Reply #8: It isn't lack of guts

[LawDem]

My guess is it's strategic; Leahy figures (correctly) that Roberts is a sure thing. He also calculates that he's no worse than an even trade for for the old Chief.

So he's voting yes for two reasons:

1. He's hoping (I agree it's a long shot) that by saying that he's putting a lot of faith in Roberts word in voting yes, he'll create some pressure on Roberts to not move too far, too quickly to the right;

2. But more importunately, Leahy's thinking that by showing his fairness in giving a meaningless vote for Roberts (meaningless in the sense of not changing the outcome), he positions himself for the high ground in opposing the next nominee, up to the point of filibuster, if she (probably a she) ends up being really far right.

You don't have to agree with Leahy, which frankly I don't, to accept there is something more at work here than his simply being a chicken shit. I mean, be honest, it isn't like he's at much risk in Vermont anyway, or needs to play to the state's right wing.