Megyn Kelly warns women: "We have swung the pendulum so far against men, due process"

[Deleted]

Nor did she name Daffy Duck. Now, if she had named someone else but Kavanaugh, that would be significant. As it is, it does not matter greatly.

It's not evidence either or a smoking gun.

It could mean something or it could mean absolutely nothing. That's the point. Her saying that somebody tried to assault her years ago to her therapist doesn't validate her claims against Kavanaugh...

[Jagscorpion]

If you were to convert the question to "Would you support someone for a supreme court position who, while drunk, attempted to rape someone at 17. Since that time he has been a model citizen, with 95% of people who know him lauding his treatment of women, etc..." it might be easier to see why roughly half the people polled would still consider supporting him. Whether this would be right to do or not I can't answer for people, but it's not "support of rape."

edit: I think part of the problem is that a large part depends on how people interpret the question. Some might interpret it as, "If Ford is telling the truth and Kavanaugh either knowingly lied under oath, or was not well aware of how severely drunkenness affected him, would you still vote to confirm?" I'm reasonably certain that those responding in the affirmative would not have been specifically endorsing lying under oath. That's the problem with statistics like this, one person reads it as an endorsement of dishonesty/rape, while another reads it as an evaluation of current character/qualification for office.

[Machismo]

No, the poll said "accusation" not "conviction". And it also said they "would consider voting", not that they would vote for them.

Actually, this was the question:

"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:"

And the options were:

"Should be confirmed
to the U.S. Supreme
Court"

"Should not be
confirmed to the U.S.
Supreme Court"

"Unsure"

It looks like you got caught lying.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-cont...359.pdf#page=3

[Draco-Onis]

No, the poll said "accusation" not "conviction". And it also said they "would consider voting", not that they would vote for them.

Here is the question.

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:

Row one:

Should be confirmed
to the U.S. Supreme
Court

54% of republicans said yes.

Here is the complete poll below

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-cont...359.pdf#page=3

[PC2]

As a man... all these sexual misconduct allegations are coming out now because it wasn't taken seriously in the past.

Yeah it's a good thing to scrutinize the way we have historically looked at things, but ultimately we can't throw out the need for objectivity-based evidence and decision making.

[frogger237]

body cams seem to be working for cops. Maybe everyone should wear a bodycam at all times then we wont need to worry about false accusations and shit.

[McFuu]

So, the facts don't really care about your feelings.

- - - Updated - - -



Then maybe you should have gotten them to take the poll, because those one sure did want to support sexual assault.

Then again, we have one in this very thread.

A Poll isn't a fact. At best, in the perfect world it's a collection of opinions.

[ProfessorTjc]

Polls are not facts, or else Hillary would be president.

Hillary won the popular vote (AKA the poll was fact). The polls were basically "who are you voting for?" and that's how it always worked. Popular vote =/= President Elect.

John Adams, Rutherford Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and G.W. Bush say "Hi!"

[Zython]

If you were to convert the question to "Would you support someone for a supreme court position who, while drunk, attempted to rape someone at 17. Since that time he has been a model citizen, with 95% of people who know him lauding his treatment of women, etc..." it might be easier to see why roughly half the people polled would still consider supporting him. Whether this would be right to do or not I can't answer for people, but it's not "support of rape."

edit: I think part of the problem is that a large part depends on how people interpret the question. If they interpret it as, If Ford is telling the truth then in this instance Kavanaugh either knowingly lied under oath, or was not well aware of how severely drunkenness affected him. I'm reasonably certain that those responding in the affirmative would not have been specifically endorsing lying under oath. That's the problem with statistics like this, one person reads it as an endorsement of dishonesty/rape, while another reads it as an evaluation of current character/qualification for office.

"He didn't rape EVERY woman he met." isn't a defense.

[Nalera]

here is the question.

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:

Row one:

Should be confirmed
to the u.s. Supreme
court

54% of republicans said yes.

Here is the complete poll below

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-cont...359.pdf#page=3

liberal arts college does poll. Finds republicans support sexual assault. I believe you so much.

[Machismo]

A Poll isn't a fact. At best, in the perfect world it's a collection of opinions.

Saying the results of a poll, is a factual statement, even if a person can be wrong, or is stating an opinion.

[Oakshana]

They basically just tried to paint Kavanaugh as a sex offender without a single shred of real evidence.

All those senators should be in jail for slander.

If are a US Senator- you need to be more responsible than trying to convict someone without any evidence at all.

The FBI even questioned the witnesses from Ford's testimony- all four of them couldn't corroborate her story. All four of them!

