Mexal Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Chris Coons thinks Kavanaugh is going to get confirmed. That means he's gotten indication from Flake at the very least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 6 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: Lots of them do own it. They stand there with signs or wear t-shirts inviting him to come grab them. Of course, every single woman I've seen in those circumstances was not a woman that Trump would have been interested in (from what I've seen) so it is very weird. Well, these Trump-voting white women are often married, older, and more prosperous. They are protected more than more vulnerable women from both gropers and the awful effects of GOP policies. The real dummies are the working-class men voting for the billionaires to further enslave them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Manchin sounds like a yes- “I am looking at the gentleman as an adult from 22 to 53, thirty-one years of professional service,” said Manchin. “I am looking at him as a father. As a person in a community, how he interacts with his community. I am trying to put the human side to it.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Sure, look at him, but look at him last fucking week, or 10 years ago when he lied under oath. That's a CRIME! Why is nobody talking about how they want to put a criminal on the Supreme Court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 So Collins is a yes. Very thorough meaning the 40 people who wanted to corroborate weren't interviewed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 39 minutes ago, aceluby said: Sure, look at him, but look at him last fucking week, or 10 years ago when he lied under oath. That's a CRIME! Why is nobody talking about how they want to put a criminal on the Supreme Court? I mean, we're all talking about it. But to most of those Republican Senators? Well, they have a mental image of what a criminal is, and what a criminal isn't, and Brett Kavanaugh just doesn't fit their mental schema for 'criminal'. When men like Kavanaugh lie under oath, it's an understandable reaction, it's a forgivable slip, it's not something you need to ruin someone's life over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said: Lots of them do own it. They stand there with signs or wear t-shirts inviting him to come grab them. Of course, every single woman I've seen in those circumstances was not a woman that Trump would have been interested in (from what I've seen) so it is very weird. Stupid is as stupid does. Why do people vote against their best interest? Why do people think a guy with a literal gold plated apartment is a populist? When his policies will screw them while allowing himself to become richer? Face it, the average American is a complete moron. I used to be optimistic about their abilities, but years canvassing in the field beat that out of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 If Kavanaugh is getting 50+ votes anyway, I'm sure Manchin will vote yes. And I hope he does, its smart politics for him and doesn't matter substantively. On the other hand, if Kavanaugh is stuck at 49, I'm fairly certain Manchin will suck it up and vote no. Same goes for Heitkamp, though polling is starting to look like she's doomed no matter what she does here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokisnow Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 I hope Manchin and Heitkamp lose their elections if they vote yes. they don't deserve a single democrat vote from voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Flake is a yes due to “no additional corroborating evidence”. What a weasel, hound this fucker, make him get that stupid upset tummy look on his face everyday. Like I said last week, there are no decent Republicans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frog Eater Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 1 minute ago, Morpheus said: Flake is a yes due to “no additional corroborating evidence”. What a weasel, hound this fucker, make him get that stupid upset tummy look on his face everyday. Like ainsaid last week, there are no decent Republicans lol, you call for people to hound a senator for doing his job and then, in the same fucking sentence proclaim there are no decent Republicans. fucking liberals man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 9 minutes ago, Frog Eater said: lol, you call for people to hound a senator for doing his job and then, in the same fucking sentence proclaim there are no decent Republicans. fucking liberals man No, he is not. I don't recall "rubber stamping a deeply partisan, dishonest, and young SCOTUS-nominee with multiple sexual assault/harrassment allegations after a sham of an investigation by the FBI" as part of his job description. fucking conservatives man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 18 minutes ago, Frog Eater said: lol, you call for people to hound a senator for doing his job and then, in the same fucking sentence proclaim there are no decent Republicans. fucking liberals man Confirming a man to the Supreme Court after lying under oat is doing his job? Pretty low bar you conservatives have. No wonder you guys keep electing these assholes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnot OG Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Frog Eater yet again with his apologism. You make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 51 minutes ago, Frog Eater said: lol, you call for people to hound a senator for doing his job and then, in the same fucking sentence proclaim there are no decent Republicans. fucking liberals man If you're not one of the 1% and you support the Republicans you're just plain stupid, best case scenario. Fucking conservatives, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 57 minutes ago, Frog Eater said: lol, you call for people to hound a senator for doing his job and then, in the same fucking sentence proclaim there are no decent Republicans. fucking liberals man Look man, a yes vote for Kavanaugh essentially means you don’t believe Dr. Ford. What message does that send to women who have been victims of sexual violence and have yet to come forward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 37 minutes ago, Bonnot OG said: Frog Eater yet again with his apologism. You make me sick. I did say in a previous thread that there were posters who absolutely disgusted me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illrede Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Look at it this way. In the current administration's 2nd Supreme Court Nomination (notably from a widely available and closed population list- high court oppo for this political moment has been given a rare handicap), after some excitement in speculation, they go with the "safe" pick. Which is to say someone not seen as one to revisit a certain decision unprompted (the key distinguishment from the speculated alternative that people perceived), a former clerk of the Judge being replaced, broad spectrum recommendation on account being very much the "establishments" representative. Some intra-establishment animosity in the past but that had been perceived as having been worked out with a brief career progression delay; good broad patronage and likewise a wide patron of others. Safe. (Gutless, if you're being uncharitable and inclined that way.) Events occur that it is perceivable that if one assumes this was someone's plan to disrupt the nomination process at a specific moment using an item kept at hand, obtain a prompt withdrawal when a second nomination process would be mechanically impossible under this Legislature and the current administration's 2nd Supreme Court Nomination can be neutralized utilizing a further expansion of some new mutually observed legislative norms should events allow.... it's believable, if you assume some out of the ordinary optimism to go with the out of the ordinary cutthroat political behavior. Inordinate optimism in three related areas (which I personally believe haven't been born out). The disrupting item has to obtain a conventional standard of importance and proof (either already possess it, or acquire it in the truncated timeframe allowed- as would in at least some way have to be a blind draw, optimistic to rely on). Ones opponents have to in sufficient degree cooperate with where these conventional standards are (historically speaking, they've been appalling low as well appallingly high. If I had to take a guess about somebody else's guess, I'd say an expectation to err towards "low" at the moment. This is still unreasonably optimistic.). There must not be a widening, extended, and unresolved conflict over these (which would be unwarranted optimism- you don't pick the size and duration of a fight unilaterally). That's gone about as badly as it could while still being implemented, but isn't contradicted as an assumption. It's much more attractive to see this as a series of events (surrounding another event) with a genesis in and carried on with error and animosity (and it's never a mistake to hold out for that), But I recommend making allowances for people that don't. (I know this is harder to follow than it needs to be but I see that as meaning anyone who bothers to try to understand what I am saying will also bother to understand what I am saying) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 3 hours ago, Fragile Bird said: Lots of them do own it. They stand there with signs or wear t-shirts inviting him to come grab them. Of course, every single woman I've seen in those circumstances was not a woman that Trump would have been interested in (from what I've seen) so it is very weird. It would be very weird regardless of whatever words came after ‘of course’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 The reason they did not interview Kavanaugh and Ford was to keep Kav from having to answer questions given his penchant for lying and dodging. Not that it matters now, but Heitkamp is a “no”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.