WaPo on the nub of the problem of targeting red Senators in blue/purple states:

Despite Democratic organizing efforts, right-leaning activists care more about the Supreme Court vacancy right now than liberals do. In the current climate, most conservatives – even in blue states – have no appetite for compromise…..

Richard Diercksmeier, a retired electrical engineer who lives in the vote-rich Milwaukee suburbs, said he heard a news report that Johnson “might be taking a moderate position or a flexible position” on confirming Garland. So he drove to a manufacturing facility here, where the senator was accepting the endorsement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to ask him for clarification.

Johnson was adamant: he will not vote for Garland—saying that elevating the judge would threaten “your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms,” “the right to free speech” and “freedom of religion.”

“We’ll withhold our consent,” the first-term senator said. “A lot of people say, ‘Do your job.’ You know what? I’m doing my job!… We need somebody that can replace Scalia… We do not want it to flip from a 5-4 conservative majority to a 5-4 super-legislator, activist judge majority. That would be very bad for America, very bad for our freedoms.”

Right. Republican obstructionism is not about giving “the people” a voice. It is about blocking the nominee on ideological grounds. This is a pure political fight that will ultimately get resolved in states like Wisconsin. And right now Democrats lack intensity to push for Garland.