Do Dems Risk Alienating Women by Rejecting a Female Supreme Court Nominee?

[Orangecat]

Real ladies prefer real virile liberal men to incel cons and Trumpbumplicans, yes.

Liberals like you don't even know what a real woman is. Hint: they aren't born with penises.

 

[Papageorgio]

Nah, 'queen, a female GOP justice nominee is like a fish out of water to Dems and libs.

No problem saying momma gotta leave the house.

I agree. But Ms. Barrett is obviously intelligent, and I think appealing. If the Dems try to destroy her does this hurt them with female voters, particularly white suburban women?

It might hurt a small group independent female voters but not much more than that. It would Democrat BS argument that Republicans don’t like strong women.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Nah, not in this case, women will want to see her bullied.

Another case in point why the world would be better if you were never born

View attachment 390971

My pleasure. Truth hurts, eh Jake.

Why is it that the mods allow their fellow cons to troll? If I wrote something like this I'd have a mod on my ass in 30 minutes.

All Azog had to do was comment on the OP with his trolling, but that is difficult for him. He does not get that con females bully each other, so the OP is silly.

Give me an example. I ll patiently wait. You are one of the reasons I am pro choice

There are several examples above that educate you. Study them on how discuss dems will not alienate females in these hearings.

If you deny the above, then you can't read/understand or you are lying.

Hmmmm...nice deflection. World would be better off if you were never born. True story.

So you don't like being a fail. Understandable. That won't change until you understand how to post and critically think. Critically thinking we know both parties bully women on the other side. Not going to change.

Provide one example please. Thanks.

: i
This entire thread. Go back to the beginning and come forward carefully. Once you realize assertions are not facts and require verifiable, accurate support, you will be on your way.

You could begin with giving support for the OP: evidence why Dems attacking a female nominated for SCOTUS would hurt Dem chances in the election, Be careful with RvW, though ~ just a hint. Here is some help on that: " A total of 77% say the Supreme Court should uphold Roe, but within that there's a lot of nuance — 26% say they would like to see it remain in place, but with more restrictions added; 21% want to see Roe expanded to establish the right to abortion under any circumstance; 16% want to keep it the way it is; and 14% want to see some of the restrictions allowed under Roe reduced. Just 13% overall say it should be overturned. " Poll: Majority Want To Keep Abortion Legal, But They Also Want Restrictions

I am Pro Choice. People like you remind me why. But I dont make stupid statements that everyone supports that.

 

[BluesLegend]

Dems have painted themselves into a corner with women. It's going to be very difficult for Dems to attack and oppose a female SCOTUS nominee. Bank on this though, their #1 argument is likely to be abortion.

Why shouldn't it be? Roe vs Wade is supported by 70% of voters. In many states, overturning Roe vs Wade would affect women the most. A woman should have a say since it is their body.

You people have aborted over 50 million babies, it's not the occasional rape victim. Now run away and go lick your wounds.

You can go back to licking Trump's ass. Woman have the right to make the choice. It is their body.

Translation, you people can't justify 50 million abortions got it.

 

[Coyote]

Nope. Not even a little bit. Conservative women are not taken seriously by anyone, especially not conservatives.

Hillary lost the white female vote even though media idiots predicted because she was a white woman other white women would automatically vote for her.
If Dems are highly uncivil to Ms. Barrett I believe that has the potential to turn off a lot of swing or independent female voters.

In 2018, the white female vote split 49-49. In Pennsylvania, white women voted for the Democrat Senator over a Trump disciple by 12 points.

Clinton lost in 2016 because white women did not like Dim policies or her. If your Dim asshole pals beat up on Amy Barrett too hard you can kiss the white female vote goodbye yet again. Trump won the white female vote 53-47.

White Women Helped Elect Donald Trump (Published 2016)

While black and Hispanic or Latino women voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, 53 percent of white women who voted picked Mr. Trump, exit data show.

www.nytimes.com

I don’t think Trump can count on that same level of support this time, Amy Barret or no. His opponent is not Clinton and he has a record.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Nope. Not even a little bit. Conservative women are not taken seriously by anyone, especially not conservatives.

