Why is Kavanaugh so unpopular?

[Calthrina950]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

[Calthrina950]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

I'm not saying that all Democrats on this forum would be in favor of such a move. But many on here have conducted themselves in a manner that would suggest so. And on the Kavanaugh confirmation thread, I made clear that I would have voted to confirm Garland if I were a Senator.

[Calthrina950]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

The Warren Court is the only liberal court in history if you go by combined judicial partisan scores. The Roberts court is one of the most Conservative in modern history and it routinely legislates from the bench.

I was addressing the ideological viewpoints of many on here as relating to who should be on the Court. What I meant to say is that the Court shouldn't be politicized in such a manner.

[Calthrina950]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

As an alleged woman of color why would you approve of justices who consistently gut the Voting Rights Act? Effectively removing barriers that allow local governments to suppress the votes of non-white citizens.

First of all, I am a man of color, not a woman of color. I've had to clarify that on other threads. My username comes from a fictional story that I created years ago, and doesn't reflect my gender. Second, why do you say "alleged"? Yes, I am aware of how people on the Internet can give false identities, but why do you doubt me here? Just because of my opinions on this matter? It offends me that you think that all blacks have to think exactly the same way on every issue.

Thirdly, as regards to my comments relating to the Court, I was referring to the ideological preferences of many here. It's not that I object to a liberal justice. I object to how the judicial process has been made subject to partisanship and to petty political disputes. I've also made clear that my view of the Court is one in which we have moderate (preferably neutral), justices who interpret the law without giving in to the partisan calls of one side or the other. From that perspective, I think that it would be plain to see that the Voting Rights Act (to give one example), is a constitutionally-legitimate measure that seeks to enforce the provisions of the 14th and 15th Amendments.

[Calthrina950]

It offends me that you think that all blacks have to think exactly the same way on every issue.

I absolutely think that all blacks should object justices who will gut provisions put in place to protect our right to vote.

I am glad we agree on the importance of the Voting Rights Act, that Republican justices have continued to gut. I know you want to separate partisanship from the courts, but the facts are the facts. Republicans appoint justices who chip away at the rights of non-white and non-straight citizens. You cannot climb on moral high ground and shame me for being "partisan" like it is not clear which party will appoint hard-right ideologues.

I am not interested in arguing with you over this matter; I've argued with many other posters on this forum already, and enough hostility has been generated as it is. Part of the reason why I identify as an independent is because I recognize many of the flaws in the Republican Party. Those flaws have been magnified by our current President. And yes, many of the decisions taken by the Supreme Court in recent years, such as on the Voting Rights Act, are objectionable as well. But I am still unwilling to politicize the court system to the extent that many on here advocate for.

I know that you are a Democratic Party activist, as evidenced by your posts concerning the election in Georgia. I understand that partisanship drives the way in which many voters see things. But I'm not so partisan enough as to want for our entire constitutional system to be undermined, or for the opposing political party to be annihilated. That to me is a step too far, and much of the behavior, by both parties, with judicial nominees alarms me.

[Calthrina950]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

Yet you’re still able to post on this forum and enjoy your day to day life just like always? Doesn’t seem like much of a violation of “fundamental human rights.”

You don't understand what we mean by "fundamental human rights". So I won't go any further.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

I'm not saying that all Democrats on this forum would be in favor of such a move. But many on here have conducted themselves in a manner that would suggest so. And on the Kavanaugh confirmation thread, I made clear that I would have voted to confirm Garland if I were a Senator.

Atlas Democrats do not represent Democrats in general.

Ironically, that's what I would try to argue. Most people in both political bases are decent people, but the people on this forum aren't representative of that. Many posters tend to be overly partisan and to have an overreaction to topics such as this one.

[Calthrina950]

The question asked is why is he so unpopular (According to polling he is the most unpopular nominee in a long time... I think even below Bjork).

For someone to fall this far in polling- I think it has to do with more than just the politics of it (b/c probably 10% of those polled are either completely in the middle politically or don't following the process in depth are not very knowledgeable regarding specifics of Supreme Court ).  These people most likely have a favorable or unfavorable opinion based on snap gut reaction opinion they have formed seeing him briefly in news, clips, etc. 

And in this snap reaction... IMO He lacks charm & doesn't have an especially compelling bio, childhood, etc.  I imagine if Kavanaugh had been appoint to Scalia's seat & the current nominee was Gorsuch or Hardiman ... both would poll higher regarding popularity (even with the balance of the court at play) simply because they come across as more charming or more likeable in general.

I’m still convinced Hardiman would have drawn 4-5 Dems

How many do you think Kavanaugh will get? 4-5 is still a low number.

[Calthrina950]

The question asked is why is he so unpopular (According to polling he is the most unpopular nominee in a long time... I think even below Bjork).

For someone to fall this far in polling- I think it has to do with more than just the politics of it (b/c probably 10% of those polled are either completely in the middle politically or don't following the process in depth are not very knowledgeable regarding specifics of Supreme Court ).  These people most likely have a favorable or unfavorable opinion based on snap gut reaction opinion they have formed seeing him briefly in news, clips, etc. 

And in this snap reaction... IMO He lacks charm & doesn't have an especially compelling bio, childhood, etc.  I imagine if Kavanaugh had been appoint to Scalia's seat & the current nominee was Gorsuch or Hardiman ... both would poll higher regarding popularity (even with the balance of the court at play) simply because they come across as more charming or more likeable in general.

I’m still convinced Hardiman would have drawn 4-5 Dems

How many do you think Kavanaugh will get? 4-5 is still a low number.

One or two at most

It will probably be Heitkamp and one of Manchin or Donnelly, perhaps both.