Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)

Status
Not open for further replies.
ilikecheese said:
You are choosing to look past his PREPARED statement that showed his true colors as a deeply partisan operative. Invoking a Clinton conspiracy and scolding the Democatic Senators with 'what comes around, goes around'.
Click to expand...
I wasn't looking past his statement. I actually wasn't speaking to anything about him actually.
 
Ghoat said:
In short, the house has 2 year terms, and all 435 come up every 2 years
The senate has 6 year terms, but they are staggered, so that no more than 35 are up for election at any time.
This election happens to be a year where most of the elections are seats that democrats won 6 years ago. 26 Democrats and 9 Republican. So because of they way the fall in this cycle, it's going to be difficult for the Democrats to gain seats, because they have only 9 to try to "take" but have to "defend" 26.
Click to expand...

I just looked up the 2020 cycle - that will have 33, 22 Republican and 11 Democrat seats up for election.
So I guess 2022 will be the last 32, 20 Republican and 12 Democrat

I'd guess based on numbers alone, the Democrats have a much better chance to get a majority in the Senate in 2020 and 2022
 
Kenshin said:
Nor has anything proven him guilty either. Can't have it both ways unless america are judging him (ironically) without Trial which would go against the system.

Until he is proven guilty then all you have realistically is a account from 40 years ago that has all actual details removed but just because a woman has accused a man (AGAIN might i add) that automatically that case is believed to be true and a whole movement of feminists are backing that up without actual trial or proving of facts.

From an outsider perspective it is ridiculous and the best example of feminists essentially backing the men are guilty no matter what as long as a woman says so idea that they are so blind to see for themselves.



How so? If he is unfit without an accusation then he will not win the nomination and no-one would bat an eyelid.

Hundreds of feminists outside protesting and all of a sudden he makes front page news, funny that?

Fact is the man is innocent until proven guilty no matter how many women say otherwise, as said above.

but arguing against the whole #metoo movement or anything like this is just labelled offensive to women and sexist if a male says it so there we go. I can see the potential end result here and it isn't good.
Click to expand...
Not sure if you have seen ot but this article was the reasoning one former supporter of Kavanaugh had in changing his mind to rejecting despite the similar concerns (that I’ve quoted) he had to you
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/
I am also keenly aware that rejecting Kavanaugh on the record currently before the Senate will set a dangerous precedent. The allegations against him remain unproven. They arose publicly late in the process and, by their nature, are not amenable to decisive factual rebuttal. It is a real possibility that Kavanaugh is telling the truth and that he has had his life turned upside down over a falsehood. Even assuming that Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations are entirely accurate, rejecting him on the current record could incentivize not merely other sexual-assault victims to come forward—which would be a salutary thing—but also other late-stage allegations of a non-falsifiable nature by people who are not acting in good faith. We are on a dangerous road, and the judicial confirmation wars are going to get a lot worse for our traveling down it.

Despite all of that, if I were a senator, I would vote against Kavanaugh’s confirmation. I would do it both because of Ford’s testimony and because of Kavanaugh’s. For reasons I will describe, I find her account more believable than his. I would also do it because whatever the truth of what happened in the summer of 1982, Thursday’s hearing left Kavanaugh nonviable as a justice.
 
There is also the possibility that this is a engineered move to stop trump's preferred candidate getting the job politically driven knowing full well the feminists would be out in full force to support it.
 
ilikecheese said:
Forgive me. It appeared that you were arguing against one of the two agendas at play.
Click to expand...
Forgiven :)

I'm arguing that all the things that I am "assumed" to believe or have been attached to me (not directly from anyone in this thread that I am aware of) simply because I'm not "certain" that BK is guilty of sexual assault...Is an agenda - absurd, and frankly offensive.
 
