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

OP
WelfareQueen

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,094
Reaction score
7,617
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
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.




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.
I disagree on the level of support you imply. Most folks I know support cause but not riots. My mother in law, lives near Portland, very liberal, wrote a letter to tbe editor, stop the violence, go home, start working on political so,unions. It is a mistake to think that because people refuse to demonize the movement or because they that most of the protests are not violent, that they support those that are,

The fact you had Joe Biden campaign workers in Minneapolis bailing out looters and rioters does not look good. The fact BLM is funneling millions to the DNC also does not look good.

But I cede your point. Many who support the cause do not support the violence.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,896
Reaction score
19,241
Points
2,180
Location
in between
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.
Schumer should bring in aborted fetuses and shriek that 'Justice Barrett would seek to put an end this!"
The question is whether woman should have a say in what goes on in their body. Should a woman be forced to have a baby created by a rapist? Democrats should definitely focus on Roe vs Wade. It is sad to say that people who oppose abortion are creating political suicide. Women in some states could be jailed for having a abortion.
Sooooooo, so, so, so, so many abortions were because of rape, right?
The point is that a woman would be forced to carry the child according to right wing extremist abortion laws. There are plenty more situations where a woman would be forced to carry the child. A woman has a right to choose.
No woman is forced to carry a child. It was HER CHOICE to procreate.

:oops8:
Wow. I had no idea it only took one.
 
OP
WelfareQueen

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,094
Reaction score
7,617
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
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.
No. Women support Roe v Wade by overwhelming majority. As does 70% of America.

Which is why Trump is going to lose big, and Republicans in state and national races are going to pay a severe price in every election going forward.

I am pro choice. You Dims claiming this nominee will destroy Roe V Wade is a lie. You tell the same lie every time a GOP President puts up a new nominee. No one believes you, No one.

Provide a link where any potential Supreme Court nominee says they will kill Roe V Wade, Didn't think so. STFU.
Think a moment. Most of Trump’s supporters want him to nominate judges who will overturn RvW. Trump has stated he will pick judges who will do so. Given that why do you insist it won’t happen?

False. I support Roe v Wade. My entire immediate family does and we all support Trump. The Roe v Wade bogeyman mostly exists in Dem's heads. I personally do not know any Trump supporters that have ever mentioned Roe v Wade as an issue or talked about its repeal.
 

Indeependent

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
44,886
Reaction score
7,837
Points
1,830
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.
Liberal Females are equally insane as Liberal Males.
 
OP
WelfareQueen

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,094
Reaction score
7,617
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
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.
Liberal Females are equally insane as Liberal Males.

As an aside, do you support Roe v Wade being overturned?
 

Indeependent

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
44,886
Reaction score
7,837
Points
1,830
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.
Liberal Females are equally insane as Liberal Males.

As an aside, do you support Roe v Wade being overturned?
As an Orthodox Jew, I do not want the USC to override the conditions under which a Jewish woman can have an abortion.
You may be shocked to discover how sensitive the Rabbis are to the emotional and mental state of the woman.
The Christian point of view is far narrower than the Jewish point of view.
 

DJT for Life

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2017
Messages
3,266
Reaction score
725
Points
195
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's possible that it could hurt them with suburban women. I don't know how much but it is possible.

However, while I immediately thought of Barrett getting the nomination (she almost got it last time),
I'm not so sure after pondering the other candidates.

Here's my logic. The Dems are going to be out of control in hearings. They will attack and slander and make
cpmlete fools of themselves. I'm of the opinion, that the best nomination, "politically" is Barbara Lagora.
She's on the 11th Circuit Bench. She is Hispanic, she is Cuban-American, she is anti-Castro and she is from
Miami. The dems are already underwater in Florida with the Hispanic vote. Cuban-Americans are very, very
tight knit group. They go after her, they give Florida to Trump.

It also would aid the GOP in other states with big Hispanic voting blocks.

I think Trump's best bet is Lagora and dare the dems to say something raunchy about her.
 

skews13

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
3,985
Reaction score
1,528
Points
360
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.
No. Women support Roe v Wade by overwhelming majority. As does 70% of America.

Which is why Trump is going to lose big, and Republicans in state and national races are going to pay a severe pce in every election going forward.

I am pro choice. You Dims claiming this nominee will destroy Roe V Wade is a lie. You tell the same lie every time a GOP President puts up a new nominee. No one believes you, No one.

Provide a link where any potential Supreme Court nominee says they will kill Roe V Wade, Didn't think so. STFU.
The Supreme Court should be Liberal.

And would be except for Republican obstruction of a pick that wasn't legitimately theirs, and the highly questionable retirement of Justice Kennedy, after a very dubious relationship was discovered between Trump and his son.

It should be Liberal for practical reasons, because the majority of America is not conservative, religious, far right, and supports laws like Roe v Wade, gun laws enacted by states like background checks, green energy initiatives that deal with global climate change due to the pollution of fossil fuels, higher taxes on the wealthy, affordable health care for everyone, paid sick leave, strong union representation, getting money out of politics, protecting Social Security, a higher minimum wage, and that's just the short list.

The majority of America supports those issues by overwhelming margins. It's not even close.

The current make up of the court is a tyranny of the minority, plain and simple. This isn't a debate, its a fact. A fact that will be dealt with, to achieve everything on that list of issues, and then some, by any means necessary.

Fortunately, the attrition of conservatives currently taking place, that will put them in a solid minority in just another 20 years, will achieve most of that for that reason alone.

The Founders created our system of government to make sure tyrants, fascists, and religious zealots, will never hold onto power for any length of time, and gave the people a system of government to get rid of them.
 
OP
WelfareQueen

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,094
Reaction score
7,617
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
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.
Liberal Females are equally insane as Liberal Males.

As an aside, do you support Roe v Wade being overturned?
As an Orthodox Jew, I do not want the USC to override the conditions under which a Jewish woman can have an abortion.
You may be shocked to discover how sensitive the Rabbis are to the emotional and mental state of the woman.
The Christian point of view is far narrower than the Jewish point of view.

I would say Jewish scholarship regarding matters of faith is generally much deeper and intellectually rigorous than Christianity. Just my .02 cents. Thank you for expressing your opinion.
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,452
Points
2,165
Your third set of lies. You're on a roll. :thup: The New York Times (The Dim Paper of record} said Hillary lost becuase white women went for Trump 53-47. I posted the link and you still make shit up. But you are a Dim.
You are both right.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
115,248
Reaction score
27,739
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
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.
Schumer should bring in aborted fetuses and shriek that 'Justice Barrett would seek to put an end this!"
The question is whether woman should have a say in what goes on in their body. Should a woman be forced to have a baby created by a rapist? Democrats should definitely focus on Roe vs Wade. It is sad to say that people who oppose abortion are creating political suicide. Women in some states could be jailed for having a abortion.
Sooooooo, so, so, so, so many abortions were because of rape, right?
The point is that a woman would be forced to carry the child according to right wing extremist abortion laws. There are plenty more situations where a woman would be forced to carry the child. A woman has a right to choose.
How many times?
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
22,787
Reaction score
4,838
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman.
And Americans, not being Trump cult morons, won't care. They'll still love the Democrats for opposing whatever fascist Trump chooses.

Adn the Trump cult knows that, hence this thread. They've been ordered by their masters to try the concern troll thing. It won't work.
 
OP
WelfareQueen

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,094
Reaction score
7,617
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman.
And Americans, not being Trump cult morons, won't care. They'll still love the Democrats for opposing whatever fascist Trump chooses.

Adn the Trump cult knows that, hence this thread. They've been ordered by their masters to try the concern troll thing. It won't work.

I am pretty sure you're clinically insane. So there's that. :D
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
115,248
Reaction score
27,739
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
President Trump has already stated his likely New Supreme Court nominee will be a woman.
And Americans, not being Trump cult morons, won't care. They'll still love the Democrats for opposing whatever fascist Trump chooses.

Adn the Trump cult knows that, hence this thread. They've been ordered by their masters to try the concern troll thing. It won't work.

I am pretty sure you're clinically insane. So there's that. :D
I have peer reviewed the above post and find it to be at least 100% accurate!

The Science is Settled!

We have Concensus
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
62,187
Reaction score
13,971
Points
2,220
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?
I think the Dems will use delaying tactics instead of attacking the nominee if it's a woman. I agree Barrett sounds likely as his pick.
 
OP
WelfareQueen

WelfareQueen

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
13,094
Reaction score
7,617
Points
1,065
Location
Uranus
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?
I think the Dems will use delaying tactics instead of attacking the nominee if it's a woman. I agree Barrett sounds likely as his pick.
You're Back!!! Welcome. And please, where are the donuts?
 

whitehall

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
46,627
Reaction score
10,418
Points
2,040
Location
Western Va.
Are you kidding? Democrats know their angry base. Political agenda trumps (no pun intended) woman's rights, capitalism and the U.S. Constitution. Democrats would filibuster Mother Teresa if push came to shove and the media would claim that Mother Teresa was a tool of the Russian government.
 

Dragonlady

Designing Woman
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
25,723
Reaction score
8,184
Points
910
Location
Niagara Escarpment
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 a prepoterous analogy, and equal treatment never means letting someone in trouble 'fend for themselves".

If one your children, male or female is being physically attacked SOMEONE should intervene, but the isn't a discussion about physical attacks. You have no common sense or sense of decency to think that way.

Welfare Queen implies that a female nominee, especially a non-white female nominee, could not be criticized by other women, especially women of colour. To hell with her qualifications. Women must let a woman, especially a woman of colour, pass without criticism.
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.
/----/ democRATs have the FemiNazi Seal of Approval to totally trash any woman that doesn't tow the liberal agenda, especially on abortion. So, no, nothing will happen if the democRATs go after a conservative female nominee. Case in point : Gov Palin was savaged by the democRATs and LSM.
Liberals were right to "savage" Palin. She was and is an unqualified twit, who has done nothing but make a public spectacle of herself ever since she ran.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
31,846
Reaction score
8,620
Points
1,340
Location
Boston, MA
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 a prepoterous analogy, and equal treatment never means letting someone in trouble 'fend for themselves".

If one your children, male or female is being physically attacked SOMEONE should intervene, but the isn't a discussion about physical attacks. You have no common sense or sense of decency to think that way.

Welfare Queen implies that a female nominee, especially a non-white female nominee, could not be criticized by other women, especially women of colour. To hell with her qualifications. Women must let a woman, especially a woman of colour, pass without criticism.
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.
/----/ democRATs have the FemiNazi Seal of Approval to totally trash any woman that doesn't tow the liberal agenda, especially on abortion. So, no, nothing will happen if the democRATs go after a conservative female nominee. Case in point : Gov Palin was savaged by the democRATs and LSM.
Liberals were right to "savage" Palin. She was and is an unqualified twit, who has done nothing but make a public spectacle of herself ever since she ran.
Aha so you pick and choose when women are equal. Got it. What a pathetic hypocrite you are.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
16,794
Reaction score
12,119
Points
2,415
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.
Schumer should bring in aborted fetuses and shriek that 'Justice Barrett would seek to put an end this!"
The question is whether woman should have a say in what goes on in their body. Should a woman be forced to have a baby created by a rapist? Democrats should definitely focus on Roe vs Wade. It is sad to say that people who oppose abortion are creating political suicide. Women in some states could be jailed for having a abortion.
Sooooooo, so, so, so, so many abortions were because of rape, right?
The point is that a woman would be forced to carry the child according to right wing extremist abortion laws. There are plenty more situations where a woman would be forced to carry the child. A woman has a right to choose.
No woman is forced to carry a child. It was HER CHOICE to procreate.

:oops8:
Wow. I had no idea it only took one.
Are you saying women have no control over whether or not they have sex?

And don't come back with the rape BS cuz the number of pregnancies due to rape is miniscule compared to the number of abortions.

I'm sure you will still try...............
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top