Hillary lost the white female vote even though media idiots predicted because she was a white woman other white women would automatically vote for her.
If Dems are highly uncivil to Ms. Barrett I believe that has the potential to turn off a lot of swing or independent female voters.

In 2018, the white female vote split 49-49. In Pennsylvania, white women voted for the Democrat Senator over a Trump disciple by 12 points.

Clinton lost in 2016 because white women did not like Dim policies or her. If your Dim asshole pals beat up on Amy Barrett too hard you can kiss the white female vote goodbye yet again. Trump won the white female vote 53-47.

White Women Helped Elect Donald Trump (Published 2016)

While black and Hispanic or Latino women voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, 53 percent of white women who voted picked Mr. Trump, exit data show.

www.nytimes.com

I don’t think Trump can count on that same level of support this time, Amy Barret or no. His opponent is not Clinton and he has a record.

We'll see. Suburban moms do not like lawlessness and violence. The polls show that overwhelmingly. And the Dims have been tacitly or actively supporting the riots from the beginning.

 

[Dragonlady]

President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman. The odds on favorite is Amy Barrett.

Ms. Barrett is 48 years old. She graduated Magna Cum Laude undergrad and was first in her Law School class. She taught Law and has been an Appellate Court judge (the level below the Supreme Court) since 2017. She is Catholic, married, and has children.

I think it is safe to assume the Dems will do everything in their power to bring her down. If that means destroying her life and career so be it.

Question: Is this a risk for Dems. If they attempt to destroy any female Supreme Court nominee do they risk alienating female voters, particularly suburban white female voters?

Discuss.

The idea that women shouldn't attempt to discredit a female nominee tells me that you're a man and a pretty clueless man at that. The whole idea of gender equality is equal treatment. Why should an unqualified or otherwise unsuitable candidate be given a pass just because she's a woman, or a woman of colour? Was Sarah Palin given a pass because she's a woman?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Nah, not in this case, women will want to see her bullied.

Another case in point why the world would be better if you were never born

View attachment 390971

My pleasure. Truth hurts, eh Jake.

Truth is always good, and in our cases, I look like a rock star compared to you. Thanks.

Everyone loves bullying conservative women, even conservative women imo will bully each other.

Barrett is 48 years old.
Used to be, before Clarence Thomas, that judges needed to have a lot more than three fucking years as a judge.
Used to be that a SC post was for judges that had broader, lengthier experience.
RBG was 60 years old when appointed, not a fucking rookie.

Age discrimination much? My goodness.

No, azzhat.
Experience discrimination.
Barrett has only three years experience as a judge.
If you couldn't twist shit, you wouldn't be able to post at all, would you?

There have been SCOTUS Justices that never served a day as judges.
" A total of 41 justices (10 Chief Justices and 31 Associate Justices) of the 112 seated (36.6%) had no judicial experience before joining the US Supreme Court. " That's from answers.com, here is a list of all justices that never served as judges:
"

Chief Justices

John Jay..........................(1789 - 1798)....Washington.............Envoy, Ambassador

John Marshall...................(1801 - 1835)....Adams....................Secretary of State

Roger Taney.....................(1836 - 1864)....Jackson..................Secretary of the Treasury

Salmon Chase..................(1864 - 1873)....Lincoln....................Secretary of the Treasury

Morrison Waite.................(1873 - 1888)....Grant......................Pres, OH Constitutional Convention

Melville Fuller...................(1888 - 1910).....Cleveland...............Lawyer

Charles Hughes................(1930 - 1941).....Hoover...................US delegate, Perm Court of Arbitration (The Hague)

Harlan Stone....................(1941 - 1946).....Roosevelt, F...........Associate Justice, US Supreme Court

Earl Warren......................(1953 - 1969)....Eisenhower.............Governor, California

William H. Rehnquist.........(1986 - 2005)....Reagan..................Associate Justice, US Supreme Court

Associate Justices

James Wilson...................(1789 - 1798)....Washington............Member, Continental Congress

Bushrod Washington.........(1799 - 1829).....Adams..................Lawyer

Joseph Story....................(1812 - 1845).....Madison................Speaker, MA Lower House

Henry Baldwin..................(1830 - 1844).....Jackson................Lawyer

John McKinley..................(1838 - 1852).....Van Buren.............House of Representatives

Benjamin Curtis...............(1851 - 1857)......Fillmore...............MA State Legislature

John Campbell.................(1853 - 1861)......Pierce..................Lawyer

Nathan Clifford.................(1858 - 1881).....Buchanan.............Lawyer

Noah Swayne...................(1862 - 1881).....Lincoln.................Lawyer

Samuel Miller...................(1862 - 1890)......Lincoln.................Lawyer

Joseph Bradley.................(1870 - 1892)......Grant..................Lawyer

Lucius Lamar....................(1888 - 1893).....Cleveland.............Secretary of the Interior

George Shiras, Jr..............(1892 - 1903)......Harrison..............Lawyer

William Henry Moody.........(1906 - 1910).....Roosevelt, T..........US Attorney General

James McReynolds............(1914 - 1941).....Wilson..................US Attorney General

Louis Brandeis..................(1916 - 1939).....Wilson.................Lawyer

George Sutherland............(1922 - 1938).....Harding...............US Consul at The Hague

Pierce Butler.....................(1923 - 1939).....Harding...............Regent, University of Minnesota

Owen Roberts...................(1930 - 1945).....Hoover.................Special US Attorney

Stanley Forman Reed.........(1938 - 1945).....Roosevelt, F.........Solicitor General

Felix Frankfurter................(1939 - 1962).....Roosevelt, F..........Law Professor, Harvard

William O. Douglas............(1939 - 1974).....Roosevelt, F..........Chairman of SEC

James Francis Byrnes.........(1941 - 1942).....Roosevelt, F..........Senator

Robert H. Jackson.............(1941 - 1954).....Roosevelt, F..........US Attorney General

Harold Hitz Burton.............(1945 - 1958).....Truman................Senator

Tom C. Clark.....................(1949 - 1967).....Truman................US Attorney General

Byron White......................(1962 - 1993).....Kennedy..............Deputy Attorney General

Arthur J. Goldberg.............(1962 - 1965).....Kennedy...............Secretary of Labor

Abe Fortas........................(1965 - 1969).....Johnson...............Lawyer

Lewis F. Powell..................(1972 - 1987)......Nixon..................Lawyer

Elena Kagan......................(2010 - Pres)......Obama.................US Solicitor General

Nah, not in this case, women will want to see her bullied.

Another case in point why the world would be better if you were never born

View attachment 390971

My pleasure. Truth hurts, eh Jake.

Truth is always good, and in our cases, I look like a rock star compared to you. Thanks.

Everyone loves bullying conservative women, even conservative women imo will bully each other.

Barrett is 48 years old.
Used to be, before Clarence Thomas, that judges needed to have a lot more than three fucking years as a judge.
Used to be that a SC post was for judges that had broader, lengthier experience.
RBG was 60 years old when appointed, not a fucking rookie.

Age discrimination much? My goodness.

No, azzhat.
Experience discrimination.
Barrett has only three years experience as a judge.
If you couldn't twist shit, you wouldn't be able to post at all, would you?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Nah, not in this case, women will want to see her bullied.

Another case in point why the world would be better if you were never born

View attachment 390971

My pleasure. Truth hurts, eh Jake.

Truth is always good, and in our cases, I look like a rock star compared to you. Thanks.

Everyone loves bullying conservative women, even conservative women imo will bully each other.

Barrett is 48 years old.
Used to be, before Clarence Thomas, that judges needed to have a lot more than three fucking years as a judge.
Used to be that a SC post was for judges that had broader, lengthier experience.
RBG was 60 years old when appointed, not a fucking rookie.

Used to be, before Clarence Thomas, that judges needed to have a lot more than three fucking years as a judge.

Elena Kagan has ZERO years experience as a judge you blithering idiot hack.

35% of the Justices appointed to SCOTUS over the years have had ZERO experience as judges.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman. The odds on favorite is Amy Barrett.

Ms. Barrett is 48 years old. She graduated Magna Cum Laude undergrad and was first in her Law School class. She taught Law and has been an Appellate Court judge (the level below the Supreme Court) since 2017. She is Catholic, married, and has children.

I think it is safe to assume the Dems will do everything in their power to bring her down. If that means destroying her life and career so be it.

Question: Is this a risk for Dems. If they attempt to destroy any female Supreme Court nominee do they risk alienating female voters, particularly suburban white female voters?

Discuss.

The idea that women shouldn't attempt to discredit a female nominee tells me that you're a man and a pretty clueless man at that. The whole idea of gender equality is equal treatment. Why should an unqualified or otherwise unsuitable candidate be given a pass just because she's a woman, or a woman of colour? Was Sarah Palin given a pass because she's a woman?

Equal treatment is preposterous. So if one of my daughters is being attacked by a boy, another boy shouldn’t come to her rescue? She should fend for herself. Let me tell you something, you evil, fat troll. Boys and men on average are much stronger than girls and women. Men and boys need to defend and protect women.

 

[WelfareQueen]

President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman. The odds on favorite is Amy Barrett.

Ms. Barrett is 48 years old. She graduated Magna Cum Laude undergrad and was first in her Law School class. She taught Law and has been an Appellate Court judge (the level below the Supreme Court) since 2017. She is Catholic, married, and has children.

I think it is safe to assume the Dems will do everything in their power to bring her down. If that means destroying her life and career so be it.

Question: Is this a risk for Dems. If they attempt to destroy any female Supreme Court nominee do they risk alienating female voters, particularly suburban white female voters?

Discuss.

The idea that women shouldn't attempt to discredit a female nominee tells me that you're a man and a pretty clueless man at that. The whole idea of gender equality is equal treatment. Why should an unqualified or otherwise unsuitable candidate be given a pass just because she's a woman, or a woman of colour? Was Sarah Palin given a pass because she's a woman?

I never said give her a pass. Don't put your words in my mouth, I said attempt to destroy her like they did Kavanaugh. Try your strawman argument on someone else.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are certainly correct about qualifications (or lack of same) to be considered for the Supreme Court. But every single justice on the court, dating back to John Jay, has been a lawyer; each one either attended law school, took law classes, was admitted to the bar, or practiced law.May 28, 2009
Judge: Sonia Sotomayor

Nonlawyers On The Supreme Court? : It's All Politics : NPR

 

[JakeStarkey]

President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman. The odds on favorite is Amy Barrett.

Ms. Barrett is 48 years old. She graduated Magna Cum Laude undergrad and was first in her Law School class. She taught Law and has been an Appellate Court judge (the level below the Supreme Court) since 2017. She is Catholic, married, and has children.

I think it is safe to assume the Dems will do everything in their power to bring her down. If that means destroying her life and career so be it.

Question: Is this a risk for Dems. If they attempt to destroy any female Supreme Court nominee do they risk alienating female voters, particularly suburban white female voters?

Discuss.

The idea that women shouldn't attempt to discredit a female nominee tells me that you're a man and a pretty clueless man at that. The whole idea of gender equality is equal treatment. Why should an unqualified or otherwise unsuitable candidate be given a pass just because she's a woman, or a woman of colour? Was Sarah Palin given a pass because she's a woman?

Equal treatment is preposterous. So if one of my daughters is being attacked by a boy, another boy shouldn’t come to her rescue? She should fend for herself. Let me tell you something, you evil, fat troll. Boys and men on average are much stronger than girls and women. Men and boys need to defend and protect women.

What are you on about? That is NOT what equal treatment means.

 

[busybee01]

If RvW was overturned, the GOP would dissolve in the next national election,

Nah, not in this case, women will want to see her bullied.

Another case in point why the world would be better if you were never born

View attachment 390971

My pleasure. Truth hurts, eh Jake.

Why is it that the mods allow their fellow cons to troll? If I wrote something like this I'd have a mod on my ass in 30 minutes.

All Azog had to do was comment on the OP with his trolling, but that is difficult for him. He does not get that con females bully each other, so the OP is silly.

