I'll out myself as one who voted "Yay." Not because I think he's great or because I agree with all his positions (I don't), but because I think he's well qualified and has the legal experience and expertise to do the job. Given the instability and chaotic nature of the current POTUS I think Kavanaugh is a surprisingly decent pick, likely due to decades of behind the scenes work by the Federalist Society. The fact that an extremely motivated opponent can only come up with nitpickery such as a sporting event debt from years ago (meh, I forget the details) or that he didn't shake someone's hand, is a pretty good indicator that he's thoroughly vetted and not some crazy person. And believe you me, I think Trump probably could have nominated some pretty wackadoodle candidates.
Justices are selected via a political process and are therefore all biased politically. Their bias is a reflection of the present political reality in DC. In other words, the bias of the nominee was determined in 2016 when Trump was elected along with a majority GOP congress. A GOP president with GOP congress is not going to nominate a moderate, and vice versa. Elections have consequences, yes?
Garland wasn't passed-over based on some high-minded ideal that a POTUS shouldn't nominate during an election year. It was clear he didn't have the votes in the Senate and Obama's term was coming to an end. Besides, most people assumed Clinton would easily win the presidency and I don't think Obama wanted to end his term grinding out an acrimonious and ultimately ill fated confirmation process. I wonder sometimes if he regrets that decision.