Why is Kavanaugh so unpopular?

[Fargobison]

I wouldn't call him unpopular, he is polarizing but this thing has become so heavily politicized that it is what it is at this point.

Perhaps the Dems should have let Gorsuch happen, saved their chips for this fight. Kavanaugh probably still gets rammed through but the GOP would have looked worse for doing so.

[Rookie Yinzer]

It offends me that you think that all blacks have to think exactly the same way on every issue.

I absolutely think that all blacks should object justices who will gut provisions put in place to protect our right to vote.

I am glad we agree on the importance of the Voting Rights Act, that Republican justices have continued to gut. I know you want to separate partisanship from the courts, but the facts are the facts. Republicans appoint justices who chip away at the rights of non-white and non-straight citizens. You cannot climb on moral high ground and shame me for being "partisan" like it is not clear which party will appoint hard-right ideologues.

[Calthrina950]

It offends me that you think that all blacks have to think exactly the same way on every issue.

I absolutely think that all blacks should object justices who will gut provisions put in place to protect our right to vote.

I am glad we agree on the importance of the Voting Rights Act, that Republican justices have continued to gut. I know you want to separate partisanship from the courts, but the facts are the facts. Republicans appoint justices who chip away at the rights of non-white and non-straight citizens. You cannot climb on moral high ground and shame me for being "partisan" like it is not clear which party will appoint hard-right ideologues.

I am not interested in arguing with you over this matter; I've argued with many other posters on this forum already, and enough hostility has been generated as it is. Part of the reason why I identify as an independent is because I recognize many of the flaws in the Republican Party. Those flaws have been magnified by our current President. And yes, many of the decisions taken by the Supreme Court in recent years, such as on the Voting Rights Act, are objectionable as well. But I am still unwilling to politicize the court system to the extent that many on here advocate for.

I know that you are a Democratic Party activist, as evidenced by your posts concerning the election in Georgia. I understand that partisanship drives the way in which many voters see things. But I'm not so partisan enough as to want for our entire constitutional system to be undermined, or for the opposing political party to be annihilated. That to me is a step too far, and much of the behavior, by both parties, with judicial nominees alarms me.

[Suburbia]

Because no one likes Republican policies no matter how much you try to shove it down our throats. You are in power because of gerrymandering and voter suppression.

No one wants Democratic policies either....open borders, welfare on demand without accountability from the recipient, failing urban schools.

Neither party is representative of the people.

As for Kavanaugh, he is seen as a typical white male conservative that is already there on the Supreme Court.

[I’m not Stu]

Kavanaugh is unpopular because he has more skeletons in his closet than most staunch conservative judges. Gorsuch, Alito, and Roberts don't have scandals of the same magnitude as Kavanaugh.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Because he was appointed by Donald Trump.

I liked Goursich more than Kavanaugh.

Hardiman would have been a good justice if Trump nominated him.

Kavanaugh, however, is an ass clown and should not be confirmed.

[Rookie Yinzer]

No one wants Democratic policies either....open borders, welfare on demand without accountability from the recipient, failing urban schools.

These aren't real policy positions held by the Democratic Party. Don't quote with me right wing propaganda.

[I’m not Stu]

Gorsuch and Hardiman are very conservative, but don't have skeletons in their closet like Kavanaugh.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

No one wants Democratic policies either....open borders, welfare on demand without accountability from the recipient, failing urban schools.

These aren't real policy positions held by the Democratic Party. Don't quote with me right wing propaganda.

Don't bother responding to bronz. The "why would any white person vote for Abrams" should have been your cue to ignore him, lol.

[Suburbia]

No one wants Democratic policies either....open borders, welfare on demand without accountability from the recipient, failing urban schools.

These aren't real policy positions held by the Democratic Party. Don't quote with me right wing propaganda.

Don't bother responding to bronz. The "why would any white person vote for Abrams" should have been your cue to ignore him, lol.

I'm making credible statements. Failing schools is a Democratic problem. Just like rising climate change is a GOP issue.

This is why I am an Independent.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

Yet you’re still able to post on this forum and enjoy your day to day life just like always? Doesn’t seem like much of a violation of “fundamental human rights.”

You don't understand what we mean by "fundamental human rights". So I won't go any further.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

I'm not saying that all Democrats on this forum would be in favor of such a move. But many on here have conducted themselves in a manner that would suggest so. And on the Kavanaugh confirmation thread, I made clear that I would have voted to confirm Garland if I were a Senator.

Atlas Democrats do not represent Democrats in general.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Kavanaugh needs to spend the rest of his life as a failed almost supreme court justice.

[TJ in Oregon]

It is sort of strange, especially in light of the political spectrum hermeneutic in which Kavanaugh is almost certainly more moderate than Gorsuch. Not as good of marketing I guess.

