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
DrDoomz said:
deskpro2k3 said:
Lots of boofin in the comments section as of late. Personally I rather they pick a clean judge, but if course they want to rush this before the midterms because they know there is a good chance that they're going to be voted out.

That’s the thing though. There’s never going to be a clean enough judge. And even if he was clean, they could just fabricate accusations cuz apparently, accusations are enough to disqualify a candidate for many ppl. At the very least, if Kav was disqualified, that would be the precedence they would be establishing.

See above comment.



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
Around the Network
deskpro2k3 said:
DrDoomz said:

That’s the thing though. There’s never going to be a clean enough judge. And even if he was clean, they could just fabricate accusations cuz apparently, accusations are enough to disqualify a candidate for many ppl. At the very least, if Kav was disqualified, that would be the precedence they would be establishing.

See above comment.

That doesn’t address what I said, but if you say so. /shrug



DrDoomz said:
deskpro2k3 said:

See above comment.

That doesn’t address what I said, but if you say so. /shrug

It does address what you said. You want someone clean? Then let the FBI investigate the claims to see if they're fabricated lies or not.



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
deskpro2k3 said:
DrDoomz said:

That doesn’t address what I said, but if you say so. /shrug

It does address what you said. You want someone clean? Then let the FBI investigate the claims to see if they're fabricated lies or not.

Nothing is stopping them from invenstigating once he’s confirmed. If he IS guilty of sexual harassment, then he could just be prosecuted once he’s in office.

Til then, we assume he is innocent until proof comes out that he’s not. Anything else would just be a stalling tactic.

Edit. Also, it doesn’t address what I said because what I said is that the democrats could just as easily try and sully any judge’s reputation if the precedence of accusation = guilt is followed (w/c is what the democrats are trying to pull) and the fact that the democrat politicians have IMO shown to everyone that they are willing to do anything and everything to prevent Trump’s nominee from being in the SC.



Snoopy said:
The way American politics is heading, we will only get corrupt people running for office. Who in their right mind would want to be a politician with all this mud slinging and people getting their lives ruined on baseless accusations?

Lol, did you just wake up today and notice how politics work.  This is pretty much normal and has been for decades.  If anything if you have a checkered past you best think twice before running for any office because people will spend a lot of time digging that stuff up.  



Around the Network
thismeintiel said:
DarthMetalliCube said:

Can't wait for this goddamn circus to be over, one way or another.

While I tend to lean towards being skeptical towards Ford, I really just wish the Repubs would have just nominated someone else with a seemingly clean record. At least then if random sexual assault allegations popped up AGAIN out of nowhere, it would look far more fishy than it does now.. Or, if Trump were smart, he'd just nominate a woman next, and one far more conservative than Kavanaugh, who's supposedly fairly moderate, just to troll the dems.

Though I guess the Dems think they're going to win the midterms so that's precisely the point of attempting to block this nomination, because then they'd be able to hold the seat empty until their "inevitable" win in 2020 and they can throw another liberal on there. The irony is the backlash I think will only sway more people from the dems to the repubs for the mids. It's certainly repelled me even further from them.

To the Dems, there won't be a judge that is clean enough. Or shows the right demeanor. They let Gorsuch slide because he was a Conservative judge replacing another Conservative judge. Kennedy's replacement tips the scale in the Reps favor, at least in their mind, even though he is more moderate. If they actually lose the mid-terms, and RBG steps down, or (God forbid) has health issues, her replacement will face even more garbage, no matter how squeaky clean they actually are. It'll make this circus look like a walk in the park.

And you are right. This may cost them the mid-terms. It's energized the base and frightened some moderates with the "guilty until proven innocent" stance the Dems are taking. Polls are slowly sliding towards the Reps. 

Wasn't Garland clean enough.  Even the GOP thought he was a good justice but they wanted to pick their own and wanted nothing from Obama.  I notice how people only see political maneuvers from the party they do not support. 

As to energizing the base, I kind of lol at that.  If they were not energized already, I wonder why this would make a difference.  The most vocal isn't always the majority.  At the end of the day, people who vote are going to vote and people who do not probably will not.  I highly doubt this will spur any people who do not vote compared to people that do not.  It will still go along partisan lines as always.

Last edited by Machiavellian - on 05 October 2018

SpokenTruth 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.

I second this exact concern.

Pretty much this. As far as the Senate is concerned is behaviour at the hearing should be enough to get him booted.
That and all the lies. Also disrespecting the panel repeatedly.



And we have cloture, by 51-49. Final nomination voting tomorrow.



DrDoomz said:
deskpro2k3 said:
Lots of boofin in the comments section as of late. Personally I rather they pick a clean judge, but if course they want to rush this before the midterms because they know there is a good chance that they're going to be voted out.

That’s the thing though. There’s never going to be a clean enough judge. And even if he was clean, they could just fabricate accusations cuz apparently, accusations are enough to disqualify a candidate for many ppl. At the very least, if Kav was disqualified, that would be the precedence they would be establishing.

One of the more factual posts here. This is completely correct. There will always be something wrong with whoever Repubs/Trump picks because #MahResist



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

absolutely. cant wait for November. voting against every listed (D)