and so what if he is? he'd never survive the vote. voting against him would be a proud feather in the cap of every gun lover. just like voting to repeal Obamacare 50 times.
That is a sucker play. Try to shame a person into fighting when the best strategy to win is refuse to pitch a battle at all.
To put it another way: when you have the upper hand in chess but have reached a stalemate it is better to simply maintain the status quo until the situation changes (ie. your oppponent concedes, or tries to break the stalemate).
To quote Sun Tzu from The Art of War: "The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."
That paraphrases to: Don't fight a battle you don't have to, and don't bring a nominee you don't want up for a vote and hope you defeat them when you don't even have to bring them up for a vote.
Republicans do not have faith that following the Constitution can deliver effective governance.
I reject your assertion based its premise that somehow the Republicans are not following the Constitution.
Show me where in the Constitution it says that a nominee must be put up for a vote? There is nothing to clarify the process that must occur. What you are crying about is tradition, not constitutional mandate. Consent, as far as the words of the Constitution are concerned, is clearly withheld simply by not bringing the nominee up for a vote.