system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Democrats should confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

First off, I am not going to make the ideological case for Mr. Gorsuch. He is by most experts' consideration as conservative, if not more conservative than Scalia. However, I do not think this man is naive enough to strike down the individual direct contribution limit of campaign finance - I think he is rational enough to understand what de facto bribery is and its deleterious effect on silencing the voice of the poor. I understand women, lgbt, strict 4th Amendment people, and evangelicals have different litmus tests that they are justified standing up for, but I think the onus is upon us to make the Constitution unambiguous, rather than lambast someone for doing what they honestly believe is upholding the Constitution with a lifetime of judicial expertise.

1. Moral. There is no moral high ground in responding to Republicans' childishness and irresponsible governance in kind. This is clear in theology and in law. Citizens are punished for responding to theft with theft, violence with violence, libel with libel, and eyes with eyes. In theology, Jesus, MLK, and Gandhi all believed only pleasure was to be achieved in retribution in kind, not moral satisfaction.

2. Job description. Part of our lawmakers' jobs are to make government run effectively, and make sure judicial appointments are up to the task and ethically faithful. Gorsuch seems to fulfill the latter, which thus makes Democrats responsibility to do the former. While Republicans shirked this duty, it is not D Congressmen's job to punish them for it, it is the voters' job.

3. Political gains. Democrats have the opportunity to make McConnell and Ryan jump through hoops to get this guy confirmed. They can ask McConnell to publically retract his comments about the justification for filibustering a qualified judicial nominee during the Obama administration. Democrats have the opportunity to cast the Republicans alone as hypocrites for a generation. I think Dem Congressmen and voter anger is clouding the opportunity this nomination presents.

4. Trump is a madman. Dems should make the determination if they truly want to filibuster a nominee for four years, when Republicans did it for only one. At this point, we should realize that nothing is beneath Donald Trump. The number of men appointed by Trump who seem to take the obligations of their job seriously (judging by their embracing the scientific method or not) can be counted on one hand. Gorsuch seems to be one of those. It would show internal inconsistency to oppose Sessions, Pruitt, Price, Devos because of ethical and partisan characteristics which Gorsuch does not seem to have.
gpt
>Political gains. Democrats have the opportunity to make McConnell and Ryan jump through hoops to get this guy confirmed. They can ask McConnell to publically retract his comments about the justification for filibustering a qualified judicial nominee during the Obama administration. Democrats have the opportunity to cast the Republicans alone as hypocrites for a generation.

Republican voters don't care if their leaders are hypocrites. Just as Democratic voters don't care if theirs are. Your senator being a hypocrite might make you support a challenger in the primary, but it's unlikely to make you switch parties over it. The two bases draw from fundamentally opposed value sets. 

That said, many Democratic voters are pushing for their leaders to use the same scorched-earth tactics that the Republicans used against Obama for 8 years. Trying to be the grown-ups in the room is likely to cost them more voters than it will gain them. Republican voters won't be impressed by the Dems maturity: they'll still hate them for being Dems.