Jim Bunning
Richard Burr
Tom Coburn
Thad Cochran
Bob Corker
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Jim DeMint
Chuck Grassley
Orrin Hatch
Kay Bailey Hutchison
James Inhofe
Mike Johanns
Jon Kyl
Mitch McConnell
Jim Risch
Pat Roberts
Jeff Sessions
Dick Shelby
John Thune
David Vitter
Roger Wicker

Predicted votes:

"Yea"s:

Kit Bond
Judd Gregg
Lisa Murkowski
George Voinovich

"Nay"s:

Lamar Alexander
John Barrasso
Saxby Chambliss
John Ensign
Mike Enzi
Johnny Isakson
John McCain

Are you sure that's a statement from Nelson?

Because to me it sounds like someone from his office is doing a bad impersonation of Sarah Palin. That's how incomprehensible it is.   

I think Nelson wishes he could be back in the governor's mansion. That way he wouldn't have to deal with these scary Nuyorican women.

Corker is the latest no: http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_155794.asp

Also, Kit Bond apparently said he'll "probably" vote for Sotomayor (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/most-gop-senators-likely-to-oppose-sotomayor-bid-2009-07-27.html), so I moved him to the predicted "yea" column.

I assume you wouldn't vote to confirm yourself?

why is kit bond voting yea?

ETA: oh, no re-election.

;)

Isn't it great when they can finally vote the way they want?

Nelson will vote yes, he just doesn't want to look like he's gung-ho, understandably.

I expected more than low end of Republicans to get behind her, I'm rather surprised.  Even most GOP strategists had initially predicted 8-12

These are the 4 that I think might still vote yes on Sotomayor:

Kit Bond
Judd Gregg
Lisa Murkowski
George Voinovich

Also, keep an eye on John McCain, even though he voted against her in 1998.  McCain said he wanted to see the Judiciary Committee results first.  Given that the Republicans on the committee voted 1-6 against her, that might seem to suggest he will vote no.  But the "yes" vote came from one of his closest allies -- Lindsey Graham.

I assume John Ensign will vote no, but given all his troubles and the demographic makeup of his state (which Obama won), who knows where his head is these days? 

On another note:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25488.html#ixzz0MYg7CRIa (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25488.html#ixzz0MYg7CRIa)

The Georgia twins say no:

http://www.macon.com/news/breaking_news/story/793774.html

Wow O.o

That was unexpected.

Actually, Lamar! tends to be fairly moderate for a Southern Republican. I'm not too surprised that he's voting for her, although I was expecting him to vote against.

The fall of Harold Ford Jr. + the continued trend toward the GOP in TN means Lamar Alexander will probably hold that seat for life regardless of how he votes unless Pat Toomey's crew decides he's not neo-nazi... I mean neocon enough.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/baucus-says-he-has-no-idea-how-hell-vote-on-sotomayor-2009-07-30.html

c'mon Max, let's not dick around

Baucus does the backtrack shuffle:

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20090731/NEWS01/90731009

I think Baucus' first statement was a little overblown (especially on the blogs, where they were calling for his head...) It's pretty obvious that he was just caught off guard/wanted to emphasize that he was more concerned with health care at the moment.

Has Begich made a statement yet? Since the NR(epublican)A has decided to score this vote, and that endorsement is pretty important up in Alaska, he might be tempted against it.

Only thing I've found is this note in one article:

Sen. Mark Begich said he remains “undecided” on his vote, although he is leaning towards a yes vote.

One last update for the list, which will probably not change between now and the vote:

Confirmed "yea"s:

Lamar Alexander
Susan Collins
Lindsey Graham
Dick Lugar
Mel Martinez
Olympia Snowe

Confirmed "nay"s:

Bob Bennett
Sam Brownback
Jim Bunning
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Tom Coburn
Thad Cochran
Bob Corker
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Jim DeMint
Chuck Grassley
Orrin Hatch
Kay Bailey Hutchison
James Inhofe
Johnny Isakson
Mike Johanns
Jon Kyl
Mitch McConnell
Jim Risch
Pat Roberts
Jeff Sessions
Dick Shelby
John Thune
David Vitter
Roger Wicker

Predicted votes:

"Yea"s:

Kit Bond
Judd Gregg
Lisa Murkowski
George Voinovich

"Nay"s:

John Barrasso
John Ensign
Mike Enzi
John McCain

McCain a no; Ben Nelson finally gets off the fence and says he'll vote yes.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5huyApqmCqq9U5Hw9jP5IYR1gSQEwD99RLD380

John "Bipartisan hero" McCain is voting against her? What a piece of crap.

He is supposed to like browns too.

McCain in 2008:


http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/04/mccain-flashback-sotomayor/

What a joke.

Hahahahaa!!!
What a pathetic little old man. And what's funny is that the day before he warned Republicans that they have to start making inroads to the Latino community if they wanted to remain relevant. I guess that's his idea of giving the good example.

Ensign voting no:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iHErkablW9yiyUK6Eq5pLQxZnL0AD99S78580

Begich is apparently the only possible no vote for the Dems. Remember how he conveniently missed the vote for Eric Holder? I doubt he can be a no-show this time.

Kit Bond, Yes #7 for the Republicans:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/sotomayor-picks-up-another-gop-vote/

Just like Obama voted against Alito. Guess Obama doesn't like white men. ::)

OMFG!!! This is the smoking gun.

Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are finally vindicated!!!

Seriously though, Obama had the excuse of planning to run for president.
And he wasn't as vocal as McCain in his support of immigration reform and defense of Latinos against the Pat Buchanans and Tom Tancredos of his party. 