The dems just ignored that and went all in- Cory Booker even said something like "it doesn't matter if he is isn't or guilty!" Excuse me, but what? What country does Cory Booker live in? He is obviously not qualified to be a Senator if he doesn;t even understand US law.

Who voted for such a pathetic hack?

Ford's lawyer even said "Kavanaugh has to prove he's innocent." Once again: what? Her lawyer did not even understand US law- you are innocent until proven guilty, duh....

Combine that with Schumer saying he wouldn't vote for the last nominee because the nominee was white...... (he said it- it is on tape). How does he even have a senate seat still with clear racism like that? Pelosi too, watch her Youtube vids- listen to what she says.

Like, what the hell is going on with that party? How do they even think America is going to vote for that nonsense?

Do they think America is that dumb?

They tried to slander Kavanaugh that he drank too much beer. Meanwhile- Obama- in his own words- said in a speech before he was President, that he was a "thug" that smoke weed and drabnk beer often. That didn't bother the Dems when they voted him in for Pres, but Kavanaughs beer drinking 30 years ago is an issue for them?

C'mon, please people. There is video now. We see the hypocrisy and racism- its actually on tape.

They need to drop all this nonsense and come back to civility, this "resistance' thing really isn't working out for them- Trump is rocking them across the board.

I don't care what CNN and MSNBC say all day long with their clowns- I don't see the Dems winning those mid terms with this garbage.

I am neither Right nor Left. But one of the biggest issues I had with this whole three-ring clusterfuck was that they had the letter from Ford claiming what he had done when they were in highschool BACK in JULY. And they hung on to it until this last month when it looks like all attempts to get him declined failed. That is honestly pretty fucking awful. If they had it in July, it should have come out in July. Regardless of whether or not there was truth to it.

If someone says "he attempted to rape me" and you sit on it until the 11th hour to use for your own agenda, you are an abysmal human being and politician.

[Jagscorpion]

How am I supposed to take an allegation serious when you wait 37 yrs to tell me a story about a time when you were 15 yrs old drunk at a party with other drunk boys?

In fairness, while I was initially suspicious at the timing of the accusation, the full story of it does match certain patterns consistent with sexual assault victims. This doesn't mean it did or didn't happen, just that the timing does not automatically disqualify it.

- - - Updated - - -

"He didn't rape EVERY woman he met." isn't a defense.

I never said it was a defense. I'm making the point that someone could believe that someone is fit for a supreme court position NOW despite doing something heinous at 17 without endorsing said heinous act, which is what people seem to be using the poll to say.

Edit: I don't believe that there's no due process in actual criminal trials, but I would agree that public opinion seems incredibly biased against men to the point that people will be absolutely certain of someone like Brett Kavanaugh's guilt despite very little actual evidence to suggest it, and then use that certainty to inform their future decisions and trust of the criminal justice system. Obviously the justice system is imperfect and sometimes can have large flaws, but fomenting distrust of police/lawyers/judges only makes things worse.

I'm not entirely sure how and why there seems to be a different process for treating accusations on campuses under title IX, but from what I've read that seems one of the most blatant examples of public opinion shaping how people are treated when under investigation. (is it because there's complaints lodged but not enough evidence to make a criminal case, so the college decides? I legit don't know how that works.)

[PC2]

body cams seem to be working for cops. Maybe everyone should wear a bodycam at all times then we wont need to worry about false accusations and shit.

Yeah as a voluntary thing if they became cheaper and seamlessly come with clothes in the far future. Rationally speaking innocent people would want to have them because it would be a constant alibi when it comes to all crimes. And if you didn't want it to record when your on the toilet or whatever you could just program it to cut the electricity in some conditions.

[McFuu]

Saying the results of a poll, is a factual statement, even if a person can be wrong, or is stating an opinion.

A fact is a truth. A poll is only a truth in that at the moment in time this is what these specific people are thinking. You can give the same exact poll to the same people a year later and get different results.
This is not a fact, it's a snapshot of opinions that shouldn't be taken at anymore than face value.

[Ragedaug]

Here is the question.

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:

Row one:

Should be confirmed
to the U.S. Supreme
Court

54% of republicans said yes.

Here is the complete poll below

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-cont...359.pdf#page=3

You are making my point for me. There's nothing in that question that determines if you are pro-sexual assault.

54% of Republics (out of the 400 or so polled) said that someone who committed misdemeanor sexual assault as a teenager could still be eligible to serve on the Supreme Court. That's all they said. You and I can both disagree with them, but they aren't saying they are pro-sexual assault. Saying that's what they are saying is a lie, and the proof is right there in the question you copied.

