Comments regarding the Kavanaugh nomination

[Torie]

IMHO, the best thing that could happen to Democrats from a purely partisan perspective is a narrow Kavanaugh confirmation. He will instantly become a liberal boogeyman and a rallying cry for women (especially if he votes to restrict reproductive rights). And his presence will become a legitimate excuse for them to pack the court once they control the trifecta.  

You need legislation to increase size of court and abolishing legislative filibuster needs 67 votes

So not gonna happen

It needs just a majority vote in the sense that the filibuster procedural rule is itself subject to being terminated by a majority vote. That can happen via the Senate overturning the ruling of the Senate parliamentarian upholding the filibuster procedural rule. That did happen most recently when the filibuster was nixed for SCOTUS nominees with respect to the Gorsuch nomination to SCOTUS.

The filibuster is hanging by a thread these days and is on life support, which an ever shortening half life. And that is a good thing, not a bad thing. Its existence has made a mess of party accountability, and the ensuing gridlock as to policy changes often locks in place the dysfunctional status quo.

[หมูเด้ง]

IMHO, the best thing that could happen to Democrats from a purely partisan perspective is a narrow Kavanaugh confirmation. He will instantly become a liberal boogeyman and a rallying cry for women (especially if he votes to restrict reproductive rights). And his presence will become a legitimate excuse for them to pack the court once they control the trifecta. 

You need legislation to increase size of court and abolishing legislative filibuster needs 67 votes

So not gonna happen

It needs just a majority vote. The filibuster can be tanked at any time via the Senate overturning the ruling of the Senate parliamentarian. That happened most recently when the filibuster was nixed for SCOTUS nominees with respect to the Gorsuch nomination to SCOTUS.

Looks like they shouldn't have done that. They better hope they always hold on to power.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1046162360321363969?ref_src=twsrc%5Et...

[Torie]

Maybe you don't get admission bonus points for grandparents, just parents.

[Landslide Lyndon]

IMHO, the best thing that could happen to Democrats from a purely partisan perspective is a narrow Kavanaugh confirmation. He will instantly become a liberal boogeyman and a rallying cry for women (especially if he votes to restrict reproductive rights). And his presence will become a legitimate excuse for them to pack the court once they control the trifecta. 

You need legislation to increase size of court and abolishing legislative filibuster needs 67 votes

So not gonna happen

It needs just a majority vote. The filibuster can be tanked at any time via the Senate overturning the ruling of the Senate parliamentarian. That happened most recently when the filibuster was nixed for SCOTUS nominees with respect to the Gorsuch nomination to SCOTUS.

Looks like they shouldn't have done that. They better hope they always hold on to power.

Filibuster is on borrowed time no matter what McConnell did. It's a matter of when it's going to be abolished, not if.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Maybe you don't get admission bonus points for grandparents, just parents.

According to the comments on Twitter, you can get it for grandparents as well.

[Torie]

Maybe you don't get admission bonus points for grandparents, just parents.

According to the comments on Twitter, you can get it for grandparents as well.

OK. One mistake K made was gilding the lily with extraneous stuff that really wasn't relevant to did he or didn't he. I was impressed however how much K was able to accomplish giving how much he drank. He was a very functional lush indeed.

[Kamala-Tim 2024]

In other news, Donnelly moves from a no vote to undecided on the K nomination. He shall await the FBI report.

F-cking really? How do you move *away* from a no after everything that’s happened?

[cp]

In other news, Donnelly moves from a no vote to undecided on the K nomination. He shall await the FBI report.

This is the same report we discussed on the previous page. Donnelly did not move his vote, he just said that he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. Hotair's lede is (deliberately) misrepresenting the content of Donnelly's statement.

c.f.:

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

I deleted my post out of a sense of embarrassment. Sorry! Torie.

[RI]

The Dem senator most at risk if they don't vote for Kavanaugh who hasn't been discussed much is Heitkamp.

[UncleSam]

In other news, Donnelly moves from a no vote to undecided on the K nomination. He shall await the FBI report.

This is the same report we discussed on the previous page. Donnelly did not move his vote, he just said that he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. Hotair's lede is (deliberately) misrepresenting the content of Donnelly's statement.

c.f.:

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

Is it bad that I was more put off by the picture of Flake at the top of an article on Donnelly than I was by the misleading headline

[Torie]

In other news, Donnelly moves from a no vote to undecided on the K nomination. He shall await the FBI report.