Give me an example. I ll patiently wait. You are one of the reasons I am pro choice

There are several examples above that educate you. Study them on how discuss dems will not alienate females in these hearings.

If you deny the above, then you can't read/understand or you are lying.

Hmmmm...nice deflection. World would be better off if you were never born. True story.

So you don't like being a fail. Understandable. That won't change until you understand how to post and critically think. Critically thinking we know both parties bully women on the other side. Not going to change.

Provide one example please. Thanks.

: i
This entire thread. Go back to the beginning and come forward carefully. Once you realize assertions are not facts and require verifiable, accurate support, you will be on your way.

You could begin with giving support for the OP: evidence why Dems attacking a female nominated for SCOTUS would hurt Dem chances in the election, Be careful with RvW, though ~ just a hint. Here is some help on that: " A total of 77% say the Supreme Court should uphold Roe, but within that there's a lot of nuance — 26% say they would like to see it remain in place, but with more restrictions added; 21% want to see Roe expanded to establish the right to abortion under any circumstance; 16% want to keep it the way it is; and 14% want to see some of the restrictions allowed under Roe reduced. Just 13% overall say it should be overturned. " Poll: Majority Want To Keep Abortion Legal, But They Also Want Restrictions

The thing that unites them is they support Roe vs Wade. The Republican nominee will not be dealing in nuances. They will be looking to axe Roe vs Wade. That will create a political explosion not seen since slavery was a part of this country's fabric.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman. The odds on favorite is Amy Barrett.

Ms. Barrett is 48 years old. She graduated Magna Cum Laude undergrad and was first in her Law School class. She taught Law and has been an Appellate Court judge (the level below the Supreme Court) since 2017. She is Catholic, married, and has children.

I think it is safe to assume the Dems will do everything in their power to bring her down. If that means destroying her life and career so be it.

Question: Is this a risk for Dems. If they attempt to destroy any female Supreme Court nominee do they risk alienating female voters, particularly suburban white female voters?

Discuss.

The idea that women shouldn't attempt to discredit a female nominee tells me that you're a man and a pretty clueless man at that. The whole idea of gender equality is equal treatment. Why should an unqualified or otherwise unsuitable candidate be given a pass just because she's a woman, or a woman of colour? Was Sarah Palin given a pass because she's a woman?

Equal treatment is preposterous. So if one of my daughters is being attacked by a boy, another boy shouldn’t come to her rescue? She should fend for herself. Let me tell you something, you evil, fat troll. Boys and men on average are much stronger than girls and women. Men and boys need to defend and protect women.

What are you on about? That is NOT what equal treatment means.

She literally said that. “Equal Treatment”. And you wonder why abuses of women are up? Men need to be chivalrous because women are physically the weaker gender. Most of the time. You’re an exception, prancing Nancy boy.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

If RvW was overturned, the GOP would dissolve in the next national election,

Nah, not in this case, women will want to see her bullied.

Another case in point why the world would be better if you were never born

View attachment 390971

My pleasure. Truth hurts, eh Jake.

Why is it that the mods allow their fellow cons to troll? If I wrote something like this I'd have a mod on my ass in 30 minutes.

All Azog had to do was comment on the OP with his trolling, but that is difficult for him. He does not get that con females bully each other, so the OP is silly.

Give me an example. I ll patiently wait. You are one of the reasons I am pro choice

There are several examples above that educate you. Study them on how discuss dems will not alienate females in these hearings.

If you deny the above, then you can't read/understand or you are lying.

Hmmmm...nice deflection. World would be better off if you were never born. True story.

So you don't like being a fail. Understandable. That won't change until you understand how to post and critically think. Critically thinking we know both parties bully women on the other side. Not going to change.

Provide one example please. Thanks.

: i
This entire thread. Go back to the beginning and come forward carefully. Once you realize assertions are not facts and require verifiable, accurate support, you will be on your way.

You could begin with giving support for the OP: evidence why Dems attacking a female nominated for SCOTUS would hurt Dem chances in the election, Be careful with RvW, though ~ just a hint. Here is some help on that: " A total of 77% say the Supreme Court should uphold Roe, but within that there's a lot of nuance — 26% say they would like to see it remain in place, but with more restrictions added; 21% want to see Roe expanded to establish the right to abortion under any circumstance; 16% want to keep it the way it is; and 14% want to see some of the restrictions allowed under Roe reduced. Just 13% overall say it should be overturned. " Poll: Majority Want To Keep Abortion Legal, But They Also Want Restrictions

The thing that unites them is they support Roe vs Wade. The Republican nominee will not be dealing in nuances. They will be looking to axe Roe vs Wade. That will create a political explosion not seen since slavery was a part of this country's fabric.

I am pro choice. Who is “they” in your post?

 

[busybee01]

Dems have painted themselves into a corner with women. It's going to be very difficult for Dems to attack and oppose a female SCOTUS nominee. Bank on this though, their #1 argument is likely to be abortion.

Why shouldn't it be? Roe vs Wade is supported by 70% of voters. In many states, overturning Roe vs Wade would affect women the most. A woman should have a say since it is their body.

You people have aborted over 50 million babies, it's not the occasional rape victim. Now run away and go lick your wounds.

You can go back to licking Trump's ass. Woman have the right to make the choice. It is their body.

Translation, you people can't justify 50 million abortions got it.

Translation woman have a say in this since it is their body. The number of abortions in this country plummeted by the use of persuasion not heavy-handed laws. This will set back the anti-abortion movement because suburban voters will not take a chance on Republicans lest they end up potentially being jailed for having a abortion.

 

[busybee01]

Nope. Not even a little bit. Conservative women are not taken seriously by anyone, especially not conservatives.

Hillary lost the white female vote even though media idiots predicted because she was a white woman other white women would automatically vote for her.
If Dems are highly uncivil to Ms. Barrett I believe that has the potential to turn off a lot of swing or independent female voters.

In 2018, the white female vote split 49-49. In Pennsylvania, white women voted for the Democrat Senator over a Trump disciple by 12 points.

Clinton lost in 2016 because white women did not like Dim policies or her. If your Dim asshole pals beat up on Amy Barrett too hard you can kiss the white female vote goodbye yet again. Trump won the white female vote 53-47.

White Women Helped Elect Donald Trump (Published 2016)

While black and Hispanic or Latino women voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, 53 percent of white women who voted picked Mr. Trump, exit data show.

www.nytimes.com

I don’t think Trump can count on that same level of support this time, Amy Barret or no. His opponent is not Clinton and he has a record.

We'll see. Suburban moms do not like lawlessness and violence. The polls show that overwhelmingly. And the Dims have been tacitly or actively supporting the riots from the beginning.

Suburban women are not housewives either. This is not the 1950s. The polls show women overwhelmingly support Biden. Democrats have not supported riots. Educated women do not buy your garbage..

 

[JakeStarkey]

She literally said that. “Equal Treatment”. And you wonder why abuses of women are up? Men need to be chivalrous because women are physically the weaker gender. Most of the time. You’re an exception, prancing Nancy boy.

You are misquoting her meaning, Azog. You could not her your own against her. Now do not alienate the liberal women, my friend: they vote.

 

[Dragonlady]

Nope. Not even a little bit. Conservative women are not taken seriously by anyone, especially not conservatives.

Hillary lost the white female vote even though media idiots predicted because she was a white woman other white women would automatically vote for her.
If Dems are highly uncivil to Ms. Barrett I believe that has the potential to turn off a lot of swing or independent female voters.

In 2018, the white female vote split 49-49. In Pennsylvania, white women voted for the Democrat Senator over a Trump disciple by 12 points.

Clinton lost in 2016 because white women did not like Dim policies or her. If your Dim asshole pals beat up on Amy Barrett too hard you can kiss the white female vote goodbye yet again. Trump won the white female vote 53-47.

White Women Helped Elect Donald Trump (Published 2016)

While black and Hispanic or Latino women voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, 53 percent of white women who voted picked Mr. Trump, exit data show.

www.nytimes.com

Clinton lost in 2016 because voters of both sexes stayed home. Trump won with fewer votes than Mitt Romney received in his losing effort in 2012. 2016 was the lowest voter turn out in years. That won't happen this year.