Is it your contention that any criminal offense committed as a teenager should disqualify you from public office? Or only the highest offices? Are you upset that Obama admitted to committing misdemeanor crimes when he was a teenager and in college? Do you think Corey Booker should be removed from office for admitting to misdemeanor sexual assault?

I've never been a fan of Kavanaugh and to be completely honest would be in favor of saying none of these people should be in office. I have a feeling you'll defend the Democrat criminals while asking to crucify their Republican counterparts.

[Elbob]

So, sexual assault... which is what he was accused of. 54% seem more than willing to hire someone whom they know has committed sexual assault, to work as a Supreme Court Justice. Now, I have that correct, do I not?

- - - Updated - - -

If I hire some one who has been convicted of speeding, do I support breaking traffic laws? No... I do not. Do you understand the correlation?

No, the poll said "accusation" not "conviction". And it also said they "would consider voting", not that they would vote for them.

I'm just going from the article he linked and haven't read the study thoroughly but... "Republicans (54%) are the only group among whom a majority believes Kavanaugh should be confirmed even if the accusations prove to be true although 32% of GOP voters disagree." The "prove to be true" part is a equivalent to a conviction in my eyes for this discussion. (prove is the key word) I understand they have not been proven nor will they(seemingly).

Here is the complete poll below

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-cont...359.pdf#page=3

Thank you for the link to the poll ;D. I am not sure if you are disagreeing with something I said or just being helpful by direct linking the poll.

[Uncle]

It’s not an insult, it’s an attack on your post’s base validity. Which is easily refuted thanks to search functionality.

You are calling my words diatribe, it is a negative word used in a dismissive manner, you are brushing of my words because, contrary to your claims, you can't refute them.
Keep being dismissive, it won't make my words less true.

Also: why do people keep answering to Machismo? He is a well know liar and as the reputation of making things up, don't feed his delusions.

[Machismo]

You are making my point for me. There's nothing in that question that determines if you are pro-sexual assault.

54% of Republics (out of the 400 or so polled) said that someone who committed misdemeanor sexual assault as a teenager could still be eligible to serve on the Supreme Court. That's all they said. You and I can both disagree with them, but they aren't saying they are pro-sexual assault. Saying that's what they are saying is a lie, and the proof is right there in the question you copied.

Is it your contention that any criminal offense committed as a teenager should disqualify you from public office? Or only the highest offices? Are you upset that Obama admitted to committing misdemeanor crimes when he was a teenager and in college? Do you think Corey Booker should be removed from office for admitting to misdemeanor sexual assault?

I've never been a fan of Kavanaugh and to be completely honest would be in favor of saying none of these people should be in office. I have a feeling you'll defend the Democrat criminals while asking to crucify their Republican counterparts.

You literally just got caught lying about what they were asked in the poll question.

- - - Updated - - -

A fact is a truth. A poll is only a truth in that at the moment in time this is what these specific people are thinking. You can give the same exact poll to the same people a year later and get different results.
This is not a fact, it's a snapshot of opinions that shouldn't be taken at anymore than face value.

And at this time, 54% of Republicans would support Kavanaugh, even if they knew he were guilty.

- - - Updated - - -

If I hire some one who has been convicted of speeding, do I support breaking traffic laws? No... I do not. Do you understand the correlation?


I'm just going from the article he linked and haven't read the study thoroughly but... "Republicans (54%) are the only group among whom a majority believes Kavanaugh should be confirmed even if the accusations prove to be true although 32% of GOP voters disagree." The "prove to be true" part is a equivalent to a conviction in my eyes for this discussion. (prove is the key word) I understand they have not been proven nor will they(seemingly).


Thank you for the link to the poll ;D. I am not sure if you are disagreeing with something I said or just being helpful by direct linking the poll.

But, as has been mentioned, he wasnt convicted. That makes the analogy off. It would be the same, if the person had committed the crime, and gotten away with it.

[Jagscorpion]

You literally just got caught lying about what they were asked in the poll question.

I would say he's re-characterizing the question, just as other people have re-characterized the question to mean "do you support rape." It's not lying, it's just assuming motivation behind the answer that can't be assumed without more knowledge.

Edit: Try to be as precise as possible and give people the benefit of the doubt when interacting. Otherwise you risk looking pedantic. "Oh you said it was 3:58 when it was actually 4:00! You are lying through your teeth!!!!!!!" A mis-characterization is not automatically the same thing as a lie.