By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Should Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Nomination Continue?

 

Should Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Nomination Continue?

Yes 53 47.32%
 
No 41 36.61%
 
Trump should pick a new canidate 18 16.07%
 
Total:112
thismeintiel on 04 October 2018
PwerlvlAmy said:
thismeintiel said:

Yep. And we're getting slight hints that those swing votes may be going for Kavanaugh. Personally, I hope it is 50-50, so Pence can vote Yea and do a mic drop. 

It's probably going to end up being that yeah. I'm going to guess 53-47. Some red state democrats are up for re-election and have fallen a bit in their polls after this whole mess. I think after this recent FBI investigation, I expect some of them to try to save their seats will vote yes on confirmation. So that's my reasoning for that number.

Makes sense to me  



 

Around the Network
Machiavellian on 04 October 2018
thismeintiel said:
PwerlvlAmy said:
Voting happening this week. Hype.

Yep. And we're getting slight hints that those swing votes may be going for Kavanaugh. Personally, I hope it is 50-50, so Pence can vote Yea and do a mic drop. 

Why would it be a mic drop.  The GOP always had control of this situation.  If any GOP members decided against Kavanaugh, its probably Kavanaugh own fault.  At the end of the day, in my opinion he failed his job interview.  His testimony is what caused this to go longer than it should have.  If anyone believed the FBI was going to gain anything more from this whole ordeal from 30+ years ago probably was fooling themselves.  Hell, from the reports they didn't even interview anyone who has claimed Kavanaugh was lying to the senate so it was pretty much just for show.  At the end of the day, the GOP have control and this was always just a dog and pony show.



deskpro2k3 on 04 October 2018

Would you pet a dog that might bite you?

Would you hire someone who might be a sex offender?

It's that simple.



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5
PwerlvlAmy on 04 October 2018

So cloture tomorrow and tentative voting on his confirmation set for 4:30pm saturday



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

Snoopy on 04 October 2018
deskpro2k3 said:
Would you pet a dog that might bite you?

Would you hire someone who might be a sex offender?

It's that simple.

Be careful with that. You should hire people based on evidence and not assumptions. Making assumptions about someone is wrong. 



Around the Network
EricHiggin on 04 October 2018
Signalstar said:
Heavenly_King said:

Just because you don't like him, it does not mean that the reason which is on topic ("rape that occurred 36 years ago, and she did not say a thing back then") should be considered as an excuse to remove him from the nomination.

Not ONE word in my post makes reference to the attempted sexual assault allegation. I do not think it can be definitively proven to have happened or not happened. I err on the side of believing he is innocent in tthe absence of concrete evidence.

HOWEVER in defending himself from the allegation he displayed an unbelievable and unacceptable amount of partisan bias and hatred for the opposing side for someone who wants a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court  It's not a matter of me liking him or not (I don't) but I cannot trust him to be ffair in his rulings based on his incoherent and rambling screed. I am not alone iin my concern.
SpokenTruth said:

I second this exact concern.

Hillary Clinton called half the Country a "basket of deplorables", and yet she was 'supposed to be' the one main individual to represent and cater to all of the people. She should have been President regardless though. Not like she would fade away and become poor because she lost either.



Signalstar on 04 October 2018
EricHiggin said:
Signalstar said:

Not ONE word in my post makes reference to the attempted sexual assault allegation. I do not think it can be definitively proven to have happened or not happened. I err on the side of believing he is innocent in tthe absence of concrete evidence.

HOWEVER in defending himself from the allegation he displayed an unbelievable and unacceptable amount of partisan bias and hatred for the opposing side for someone who wants a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court  It's not a matter of me liking him or not (I don't) but I cannot trust him to be ffair in his rulings based on his incoherent and rambling screed. I am not alone iin my concern.
SpokenTruth said:

I second this exact concern.

Hillary Clinton called half the Country a "basket of deplorables", and yet she was 'supposed to be' the one main individual to represent and cater to all of the people. She should have been President regardless though. Not like she would fade away and become poor because she lost either.

"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” Clinton said.

Facts matter. Words matter.

She said half of Trump Supporters. Trump supporters at not even half the country. So she called half of less than half of the country deplorable.

Also the presidency is not a lifetime position.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.

Nighthawk117 on 04 October 2018
PwerlvlAmy said:
So cloture tomorrow and tentative voting on his confirmation set for 4:30pm saturday

Gotta love that word "cloture." Like in, Give me cloture or give me death! (I'm alluding to this thread !!!)



OhNoYouDont on 04 October 2018
Mr Puggsly said:
OhNoYouDont said:

This was the same guy who already said that Dr. Ford's testimony was credible. Flip flop, flip flop.

This isn't a left/right issue either, like the insane folks who think this is all some elaborate scheme by the democratic party.

45% of Americans believe Ford

33% of Americans believe Kavanaugh

The word victim isn't at all disingenuous unless you think Dr. Ford committed perjury. It's disingenuous to refer to Kavanaugh as her assailant rather than *alleged* assailant though.

And this is why we try to be careful when selecting a jury. The masses ignore the evidence, which is essentially nothing and story full of holes.

This is absolutely a scheme by the dems. The timing alone indicates that. Kavanaugh could never be found guilty based on stories as well, too much reasonable doubt.

Ever been to traffic court? Officer shows up, testifies against you. Maybe he has no other evidence than his word that you ran through that stop sign.

9 times out of 10 the cop wouldn't be able to pick you out of a line-up the day after the infraction but he has your name as the registered owner of the vehicle.

As to the scheme argument. Where is the evidence you so demanded from Ford while supplying none yourself?



Nighthawk117 on 04 October 2018

From NBC News: 'Bull---- investigation,' 'sham,' 'horrific cover-up': Democrats blast FBI Kavanaugh report

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/sham-cover-so-called-investigation-democrats-blast-fbi-kavanaugh-report-n916701


Senator Bob Menendez: "Just read the FBI report on Kavanaugh - if that’s an investigation, it’s a bullshit investigation."