Maybe he'll pull a shocker and vote no in the end, which would definitely attract my interest and reconsideration.  But Sasse isn't even on the list of GOP senators considered open to a no vote.  Unless and until he takes actions that provide substance and integrity backing up the image he seeks to project with his words, he has zero credibility as being anything other than one more party and ideology-over-country GOP hack, when push comes to shove as now.  

I can confirm that was true during his law school years.

Will tries, and fails again, to thread a needle.  He does not say what he believes is the right vote or course of action.  Even though he hints at a position Democrats in the Senate declined to take, which is that postponing appointment of the next justice until after the November elections  the next Congress may be the least bad option under the circumstances considering how the GOP majority dealt with the Garland nomination.

More fundamentally, he falls into the trap of treating the FBI findings as the decisive issue.  Kavanaugh manifestly lacks judicial temperament.  Confirming him would wreak immense damage to the Court, the Senate, and the country.  Elevating the national interest above other considerations, as Will's column superficially may appear to do, requires a no vote. 

Of any patriot willing to uphold the oath of office they took to protect and defend our Constitution, that is. 

ETA: Potentially a major difference between "after the November elections" (which, if the vote were held before the next Congress, would have a lame duck, and especially spineless and lame, GOP majority still in control) vs. "the next Congress" (where there will be a different makeup, possibly with a different party in the majority and possibly not).