• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If the charge of sexual assault against Kavanaugh is true should he be confirmed anyway?

If the charge of sexual assault against Kavanaugh is true should he be confirmed anyway?

  • Total voters
    40
Risky Thicket

Risky Thicket

Sewer Rat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
34,143
Reaction score
37,608
Location
With Yo Mama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Question in full: [FONT=&quot]If the charge of sexual assault during a party in high school by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh is true, do you think Brett Kavanaugh… should be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court?
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]Simple question. Simple answer.

1. The question has nothing to do with Clinton or Obama so don't even start with the "What about...?" responses.

2. The question is hypothetical and straightforward. If you want to add conditions to the question ("Yeah, but what if Kavanaugh was only pretending to assault the woman/women" or "What if Kavanaugh was only doing it because he was drunk?", etc.) then start your own thread with all the hypothetical additions you can think of. Don't do it here. I did not include an "Other" response option because the question is a straightforward.

3. "If the charge is true ..." This thread is not intended to be another thread addressing the question or guilt or innocence. There are already many threads where that discussion is taking place. This thread asks whether you would or would not support Kavanaugh's confirmation IF the charge of sexual assault is true.

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
 
If any of what he's being accused of is true, then absolutely not. In that scenario, I'd be supportive of legal action against him.
 
If true, then of course not. As well, if true and he lies about it under oath then that should be another reason to not confirm.
 
I did not vote either way, IF questions are basically worthless, you are being asked to decide on something that may be or may not be, could have been or if it could not. IF I chose the right numbers in the powerball lotto would I be millionaire, a multi-millionaire or only a few thousand winner? Far too many if's involved.
 
only one answer

and only one problem

PROVING IT

so far, no one is even close to that aspect....

what we have is claims, and innuendo

so without PROOF...should he be confirmed?

or should the GOP let the me too sway the next seat on the SCOTUS
 
If there was any way that it was deemed that a sexual assault committed in high school should not stand in the way of someone being on the Supreme Court, that possibility is taken off the table if the candidate lies about it under oath.

If there was any chance that a person with such a past should be allowed on the court, then that person's past would need to be handled very carefully by the candidate, with humility, honesty, penitence, signs of growth, not signs of willingness to continue the same boys club mentality which encouraged the original abuses.
 
I knew this wasn’t going to stay inside the guard-rails, but I had hope..........:3oops:
 
There is no charge of sexual assault against Kavanaugh.
 
gdgyva said:
only one answer

and only one problem

PROVING IT

so far, no one is even close to that aspect....

what we have is claims, and innuendo

so without PROOF...should he be confirmed?

or should the GOP let the me too sway the next seat on the SCOTUS
Click to expand...

You obviously didn't read my comments in the OP. Proving or disproving it is NOT the subject of this thread. There are many threads that address that topic. Jump on over to one of them and discuss it. Not here. Thanks.
 
joko104 said:
There is no charge of sexual assault against Kavanaugh.
Click to expand...

You obviously didn't read my comments in the OP. Proving or disproving it is NOT the subject of this thread. There are many threads that address that topic. Jump on over to one of them and discuss it. Not here. Thanks.
 
Risky Thicket said:
You obviously didn't read my comments in the OP. Proving or disproving it is NOT the subject of this thread. There are many threads that address that topic. Jump on over to one of them and discuss it. Not here. Thanks.
Click to expand...


Good Luck!
 
Risky Thicket said:
You obviously didn't read my comments in the OP. Proving or disproving it is NOT the subject of this thread. There are many threads that address that topic. Jump on over to one of them and discuss it. Not here. Thanks.
Click to expand...

It is a pointless poll since there is no charge of sexual assault other than 100% baiting? Since there is no charge as the poll falsely asserts there is, the poll is nonsensical.

You COULD have worded it in a way that makes sense. For example, "if the accusations against... were proven true?" But you didn't. You assert a false fact as a premise and that accepting the premise is a condition of voting.
 
Accused vs Charged?

