So you are linking to an opinion piece rather than the actual speech? Lets look at the actual speech
https://www.congress.gov/congression...article/S925-7
Now lets quote the part the above opinion piece is pointing to that seemingly allows McConnell to do what he is doing without being a hypocrite.
This paragraph is doing nothing more than providing some historical context. its not actually a part of his argument.One might say this is an almost unprecedented moment in the history
of our country. It has been more than 80 years since a Supreme Court
vacancy arose and was filled in a Presidential election year, and that
was when the Senate majority and the President were from the same
political party. It has been 80 years.
Since we have divided government today, it means we have to look back
almost 130 years to the last time a nominee was confirmed in similar
circumstances. That was back when politicians such as mugwumps were
debating policy like free silver and a guy named Grover ran the
country. Think about that.
But what is McConnell's actual argument? back to the speech!
This is what he is arguing against. You'll notice he makes no mention of the controlling parties anywhere in the speech or how that would impact the decision on whether or not to allow a vote. His stance is purely based on the fact that its an election year and that the President is a "lameduck" (which at that point i would argue is not true, but not really relevant at the moment.)Will we allow the people to
continue deciding who will nominate the next Justice or will we empower
a lameduck President to make that decision on his way out the door
instead?
The opinion piece is taking a small part of his speech and spinning the context of it to mean something it didn't. The GOP is effectively moving the goalposts so as not to seem like hypocrites playing politics, which of course they are.