LinekersLegs said:
Not sure if you have seen ot but this article was the reasoning one former supporter of Kavanaugh had in changing his mind to rejecting despite the similar concerns (that I’ve quoted) he had to you
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/
I am also keenly aware that rejecting Kavanaugh on the record currently before the Senate will set a dangerous precedent. The allegations against him remain unproven. They arose publicly late in the process and, by their nature, are not amenable to decisive factual rebuttal. It is a real possibility that Kavanaugh is telling the truth and that he has had his life turned upside down over a falsehood. Even assuming that Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations are entirely accurate, rejecting him on the current record could incentivize not merely other sexual-assault victims to come forward—which would be a salutary thing—but also other late-stage allegations of a non-falsifiable nature by people who are not acting in good faith. We are on a dangerous road, and the judicial confirmation wars are going to get a lot worse for our traveling down it.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned it could well be a politically driven move simply because he is trump's nomination for the role.

As I stated originally I don't know all the details and I don't know if he is innocent or guilty. But from an outsider perspective it all seems far too convenient from the accusation to the timing to hold real truth. Especially when it's not like Brett has come from nowhere, he has always held a powerful position and yet not a public word about it. Trump is involved though and things change considerably.

They need to prove him guilty , simply because it backs feminists anti men agenda which is now woefully misguided to form a mob mentality in my opinion. Because that is the issue in my mind, women should have full support to be able to come forward , but when it costs a whole sex their potential innocence until proven guilty then that's when it needs to be looked at by everyone
 
Kenshin said:
Nor has anything proven him guilty either. Can't have it both ways unless america are judging him (ironically) without Trial which would go against the system.

Until he is proven guilty then all you have realistically is a account from 40 years ago that has all actual details removed but just because a woman has accused a man (AGAIN might i add) that automatically that case is believed to be true and a whole movement of feminists are backing that up without actual trial or proving of facts.

From an outsider perspective it is ridiculous and the best example of feminists essentially backing the men are guilty no matter what as long as a woman says so idea that they are so blind to see for themselves.



How so? If he is unfit without an accusation then he will not win the nomination and no-one would bat an eyelid.

Hundreds of feminists outside protesting and all of a sudden he makes front page news, funny that?

Fact is the man is innocent until proven guilty no matter how many women say otherwise, as said above.

but arguing against the whole #metoo movement or anything like this is just labelled offensive to women and sexist if a male says it so there we go. I can see the potential end result here and it isn't good.
Click to expand...

He's lied under oath
 
Kenshin said:
There is also the possibility that this is a engineered move to stop trump's preferred candidate getting the job politically driven knowing full well the feminists would be out in full force to support it.
Click to expand...
Yes that is a possibiltity

But that possibility, by its mere existence, doesn't mean that the opposite cannot be accurate as well, i.e., there are a myriad of legitimate reasons why Kavanaugh shouldn't be confirmed
 
ilikecheese said:
Senator Coons: "You can't find corroboration if you don't look for corroboration." Regarding the FBI 'investigation'.
Click to expand...
That assumes there is corroboration to be had. And if that is the assumption, then there will be no satisfaction until it's found.
If there actually is no corroboration and you operate from the above assumption, would you agree that you are in an infinite loop?
 
Pittsburgh Footy said:
Yes that is a possibiltity

But that possibility, by its mere existence, doesn't mean that the opposite cannot be accurate as well, i.e., there are a myriad of legitimate reasons why Kavanaugh shouldn't be confirmed
Click to expand...

And that is the exact same logic I have (I won't speak for anyone else) have in regards to the accuracy of the accusation that cannot be proved one way or the other.

It's possible, but by it's existence, it doesn't mean the denial isn't accurate as well. And no, I'm trying to twist your words or such, but you just clearly articulated how I feel, but haven't been able to articulate as plainly!
 
Ghoat said:
That assumes there is corroboration to be had. And if that is the assumption, then there will be no satisfaction until it's found.
If there actually is no corroboration and you operate from the above assumption, would you agree that you are in an infinite loop?
Click to expand...
In a word, no

Let's call the allegations "leads" in a crime investigation. Wouldn't the investigation involve looking into those leads (in this context, looking for corroboration), and if those leads go nowhere, there is no corroboration.

What happened in this case is that not all of the leads were followed. it would be akin to a murder scene with witnesses and a camera showing two guys in a blue car fired shots and the investigators only interviewing and following up on the guy that lived across the street.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top