A lot of ink on all sides has been spilled regarding the ongoing debate surrounding Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to Justice Anthony Kennedy’s seat on the Supreme Court. I want to offer a slightly different analysis limited to the strategic tactics of Senate Democrats and what it means for a party desperate for power again.

[Click here for complete Kavanaugh coverage]

As it stands, there is nothing left to do but vote. One important question in my mind is where do the Democrats go from here in their quest for control of the House, Senate, and ultimately the White House? What lessons could they learn from these past few months?

In April 2017, mere hours before the Senate Judiciary Committee was set to vote on Judge Neil Gorsuch, spurious plagiarism charges were leveled in a last-ditch attempt to scuttle President Trump’s nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the court. Tactically, the timing of this accusation is now eerily similar to the timing of the allegations against Kavanaugh. The hearings are where these issues should be vetted; otherwise, why put us all through a week of grandstanding?

Nevertheless, Senate Democrats mounted a fruitless filibuster against the Gorsuch nomination. What if they hadn’t?

At the time, in 2017, just like it looked a few weeks ago, Gorsuch’s nomination was moving swiftly along. It was assumed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., would rally his caucus to break the final barrier that Senate rules provided on nominations. Senate Democrats led by then-Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., arguably made a huge tactical error in removing the threat of filibuster in November 2013 on all but Supreme Court nominations. It's an error Trump and McConnell have masterfully exploited.

Had cooler heads prevailed in the Democratic Party and theirs moderate voices been allowed to speak, let alone lead, one has to wonder if they would have forced Senate Republicans’ hands to break the rules on the Gorsuch nomination.

Imagine how the Kavanaugh nomination would have gone down were Gorsuch confirmed with 60-plus votes and if the filibuster were still in place today. It's an attractive set of events, if you’re a Democrat.

Judge Gorsuch becomes Justice Gorsuch (qualified nominees usually do), Republicans would now either need 60 votes to confirm Kavanaugh or McConnell would have to convince 50 of the 51 GOP Senators to end the filibuster in this current divisive political environment. Good luck with that, it'd be game over for Kavanaugh. It’s hard to imagine that fence-sitting Republican senators would also be willing to “break” the rules to get to a final vote right now. And, a cherry on top for Democrats, the filibuster would also still be a tool for future Supreme Court nominees under the Trump administration.

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is as good as they get. When the most radical voices get to effectively call the shots, forcing elected leaders to pursue the most ideologically pure positions, it’s easy to make mistakes. In baseball, they're called unforced errors.

The nomination process is broken and it will take leadership on both sides to fix it. Unfortunately, politicians who are beholden to the most extreme voices in their coalition are leading the Democratic Party today. If you don’t believe me, wait a mere 30 days until the 2020 nomination process really starts. Is this really the way to win back Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and Obama voters who cast their vote for President Trump in 2016? The radical Left is helping my party, so I guess I should just wish them more “success."

Geoff Verhoff is a vice chairman of the RNC Finance Committee and a longtime Republican lobbyist.