Nobody likes Italo-Americans. :P

6 of the 7 GOP senators and major Senate candidates in Hispanic heavy states are "no" votes:  Kyl, McCain, Ensign, Cornyn, Hutchison, Crist.  And they are all white.  The one exception is Mel Martinez, who is both retiring in 2010 and Hispanic. 

This might not be as damaging if the GOP wasn't already in the doghouse with Hispanic voters.  They won't be improving their standing with this vote, especially given how they also failed to send a representative to the national La Raza meeting.  Their actions speak loud and clear.

Sonya Sotomayor has just been confirmed by a vote of 68 to 31.

The official anouncement was made by none other than Al Franken!

Is simply voting for Sotomayor's confirmation the way to make inroads?  Perhaps he felt that Sotomayor was...I dunno...unqualified?


Are we supposed to be happy that Obama voted against confirming a Justice in anticipation of running for the Dem nomination?  I mean, shouldn't he have voted with his conscience?  I'm not insinuating that that's why he voted the way he did, but you made the implication.

With that in mind, you cannot question the integrity in McCain's "no" vote against Sotomayor.  You can be sure his vote wasn't personally motivated, since he's currently running for re-election in a Hispanic-heavy state.  I can assume two things went through his mind:

(1)  I'm going to vote against Sotomayor because I feel she's unqualified.
(2)  I cannot expect Hispanic Arizonans to be so short-sighted as to vote for me based on my support for a Puerto Rican judicial appointee.

And it's the Republicans that are the "racist" party. ::)

Yeah, that's it. He felt that she was unqualified. ::)
Once again you nailed it man.

Have you even read the statements by those senators who voted against her? 


 

Does anyone have the full list of votes?

How the hell could anyone say she was unqualified?  For anyone familiar with her resume, that statement makes no sense.

Then tell me, why did he vote against her confirmation?



Yes.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5huyApqmCqq9U5Hw9jP5IYR1gSQEwD99RLD380 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5huyApqmCqq9U5Hw9jP5IYR1gSQEwD99RLD380)
"McCain called her background 'inspiring and compelling,' but added that, 'an excellent resume and an inspiring life story are not enough to qualify one for a lifetime of service on the Supreme Court...She is a judge who has foresworn judicial activism in her confirmation hearings, but who has a long record of it,'"

Ricci v. DeStefano

Also, her quote "The Appellate Court is where policy is made." 

Honestly, I think I would probably vote to confirm her.  But I'm not going to summarily discredit anyone who voted against her. 

So, by your standards Alito is also unqualified because I read that some of his cases as an appelate judge were overturned by the Supreme Court.

And her quote is absolutely true, as anyone who knows how the law and courts work will attest.
Just because "Judicial Activism" is a nice slogan doesn't mean it makes any sense too. 

If the above is the basis for claiming that Sotomayor is unqualified (as opposed to admitting they are against her for partisan and ideological reasons) then they deserve to be discredited.  The fact that some disagree with her opinion in Ricci doesn't make her "unqualified."  And Sotomayor is correct -- the Court of Appeals is where policy is made, because it sets precedent for its respective circuit.  Her enemies were simply taking quotes out of context to defame her.

Ricci was controversial because the ruling permitted alleged racism to take place.  It doesn't matter that it was overturned...it matters that Sotomayor affirmed it. 

I don't know that much about Alito, and I very well might've opposed his appointment.



A judge is not supposed to legislate from the bench.  Political questions are to be left to the legislature.  Just because it happens, doesn't make it okay.



My intention isn't to go tit-for-tat over the merits of Sotomayor's nomination.  I jumped in only when I saw someone make a post calling John McCain a "piece of sh**t" for voting against her. 

59 Democrats (all but Kennedy, who did not vote) + 9 Republicans (Lamar Alexander, Kit Bond, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, Judd Gregg, Richard Lugar, Mel Martinez, Olympia Snowe, and George Voinovich).

lamar alexander should be minority leader.

()

Map of the votes.

I'm happy Begich decided to vote for her.

Only 2 Republicans out of the 8 Republicans from Obama states voted no (Burr NC  and Grassley IA, and NC was barely Obama).
Only 3 of the 32 Republicans from McCain states voted aye (Bond MO Graham SC Alexeander TN).

The 6 Republicans who voted aye from Obama states were
Collins ME Snowe ME Gregg NH Voinovich OH Lugar IN Martinez FL

I wonder how Kyl thinks he's going to win re-election in 2012. He only got 53% of the vote in 2006 against a mediocre candidate, and it's not like the Hispanic vote in Arizona is shrinking.

An insignificant amount of Hispanics will base their vote off of who voted to confirm Sotomayor.  They aren't that simple-minded of a people, Lief.

I think you're forgetting that Obama won NV and so put Ensign in the wrong category.

No sh**t dude, the point he is trying to make is that this is an anti-latino posturing. Sotomayor extremely high favorables among Latinos across the board, even among many latino Republicans. Meanwhile Rush Limbaugh has ridiculously low favorables among latinos(in the single digits I think). By voting against Sotomayor, Kyl is aligning himself with the "Limbaugh" wing of the party. That won't help on election day.

So Hispanics in Arizona will see Kyl as "anti-Hispanic" for voting against Sotomayor?  Give me a break.

More so than if he voted for Sotomayor...

Anyways I don't think you really understand the persona of Mexican-Americans as opposed to other latino groups. Hatred against us is much greater than anyother group and as a whole ridiculous claims of right wing racism work better than in any other group. The ad's that were used against McCain that basically claimed he was a racist, were actually quite affective.

Anyways that vote as a whole will affect Kyl somewhat. Latino turnout could increase if a Democratic opponent used an ad attacking on opposing her nomination and perhaps other less than favorable to latino views he has taken.