The Republicans are taking a pretty big gamble in promising to block any nomination Obama makes to replace Justice Scalia. They’re not only betting that their party will win the presidency, but also that this action won’t lose them the election. I don’t think it’s a smart gamble.

The reasoning behind this obstructionist stance makes sense on the surface level. If the next president is a Republican, then presumably waiting for that president to take office will result in a more conservatively favorable addition to the Supreme Court. But given the status of the campaigns right now, it’s not at all more likely that we have a Republican for our next president than a Democrat. And if we do have a Democrat, it might be Bernie Sanders, who is sure to nominate someone much less moderate than Obama’s likely choices. Furthermore, if the Republicans win The White House, we might have a President Trump, a wildcard who has real potential to do more harm than good to the Republican party. The last thing Republicans should want is a Supreme Court Justice with a life-long term as a perpetual reminder of Trump’s presidency. A Supreme Court seat is a high-stakes bet on a non-Trump Republican being the next president.

In addition, this high profile refusal to perform essential Congressional duties has the potential to sway voters away from Republican candidates in November. While the Republican base loves when McConnell and his peers do things like this to prevent Obama from getting anything done, the more moderate majority of America is less on board. And Republicans can’t win in November if only their radical base votes for them. Remember the last government shutdown? It did not go over well with the voters (across the political spectrum), who are tired of our government’s refusal to govern. The Republican party left that battle with a bruised image, while Obama’s approval remained fairly constant. If Republicans want to win in November they can’t afford to lose the moderate American voter, who is already frustrated by gridlock and ineffectiveness. The choice, therefore, to blatantly and overtly promise inaction on such an important job is politically perplexing, to say the least.

Finally, a standoff on the Supreme Court this year would bring about an intense focus on some issues that Republicans might be better off not talking about. The Court is slated to hear a case about a Texas law that has severely restricted access to safe and legal abortions in the state. At a time when Republicans are losing ground with female voters, heavy coverage of the party’s anti-abortion stance may not be politically beneficial. Especially given that almost 30% of Republican voters think abortion should be legal in all or most cases.* Republicans would be better off this year if the focus were on national security, gun control, and the budget deficit, all issues on which American voters view Republican leadership more positively.

McConnell’s statement, made only an hour after Scalia’s death was announced, was disheartening. It’s frustrating that he believes Obama doesn’t have the right to exercise his responsibilities as president, and that our government is at a point where such overt opposition to effective governing is acceptable, and not even particularly surprising. Republicans are taking a big risk here, one that could cost them for decades to come as it has implications for the 2016 presidential and congressional elections, as well as a Supreme Court seat. It might have been more politically savvy to quietly work with Obama to get someone reasonable approved quickly. That way Republicans could have gone back to their campaigns and talking about what their voters want to hear.

*Note: although the article linked here is titled “Support for Legal Abortion Falls Sharply Among Conservative Republicans”, the data in the table shows that out of Republicans as a whole, 28% believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases.