That is a bit of a strange comment. I mean of course they’d want a judge that is nominated from their side rather than a judge that the dems nominated. How can you fault them for that? That’s literally what either party would do. And of course either party is pro party (or to be more accurate, more focused on their base) and not pro country (else they’d all be moderates and not left/right), that is just the sad truth of American politics these days. The only thing is that now the Repubs are the ones with the power to do so and the Dems are basically trying to stop them by any means necessary (though I feel the dems may have crossed a line here by taking mudslinging to the next level).

You literally said you wanted to drag the process out for the purpose of a "mic drop" which as far as I can see is pure schadenfreude.  Even if, and be sure that I dispute your characterization, but even if your claims about the Democrats were true, they would still at least have some objective to what they are doing above pure "neener neener" knife-twisting.  Which is what you explicitly wished for.  So get the fuck off your high horse. 

One time I was in bad traffic and I changed to an outside lane, but it turned out that the lane was closing. The guy who had been behind me didn't let me back in. I'll never forget the look on his face: he was laughing uproariously—giddy, almost ecstatic to be able to punish me. I thought to myself, what sort of human being takes THAT MUCH pleasure in the downfall of another?

You do realize the FBI initially turned down looking into the allegation, right?  There wasn't enough proof to warrant an investigation.  The Dems knew this.  Now, after Trump gave them what they wanted, they are kicking and screaming because the FBI turned up exactly what the Reps told them it would, which was the exact same thing the committee found.  No proof whatsoever.

And the timing shows exactly what the Dems wanted.  Otherwise they would have brought it to the committee's attention back in July so this could have been investigated privately .  Instead, they waited til the 11th hour and leaked the story to the press, which caused the calls for a hearing, thus delaying the vote.  Fortunately, we're done with the delays.

Yea, you didn't really comprehend a single thing I wrote, or choose not to.  But, that's ok, cause I don't really care.  Though, I think someone else in this convo is on the high horse.

First of all, they were just keeping with the standard set by Dems in '92, who kept 50+ judgeships open so that they could put their guys in when Clinton won the presidency.  You can't set a precedent and then cry when the other side uses it against you.  Second, while I would have preferred that they hold a vote anyway, the truth is he wouldn't have made it through.  And third, and much more important, Garland was just not voted on.  They didn't rake his name and reputation through the mud and accused him of being a serial rapist.

Well, when you piss on one of the founding principles, here being innocent until proven guilty, it seems to wake up a lot of people. 

Whelp, so much for that month long temper tantrum and trying to destroy a man's life with uncorroborated and unproven sexual assault charges.

Looks like after all that, the only folks Brett Kavanaugh raped were the Democrats lol. On top of that, the Republican base is now energized and several Dem senators in red / swing states are extremely vulnerable thanks to this show trial and non-stop smears by Democrats and the media against President Trump's SCOTUS nomination - and let's be real here, this is was it was all about all along. Trump could've nominated Jesus, and Democrats would've questioned his temperament and fitness to serve on the court after he overthrew some tables in a temple one time. I think Jesus was also a lush (his big trick at parties was turning water into wine) and he associated with a prostitute too. Totally unfit to serve!

Dude, gotta ask. But what world have you been living in? We have literally entire shows that have comedy bits revelling in Kav’s humuliation. And this is a man that may well be innocent and having ppl trying to ruin his life/reputation/career.

The world is full of human beings that are that way. Hell, that may well be the norm now if the celebs from the left are anything to go by.

Glad to see the democrats have a sane person among them.

I hope Kavanaugh does get the votes and people start to think about what the dems truly represent at the moment.

It wasn't a jab at you specifically but mostly the left's viewpoint as the media portray's. It's hard to assume the news is wrong, since when they are called 'fake news' they make sure to point out that's totally incorrect. If that is incorrect on an overall scale, then by all means correct me, as you did already based on your own personal stance.

Sure there is. The candidate who seems to be the most impartial is who the Country votes for, a majority, no different than how you would want the most impartial individual confirmed to the Supreme Court. As President your job is to cater to all the people equally, or that's what is supposed to happen, even though we all know that's not exactly the case, just like how we all know some Justices are known to be lefties and some are known to be righties. Also, considering the President themselves choose the nominee, having a heavily biased President would more than likely lead to a more biased pick.

No I don't want to go there, because corrupt vs corrupt is an argument nobody but the most corrupt can win.

If they nominated a Jesus-like character and the democrats tried in futility to smear this individual, at least the American people would be accepting of the nomination. Kavanaugh displayed his true character and it is unbecoming of an impartial interpreter of the constitution. It's revolting that such an obstreperous, partisan shill is being promoted to such a duty.

Voting is today,seems like it will be 51-49 if votes stay the same,