F-cking really? How do you move *away* from a no after everything that’s happened?

He didn't. The article was pointed out above to be disingenuous spin, but I failed to recollect that.

[Torie]

If you thought that Lindsey Graham was perhaps the most overwrought Senator regarding the K nomination (not that he didn't have some competitors), think again. Senator Cotton is on the warpath. Just why he is so sure about what he says is actually happening I don't know. Sad!

[Landslide Lyndon]

If you thought that Lindsey Graham was perhaps the most overwrought Senator regarding the K nomination (not that he didn't have some competitors), think again. Senator Cotton is on the warpath. Just why he is so sure about what he says is actually happening I don't know. Sad!

I hope Cassandra Butts's ghost haunts this scumbag's dreams every night.

[libertpaulian]

The Dem senator most at risk if they don't vote for Kavanaugh who hasn't been discussed much is Heitkamp.

Actually, it's McCaskill.  A poll showed that 49% of voters polled would be less likely to vote for her if she didn't confirm him.

[OSR stands with Israel]

My position on this probably matches up more with Jeff Flake's position than any other senator on this

[Mr.Bakari-Sellers]

Reaching a conclusion and obviously the GOP will have a victory, should there be no smoking gun in the FBI investigation.

[TJ in Oregon]

My position on this probably matches up more with Jeff Flake's position than any other senator on this

I agree actually. Flake, despite his laundry list of faults in the way he's handled things, does seem to honestly want to know whether Kavanaugh is guilty or not and will vote for him if convincing evidence cannot be found that Kavanaugh is guilty.

[Brittain33]

The Dem senator most at risk if they don't vote for Kavanaugh who hasn't been discussed much is Heitkamp.

Actually, it's McCaskill.  A poll showed that 49% of voters polled would be less likely to vote for her if she didn't confirm him.

Wasn't that a poll for a Republican org?

[Torie]

Here is a columnist piece in WAPO that I found refreshingly calm and sensible, where so much is neither on this matter, as to what the FBI should be investigating and what one might hope the denouement will be, even if that is unrealistic.

One thing that I might add, is that inasmuch as Keyser does not remember meeting Kavanaugh at all, I would focus on asking Ford about that beer she drank. Was that in the living room, and who was there in the living room? It is odd that Ford who remembers so little, other than the actions surrounding the violent events themselves, remembers the one beer. Anyway, that suggests a period of normal time before the violent time, while the beer was consumed. Another oddity is that Ford did not seek out Keyser as she fled the house. What happened to Keyser?

The more I think about it, the more I think Mitchell should have asked a bunch of questions of Ford that she did not. The FBI now should.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Here's a Change Research poll from Sep. 27-28, 741 RV with many detailed questions about Kavanaugh and the hearing for those who are interested.

[KingSweden]

Here's a Change Research poll from Sep. 27-28, 741 RV with many detailed questions about Kavanaugh and the hearing for those who are interested.

So Kavamaugh is consistency underwater, but not overwhelmingly so

[Mister Mets]

On the Kavanaugh story, two places posted the same criticism based on an article of the Intercept.

https://politicalwire.com/2018/09/30/kavanaugh-lied-about-being-unconnected-to-yale/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/kavanaugh-hearing-yale-legacy.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Looking at the transcript, he said something different. His comments weren't about Yale, but about Yale Law School.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One can easily say that it's ridiculous for a Yale undergrad to claim no connection to Yale Law School, but that isn't the argument made here.

I’m curious as to how respectable journalists got this wrong, and what that means. Is the rush for content just preventing them from doing due diligence, or is this caused by bias of some kind? What makes this ironic and hypocritical is that it comes in the context of arguments about whether Brett Kavanaugh is too dishonest to be on the Supreme Court.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

CNN is saying that FBI is not expected to interview either Dr. Ford or Kavanaugh. Also, that the White House might not even make the report public.

This is absolutely sickening. The Republicans are disgusting (I'm not supposed to say that because it's "offensive"). What are they hiding?

[Progressive Pessimist]

CNN is saying that FBI is not expected to interview either Dr. Ford or Kavanaugh. Also, that the White House might not even make the report public.

This is absolutely sickening. Congressional Republicans are disgusting (I'm not supposed to say that because it's "offensive"). What are they hiding?

How low can the Republican Party go? They're pretty much the world's limbo champions at this point.