Skip to comments.Murkowski to vote "present" as a courtesy to Montana senator
Posted on 10/05/2018 6:27:37 PM PDT by 11th_VA
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) will vote "present" as a courtesy to Montana Sen. Steve Daines as he plans to walk his daughter down the aisle at her wedding, which collides with the timing of the Senate floor vote for Judge Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation.
The big picture: Her vote will not change the outcome of Kavanaugh's confirmation as Sen. Daines was expected to vote in favor of Trump's pick. Though Murkowski announced earlier that she opposes Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court, she says she hopes her "present" vote "reminds us we can take very small steps to be gracious."
(Excerpt) Read more at axios.com ...
I thought Daines said he would be there for the vote.
I dont get it.
Is she planning on voting no for Kavanaugh?
And whats the connection with Montana?
Im missing something here.
Nice try to duck the vote Sen. M but S. Palin can see 2022 from her window.
If he can have someone vote present for him, why can’t he leave a yea instead?
She can’t be trusted.
Duluth, slow on the uptake. Got it now.
Voting present is not the same as not voting. It raises the total number of senators voting, thus increasing the number needed to obtain victory.
I believe that if she votes present, Daines doesn’t vote, and Manchin switches, we lose. Am I wrong about this.
I’m not detecting any logic here. If we were short the votes, would a present vote help?
Every GOP Senator needs to be present for the confirmation vote. Every one of them.
Afterwards they can go do personal business and pleasure...but not before confirmation. That is the right thing to do for their position representing the citizens of this country.
F her and that stinking selfish POS, Daines, too!
He’s NOT voting, she CAN’T vote “for him”, and both of them are stinking POS! DAMN THEM BOTH TO HELL AND SOON!
Without Daines and with Murkowski voting present, that makes it 50-48-1.
No, would NOT help at all! This is garbage.
If she votes present, the RATs only have 48 No votes - so the Montana Senators vote isnt need (his daughter has a wedding). It will pass 50-48.
The fickle old hag doesn’t have a better excuse?
Why drag some other senator into her decision on yes or no vote?
Has she been this undecisive all the time, throughout her life?
He is ready to fly back if needed
He is at his daughters wedding
why the hostility toward him? He has said he will vote yes
Shes a chicken shiit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.