If the accusations (charges) are proven to be true and he committed those things, then no he should not be confirmed.

challenge: where is the evidence/proof it happened?
 
Someone lacking such moral fibre should not only be denied the SC they should be fired as a judge.
 
What if people who don’t like answering hypothetical questions just refrained from posting in threads about hypothetical questions?
 
Skeptic Bob said:
What if people who don’t like answering hypothetical questions just refrained from posting in threads about hypothetical questions?
Click to expand...

You angling for a vacant SCOTUS seat? :2wave: :mrgreen:
 
Risky Thicket said:
Question in full: [FONT="][I]If[/I] the charge of sexual assault during a party in high school by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh is true, do you think Brett Kavanaugh… should be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court?
[/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT]Simple question. Simple answer.

1. The question has nothing to do with Clinton or Obama so don't even start with the "What about...?" responses.

2. The question is hypothetical and straightforward. If you want to add conditions to the question ("Yeah, but what if Kavanaugh was only pretending to assault the woman/women" or "What if Kavanaugh was only doing it because he was drunk?", etc.) then start your own thread with all the hypothetical additions you can think of. Don't do it here. I did not include an "Other" response option because the question is a straightforward.

3. "If the charge is true ..." This thread is not intended to be another thread addressing the question or guilt or innocence. There are already many threads where that discussion is taking place. This thread asks whether you would or would not support Kavanaugh's confirmation IF the charge of sexual assault is true.

[FONT="][/FONT]
Click to expand...

I voted yes to the hypothetical question even though I would never vote for him.

Because the real question is, would you vote against someone who was aggressive sexually when drunk, in high school that was never reported at the time and that was 35 years ago.

At some point you are no longer that person so it is not relevant.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
What if people who don’t like answering hypothetical questions just refrained from posting in threads about hypothetical questions?
Click to expand...

Some folks just want to be noticed.

Like the kid who "acts up" when others are around.

Some folks get older, other grow up.

People that do this just get older,.
 
MrMike said:
Accused vs Charged?

If the accusations (charges) are proven to be true and he committed those things, then no he should not be confirmed.

challenge: where is the evidence/proof it happened?
Click to expand...

We don't need proof to not give him a promotion.

This is a complete fallacy.
 
noonereal said:
I voted yes to the hypothetical question even though I would never vote for him.

Because the real question is, would you vote against someone who was aggressive sexually when drunk, in high school that was never reported at the time and that was 35 years ago.

At some point you are no longer that person so it is not relevant.
Click to expand...


Apologies, RT, my problem with your statement is the way Judge Kavanaugh has painted himself into a legal corner with no room for the wiggle. He has also painted himself as a “choir boy.” Now, I understand Kavanaugh is walking back the “choir boy” image a little. This response rules out his qualifications for the job he is seeking.....
 
Rexedgar said:
Apologies, RT, my problem with your statement is the way Judge Kavanaugh has painted himself into a legal corner with no room for the wiggle. He has also painted himself as a “choir boy.” Now, I understand Kavanaugh is walking back the “choir boy” image a little. This response rules out his qualifications for the job he is seeking.....
Click to expand...

You don't need to convince me.

I would never vote for him.

The guy got married at 40 and claims to be Christian? What was he doing all these years?

The guy, on national TV claims to have been a virgin for many years post college?

Sorry, that just ain't normal. I don't want a freak deciding on what I can and cannot do.
 
Risky Thicket said:
You obviously didn't read my comments in the OP. Proving or disproving it is NOT the subject of this thread. There are many threads that address that topic. Jump on over to one of them and discuss it. Not here. Thanks.
Click to expand...

so you want no debate....

you want no discourse

you just want a thread with lots more innuendo trashing a SCOTUS nominee

you lefties can have the thread all to yourselves....
 
noonereal said:
We don't need proof to not give him a promotion.

This is a complete fallacy.
Click to expand...

No it isn’t. Proof of guilt is required.

Are you okay for someone to accuse you (innocent) of something and provide zero proof and yet still think it is fair destroy your career and life?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom