Democrats November edge evaporates after kavanaugh hearing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FiveThirtyEight put out a pretty detailed analysis this morning of how they think the Kavanaugh hearing is affecting midterms: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-kavanaugh-helping-republicans-midterm-chances/

On the House side, the upshot is that the numbers have moved back and forth through the process, but overall Republicans are polling slightly worse now than they were before Kavanaugh was nominated, especially if you look at district-level polls.

On the Senate side, Republicans' odds of keeping the Senate have improved overall since Kavanaugh was nominated (like the House, they've fluctuated throughout the process, but never dipped so low that they were in real jeopardy of losing the Senate). What's less clear is whether this improvement is because they're capturing the support of more swing voters or because their committed base has been energized by the Kavanaugh hearings.00 The piece seems to lean toward the conclusion that it's a more energized base compensating for the GOP actually losing swing voters, based on the combination of the Republicans closing the gap between registered and likely voters, but showing less support in polling at the district level. This means that the resolution of the Kavanaugh vote could affect the outcome -- if he's confirmed, the people who were only going to turn out because they were angry about Kavanaugh probably stay home and the GOP overall fares worse in November (but probably still keep the Senate), and if he's not, the Republicans could end up with more of a majority than previously expected.

538 really led me astray 2 years ago, and I’m not sure I have forgiven them yet.

538 came the closest of just about anyone to calling the actual result in 2016. They took a ton of heat during the election from people who said they were overestimating Trump's chances, they were the ones saying Trump had a real chance of winning in the final week before the election, and their final forecast gave Trump a 30% chance of winning (which is far from nothing) when other outlets were putting him at single digits.

Ok. So they were less wrong than others. But still wrong. They had HRC in the upper 80’s as of a few days prior, and still 71% on Election Day. I would not call that a win for them.

Your logic reminds me of the "So you are telling me there is a chance" scene in Dump and Dumber. Statistics doesn't "win" when the outcome of a trial falls inline with the predicted outcome, nor does it "lose" when the outcome falls into (1-p).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
People these days tend to tell you want you want to hear. No one wants to get their head bashed in (by NPR crazies) for speaking the truth.

Funny how you Libs have learned nothing.

for 2.5 years now you morons have been shouting "THIS IS WHY TRUMP WON" and "THIS IS WHY TRUMP WILL WIN AGAIN" every time dems do something you don't like.

it's like you have a string in your back and this is the only thing you can say. idiots keep idioting.

Nah, that would be you

(Pull string) "Russia Russia Russia!!!! Collusion Collusion!!!!"

no you're the puppet. no you're the racist. this is why trump won. blah blah blah. you have nothing worthwhile to say so you just try to get people riled up. you're trolls. moron trolls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If being against the mistreatment of other human beings (be it subjugation of women, mistreatment of POC, mistreatment of migrants) and willing to speak against those who try to justify it with a perverted version of Christianity makes me a bigot, then so be it.

I'm happy to hear other opinions about the economy (that don't involve oppression of others), education (that don't involve oppression of others), etc. etc. etc., but I'm not going to sit back and suffer the idiocy of people who are racists or sexists in the name of listening to other "opinions".

The twisted pretzel of conservative defense that being intolerant of intolerance makes you intolerant is ludicrous. Save it.

Admirable and am totally with you. But let us not pretend for one moment that the subjugation of women, mistreatment of POC, persecuting gays and other undesirable traits are not rife in other religions and cultures. Having lived in other countries where these groups were mistreated terribly, I would take the "perverted version of Christianity" any day.

Absolutely it is true that other religions and cultures do these things, but it does not excuse the works of the perverted version of Christianity unfortunately influencing the governing of this country. I will not take any of it, any day. Not interested in a "what about..." deflection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
People these days tend to tell you want you want to hear. No one wants to get their head bashed in (by NPR crazies) for speaking the truth.

Funny how you Libs have learned nothing.

for 2.5 years now you morons have been shouting "THIS IS WHY TRUMP WON" and "THIS IS WHY TRUMP WILL WIN AGAIN" every time dems do something you don't like.

it's like you have a string in your back and this is the only thing you can say. idiots keep idioting.

Nah, that would be you

(Pull string) "Russia Russia Russia!!!! Collusion Collusion!!!!"

no you're the puppet. no you're the racist. this is why trump won. blah blah blah. you have nothing worthwhile to say so you just try to get people riled up. you're trolls. moron trolls.

Hey Pee Wee and Francis, take this nonsense to the playground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FiveThirtyEight put out a pretty detailed analysis this morning of how they think the Kavanaugh hearing is affecting midterms: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-kavanaugh-helping-republicans-midterm-chances/

On the House side, the upshot is that the numbers have moved back and forth through the process, but overall Republicans are polling slightly worse now than they were before Kavanaugh was nominated, especially if you look at district-level polls.

On the Senate side, Republicans' odds of keeping the Senate have improved overall since Kavanaugh was nominated (like the House, they've fluctuated throughout the process, but never dipped so low that they were in real jeopardy of losing the Senate). What's less clear is whether this improvement is because they're capturing the support of more swing voters or because their committed base has been energized by the Kavanaugh hearings.00 The piece seems to lean toward the conclusion that it's a more energized base compensating for the GOP actually losing swing voters, based on the combination of the Republicans closing the gap between registered and likely voters, but showing less support in polling at the district level. This means that the resolution of the Kavanaugh vote could affect the outcome -- if he's confirmed, the people who were only going to turn out because they were angry about Kavanaugh probably stay home and the GOP overall fares worse in November (but probably still keep the Senate), and if he's not, the Republicans could end up with more of a majority than previously expected.

538 really led me astray 2 years ago, and I’m not sure I have forgiven them yet.

538 came the closest of just about anyone to calling the actual result in 2016. They took a ton of heat during the election from people who said they were overestimating Trump's chances, they were the ones saying Trump had a real chance of winning in the final week before the election, and their final forecast gave Trump a 30% chance of winning (which is far from nothing) when other outlets were putting him at single digits.

Ok. So they were less wrong than others. But still wrong. They had HRC in the upper 80’s as of a few days prior, and still 71% on Election Day. I would not call that a win for them.

So if you're rolling a die and I say you only have a 1-in-3 chance of rolling a 1 or 2 and then you do roll a 2, does that mean I was wrong? Does that mean rolling a 1 or 2 was actually more likely than rolling a 3, 4, 5 or 6?

People like the PP should go watch horse races and complain that the group publishing the odds was wrong wrong when the odds-favorite horse doesn't win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are missing the point:

It was known from the start that the mid-terms were going to hinge on turn out. The Democrats were really fired up about voting for the various reasons that others have cited. The Republicans were fairly complacent. What has turned things around is the Kavanaugh fracas and the belief by Republicans that he has been hounded and pilloried by Democrats - it does not matter whether this is valid.

I think the Democrats will still take the House but the Senate, at best, will remain in Republican hands and they may even increase their majority.

The thing about Trump is that despite all his nuttiness, he is very savvy politically. He really does not care if Kavanaugh goes down which is why he has stuck with him. If he goes down, you can be sure that he will exploit it to the hilt and enrage Republicans even more and you will likely see a massive turn-out in November. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, Trump will brag about it and drive Republicans to vote because he will say that without a solid majority in the Senate, other appointments are in jeopardy and will cite the Kavanaugh experience.

Democratic incumbent senators in red states are in a bind; their best bet - at least some of them - would be to support Kavanaugh's confirmation. Voting against his confirmation will jeopardize their reelection prospects. Voting in his favor may just possibly help.

We all get the point. We just disagree about what anyone was supposed to do about this. Is your suggestion that we accept this unqualified, dispositionally unfit accused sex predator for the bench because then maybe Trump will keep quiet and Republicans will forget there's an election?

What matters is the end game: the Democrats sought short term advantage with the FBI background check, etc. It has given those who are on the fence cover to vote for Kavanaugh. At this point what can we do to minimize the fall-out whether he is confirmed or not?

If I were Trump, if he goes down, I'd renominate him and urge Republicans to get out and vote so that a larger majority can ensure that Kavanaugh or someone else is confirmed.

Vulnerable Democratic senators are boxed in: either vote for Kavanaugh and have a chance of being reelected or vote against him and risk being voted out by ramped up turnout.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are missing the point:

It was known from the start that the mid-terms were going to hinge on turn out. The Democrats were really fired up about voting for the various reasons that others have cited. The Republicans were fairly complacent. What has turned things around is the Kavanaugh fracas and the belief by Republicans that he has been hounded and pilloried by Democrats - it does not matter whether this is valid.

I think the Democrats will still take the House but the Senate, at best, will remain in Republican hands and they may even increase their majority.

The thing about Trump is that despite all his nuttiness, he is very savvy politically. He really does not care if Kavanaugh goes down which is why he has stuck with him. If he goes down, you can be sure that he will exploit it to the hilt and enrage Republicans even more and you will likely see a massive turn-out in November. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, Trump will brag about it and drive Republicans to vote because he will say that without a solid majority in the Senate, other appointments are in jeopardy and will cite the Kavanaugh experience.

Democratic incumbent senators in red states are in a bind; their best bet - at least some of them - would be to support Kavanaugh's confirmation. Voting against his confirmation will jeopardize their reelection prospects. Voting in his favor may just possibly help.

We all get the point. We just disagree about what anyone was supposed to do about this. Is your suggestion that we accept this unqualified, dispositionally unfit accused sex predator for the bench because then maybe Trump will keep quiet and Republicans will forget there's an election?

What matters is the end game: the Democrats sought short term advantage with the FBI background check, etc. It has given those who are on the fence cover to vote for Kavanaugh. At this point what can we do to minimize the fall-out whether he is confirmed or not?

If I were Trump, if he goes down, I'd renominate him and urge Republicans to get out and vote so that a larger majority can ensure that Kavanaugh or someone else is confirmed.

Vulnerable Democratic senators are boxed in: either vote for Kavanaugh and have a chance of being reelected or vote against him and risk being voted out by ramped up turnout.

As a Dem, I still say Kavanaugh will get confirmed (and was always going to be) and this will be old news a month from now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FiveThirtyEight put out a pretty detailed analysis this morning of how they think the Kavanaugh hearing is affecting midterms: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-kavanaugh-helping-republicans-midterm-chances/

On the House side, the upshot is that the numbers have moved back and forth through the process, but overall Republicans are polling slightly worse now than they were before Kavanaugh was nominated, especially if you look at district-level polls.

On the Senate side, Republicans' odds of keeping the Senate have improved overall since Kavanaugh was nominated (like the House, they've fluctuated throughout the process, but never dipped so low that they were in real jeopardy of losing the Senate). What's less clear is whether this improvement is because they're capturing the support of more swing voters or because their committed base has been energized by the Kavanaugh hearings.00 The piece seems to lean toward the conclusion that it's a more energized base compensating for the GOP actually losing swing voters, based on the combination of the Republicans closing the gap between registered and likely voters, but showing less support in polling at the district level. This means that the resolution of the Kavanaugh vote could affect the outcome -- if he's confirmed, the people who were only going to turn out because they were angry about Kavanaugh probably stay home and the GOP overall fares worse in November (but probably still keep the Senate), and if he's not, the Republicans could end up with more of a majority than previously expected.

538 really led me astray 2 years ago, and I’m not sure I have forgiven them yet.

538 came the closest of just about anyone to calling the actual result in 2016. They took a ton of heat during the election from people who said they were overestimating Trump's chances, they were the ones saying Trump had a real chance of winning in the final week before the election, and their final forecast gave Trump a 30% chance of winning (which is far from nothing) when other outlets were putting him at single digits.

Ok. So they were less wrong than others. But still wrong. They had HRC in the upper 80’s as of a few days prior, and still 71% on Election Day. I would not call that a win for them.

So if you're rolling a die and I say you only have a 1-in-3 chance of rolling a 1 or 2 and then you do roll a 2, does that mean I was wrong? Does that mean rolling a 1 or 2 was actually more likely than rolling a 3, 4, 5 or 6?

People like the PP should go watch horse races and complain that the group publishing the odds was wrong wrong when the odds-favorite horse doesn't win.

I heard a bit of an NPR show the other night where the interviewee was saying that statistics and probability should be given a much greater role in basic math education than things like trigonometry, because most people aren't going to use trigonometry in their day-to-day adult lives but statistics and probability are things we're exposed to nearly every day and that people really should understand better than the average American does. I think there's something to it.

[Anonymous]

A few pages back this PP stated (and others as ad nauseum)

He (Kavanaugh) had SIX prior FBI investigations, and all of them were clean as a whistle. He is a highly respected judge.

This is SJ confirm of those prior investigations:

As part of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to ?#SCOTUS?, the FBI conducted its SIXTH full-field background investigation of Judge Kavanaugh since 1993. As part of these 6 prior FBI investigations, the FBI interviewed nearly 150 different people who know Judge Kavanaugh personally.

Senate Judiciary
?
@senjudiciary


As of this morning, this:

"Nowhere in any of these six FBI reports, which the committee has reviewed on a bipartisan basis, was there ever a whiff of ANY issue – at all – related in any way to inappropriate sexual behavior or alcohol abuse", Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, quoted the tweet and said, "This tweet is not accurate. Committee Republicans must correct it."

See his letter here
https://twitter.com/SenatorDurbin/status/1047592548351574016

Full article here
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/10/03/politics/senate-judiciary-twitter-kavanaugh/index.htmld:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are missing the point:

It was known from the start that the mid-terms were going to hinge on turn out. The Democrats were really fired up about voting for the various reasons that others have cited. The Republicans were fairly complacent. What has turned things around is the Kavanaugh fracas and the belief by Republicans that he has been hounded and pilloried by Democrats - it does not matter whether this is valid.

I think the Democrats will still take the House but the Senate, at best, will remain in Republican hands and they may even increase their majority.

The thing about Trump is that despite all his nuttiness, he is very savvy politically. He really does not care if Kavanaugh goes down which is why he has stuck with him. If he goes down, you can be sure that he will exploit it to the hilt and enrage Republicans even more and you will likely see a massive turn-out in November. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, Trump will brag about it and drive Republicans to vote because he will say that without a solid majority in the Senate, other appointments are in jeopardy and will cite the Kavanaugh experience.

Democratic incumbent senators in red states are in a bind; their best bet - at least some of them - would be to support Kavanaugh's confirmation. Voting against his confirmation will jeopardize their reelection prospects. Voting in his favor may just possibly help.

We all get the point. We just disagree about what anyone was supposed to do about this. Is your suggestion that we accept this unqualified, dispositionally unfit accused sex predator for the bench because then maybe Trump will keep quiet and Republicans will forget there's an election?

What matters is the end game: the Democrats sought short term advantage with the FBI background check, etc. It has given those who are on the fence cover to vote for Kavanaugh. At this point what can we do to minimize the fall-out whether he is confirmed or not?

If I were Trump, if he goes down, I'd renominate him and urge Republicans to get out and vote so that a larger majority can ensure that Kavanaugh or someone else is confirmed.

Vulnerable Democratic senators are boxed in: either vote for Kavanaugh and have a chance of being reelected or vote against him and risk being voted out by ramped up turnout.

+1

Your assessment is exactly on point. The game has turned for the Republicans and there are several ways it could develop to Republican's favor. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, Republicans can point out how close of a call it was and how the Democrats attacked a good candidate, whom the FBI investigation showed no evidence of having committed sexual assault. If Kavanaugh is not confirmed, it's even better - Republicans will drive voters out to the polls with the promise that if they retain control of Senate and House they will nominate Kavanaugh again. Both scenarios will energize the Republican voter base.

Democrats have worked themselves into a very bad position and you can already hear the Democrat senators softening their position. Just like their manipulation of the 2016 election caused the downfall of Hillary, their current manipulation will cause them to miss the opportunity to take control of the House or have a shot at the Senate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are missing the point:

It was known from the start that the mid-terms were going to hinge on turn out. The Democrats were really fired up about voting for the various reasons that others have cited. The Republicans were fairly complacent. What has turned things around is the Kavanaugh fracas and the belief by Republicans that he has been hounded and pilloried by Democrats - it does not matter whether this is valid.

I think the Democrats will still take the House but the Senate, at best, will remain in Republican hands and they may even increase their majority.

The thing about Trump is that despite all his nuttiness, he is very savvy politically. He really does not care if Kavanaugh goes down which is why he has stuck with him. If he goes down, you can be sure that he will exploit it to the hilt and enrage Republicans even more and you will likely see a massive turn-out in November. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, Trump will brag about it and drive Republicans to vote because he will say that without a solid majority in the Senate, other appointments are in jeopardy and will cite the Kavanaugh experience.

Democratic incumbent senators in red states are in a bind; their best bet - at least some of them - would be to support Kavanaugh's confirmation. Voting against his confirmation will jeopardize their reelection prospects. Voting in his favor may just possibly help.

We all get the point. We just disagree about what anyone was supposed to do about this. Is your suggestion that we accept this unqualified, dispositionally unfit accused sex predator for the bench because then maybe Trump will keep quiet and Republicans will forget there's an election?

What matters is the end game: the Democrats sought short term advantage with the FBI background check, etc. It has given those who are on the fence cover to vote for Kavanaugh. At this point what can we do to minimize the fall-out whether he is confirmed or not?

If I were Trump, if he goes down, I'd renominate him and urge Republicans to get out and vote so that a larger majority can ensure that Kavanaugh or someone else is confirmed.

Vulnerable Democratic senators are boxed in: either vote for Kavanaugh and have a chance of being reelected or vote against him and risk being voted out by ramped up turnout.

I think you are missing the point because you are focused on only two of the three branches: a judge who lied and expressed strong partisan views is about to get a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. This body of government is supposed to be the one that balances the other two -- he throws off the balance. This is why all ABA and law professors have come out against him. Listen to the people who understand this branch of government the most. They know this is wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FiveThirtyEight put out a pretty detailed analysis this morning of how they think the Kavanaugh hearing is affecting midterms: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-kavanaugh-helping-republicans-midterm-chances/

On the House side, the upshot is that the numbers have moved back and forth through the process, but overall Republicans are polling slightly worse now than they were before Kavanaugh was nominated, especially if you look at district-level polls.

On the Senate side, Republicans' odds of keeping the Senate have improved overall since Kavanaugh was nominated (like the House, they've fluctuated throughout the process, but never dipped so low that they were in real jeopardy of losing the Senate). What's less clear is whether this improvement is because they're capturing the support of more swing voters or because their committed base has been energized by the Kavanaugh hearings.00 The piece seems to lean toward the conclusion that it's a more energized base compensating for the GOP actually losing swing voters, based on the combination of the Republicans closing the gap between registered and likely voters, but showing less support in polling at the district level. This means that the resolution of the Kavanaugh vote could affect the outcome -- if he's confirmed, the people who were only going to turn out because they were angry about Kavanaugh probably stay home and the GOP overall fares worse in November (but probably still keep the Senate), and if he's not, the Republicans could end up with more of a majority than previously expected.

538 really led me astray 2 years ago, and I’m not sure I have forgiven them yet.

538 came the closest of just about anyone to calling the actual result in 2016. They took a ton of heat during the election from people who said they were overestimating Trump's chances, they were the ones saying Trump had a real chance of winning in the final week before the election, and their final forecast gave Trump a 30% chance of winning (which is far from nothing) when other outlets were putting him at single digits.

Ok. So they were less wrong than others. But still wrong. They had HRC in the upper 80’s as of a few days prior, and still 71% on Election Day. I would not call that a win for them.

So if you're rolling a die and I say you only have a 1-in-3 chance of rolling a 1 or 2 and then you do roll a 2, does that mean I was wrong? Does that mean rolling a 1 or 2 was actually more likely than rolling a 3, 4, 5 or 6?

People like the PP should go watch horse races and complain that the group publishing the odds was wrong wrong when the odds-favorite horse doesn't win.

I heard a bit of an NPR show the other night where the interviewee was saying that statistics and probability should be given a much greater role in basic math education than things like trigonometry, because most people aren't going to use trigonometry in their day-to-day adult lives but statistics and probability are things we're exposed to nearly every day and that people really should understand better than the average American does. I think there's something to it.

Agree totally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
People these days tend to tell you want you want to hear. No one wants to get their head bashed in (by NPR crazies) for speaking the truth.

Funny how you Libs have learned nothing.

for 2.5 years now you morons have been shouting "THIS IS WHY TRUMP WON" and "THIS IS WHY TRUMP WILL WIN AGAIN" every time dems do something you don't like.

it's like you have a string in your back and this is the only thing you can say. idiots keep idioting.

Nah, that would be you

(Pull string) "Russia Russia Russia!!!! Collusion Collusion!!!!"

no you're the puppet. no you're the racist. this is why trump won. blah blah blah. you have nothing worthwhile to say so you just try to get people riled up. you're trolls. moron trolls.

Hey Pee Wee and Francis, take this nonsense to the playground.

sorry. you're right. (but she started it.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are missing the point:

It was known from the start that the mid-terms were going to hinge on turn out. The Democrats were really fired up about voting for the various reasons that others have cited. The Republicans were fairly complacent. What has turned things around is the Kavanaugh fracas and the belief by Republicans that he has been hounded and pilloried by Democrats - it does not matter whether this is valid.

I think the Democrats will still take the House but the Senate, at best, will remain in Republican hands and they may even increase their majority.

The thing about Trump is that despite all his nuttiness, he is very savvy politically. He really does not care if Kavanaugh goes down which is why he has stuck with him. If he goes down, you can be sure that he will exploit it to the hilt and enrage Republicans even more and you will likely see a massive turn-out in November. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, Trump will brag about it and drive Republicans to vote because he will say that without a solid majority in the Senate, other appointments are in jeopardy and will cite the Kavanaugh experience.

Democratic incumbent senators in red states are in a bind; their best bet - at least some of them - would be to support Kavanaugh's confirmation. Voting against his confirmation will jeopardize their reelection prospects. Voting in his favor may just possibly help.

We all get the point. We just disagree about what anyone was supposed to do about this. Is your suggestion that we accept this unqualified, dispositionally unfit accused sex predator for the bench because then maybe Trump will keep quiet and Republicans will forget there's an election?

What matters is the end game: the Democrats sought short term advantage with the FBI background check, etc. It has given those who are on the fence cover to vote for Kavanaugh. At this point what can we do to minimize the fall-out whether he is confirmed or not?

If I were Trump, if he goes down, I'd renominate him and urge Republicans to get out and vote so that a larger majority can ensure that Kavanaugh or someone else is confirmed.

Vulnerable Democratic senators are boxed in: either vote for Kavanaugh and have a chance of being reelected or vote against him and risk being voted out by ramped up turnout.

I think you are missing the point because you are focused on only two of the three branches: a judge who lied and expressed strong partisan views is about to get a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. This body of government is supposed to be the one that balances the other two -- he throws off the balance. This is why ABA and law professors have come out against him. Listen to the people who understand this branch of government the most. They know this is wrong.

^^fixing typo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If being against the mistreatment of other human beings (be it subjugation of women, mistreatment of POC, mistreatment of migrants) and willing to speak against those who try to justify it with a perverted version of Christianity makes me a bigot, then so be it.

I'm happy to hear other opinions about the economy (that don't involve oppression of others), education (that don't involve oppression of others), etc. etc. etc., but I'm not going to sit back and suffer the idiocy of people who are racists or sexists in the name of listening to other "opinions".

The twisted pretzel of conservative defense that being intolerant of intolerance makes you intolerant is ludicrous. Save it.

Admirable and am totally with you. But let us not pretend for one moment that the subjugation of women, mistreatment of POC, persecuting gays and other undesirable traits are not rife in other religions and cultures. Having lived in other countries where these groups were mistreated terribly, I would take the "perverted version of Christianity" any day.

Absolutely it is true that other religions and cultures do these things, but it does not excuse the works of the perverted version of Christianity unfortunately influencing the governing of this country. I will not take any of it, any day. Not interested in a "what about..." deflection.

Right wing rhetorical tactic #304(c): "I know you are but what am I?"