[Calthrina950]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

Yet you’re still able to post on this forum and enjoy your day to day life just like always? Doesn’t seem like much of a violation of “fundamental human rights.”

You don't understand what we mean by "fundamental human rights". So I won't go any further.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

I'm not saying that all Democrats on this forum would be in favor of such a move. But many on here have conducted themselves in a manner that would suggest so. And on the Kavanaugh confirmation thread, I made clear that I would have voted to confirm Garland if I were a Senator.

Atlas Democrats do not represent Democrats in general.

Ironically, that's what I would try to argue. Most people in both political bases are decent people, but the people on this forum aren't representative of that. Many posters tend to be overly partisan and to have an overreaction to topics such as this one.

[J. J.]

Do you guys realize who the swing vote on Obamacare was?  It was Roberts.

Here is a chart showing the rough ideology of the current Court:

 

We have two very conservative Justices; Gorsuch does not have a long record at this point so we don't know where he ends up.  There are two very liberal Justices, and two that are liberal.    We have Roberts as being fairly middle of the road.

So far, Gorsuch has not been Scalia reincarnated, nor Alito's soulmate. Maybe he will move to the right, but right now, he is basically the conservative Kagan.

Three things have to happen for the Court to be really conservative.

1.  Kavanaugh has to be exceptionally conservative.

2.  Gorsuch has to become much more conservative.

3.  Roberts, or one of the liberal Justices, have move fairly substantially to conservative side.

Roberts has drifted slightly to the center.   Gorsuch, at least for now, looks like he is far to the left of Scalia.  Kavanaugh, from what little we have so far, appears to be closer to a Roberts than to a Scalia. 

[Hindsight was 2020]

Honestly I think because “Trump nominated a judge who thinks presidents shouldn’t be investigated” is a pretty simple and damaging story for Joe Q. Public

[J. J.]

Honestly I think because “Trump nominated a judge who thinks presidents shouldn’t be investigated” is a pretty simple and damaging story for Joe Q. Public

I'm not sure if it is "investigated" or "indicted."  There is a difference. 

[junior chįmp]

 Kavanaugh, from what little we have so far, appears to be closer to a Roberts than to a Scalia. 

Kavanaugh is one of the most Conservative justices on the DC circuit Court (this is measured by his actual opinions written):



Absurd that anyone thinks the GOP will goof again and end up with a Souter or Kennedy....hell they dont even want a Roberts

[MAINEiac4434]

He is going to end a right that 60% of Americans support and he is rock hard about it.

[Saint Milei]

He will make a terrible justice. He's no moderate and slightly to the left of Clarence Thomas:



Screw every pathetic Democrat that votes for him

Sounds like an amazing candidate based on what you said.



He's an enemy of the 4th amendment so I dont like him. Besides that hes coo

[JGibson]

Because he is the second appointment within two years by an unpopular President that lost the popular vote, when he should only have been the first appointment since Gorsuch's nomination should have been Obama's. But even then, the court is losing a swing-vote and gaining a reactionary that will cement a conservative majority for possible decades. All based on an untrue assumption that Trump and the GOP has that since they won the electoral college in 2016, and have the barest possible majority in the Senate, that their will reflects America at large, when it blatantly doesn't!

This is spot-on about Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Garland.

[Badger]

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

Well, that's because it's true.

Because he wants to kill democracy, and he wants to deny people their fundamental human rights.

That’s what we’ve heard about every Republican SCOTUS nominee for the last 30 years. It’s getting old.

It's unfortunate that many people on here seem to think that the only good Supreme Court Justices are those who are solidly on the left side of the political spectrum.

Not true. Most Democrats would have been perfectly fine with Merrick Garland who was a moderate. Even, Orrin Hatch (before Garland was nominated) said that Garland was a great & qualified judge.

Yet you’re still able to post on this forum and enjoy your day to day life just like always? Doesn’t seem like much of a violation of “fundamental human rights.”

A, that's rather a low bar, isn't it? B, this is a crucial Swing Vote that truly will change the course of American jurisprudence for the next 30 Years period or unless Thomas goes down during a democratic Administration and Senate.

[Technocracy Timmy]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/father-parkland-victim-kavanaugh-shake-hand-supreme-court/story?id=57598458&cid=clicksource_4380645_1_hero_headlines_bsq_hed

He's also a major douche.

I saw Brett Kavanaugh at a grocery store in D.C. yesterday. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for photos or anything.
He said, “Oh, like you’re doing now?”

I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shopping, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to pay for my stuff up front I saw him trying to walk out the doors with like fifteen Milky Ways in his hands without paying.

The girl at the counter was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to pay for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the counter.

When she took one of the bars and started scanning it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to scan them each individually “to prevent any electrical infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she scanned each bar and put them in a bag and started to say the price, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.

[darklordoftech]

Honestly I think because “Trump nominated a judge who thinks presidents shouldn’t be investigated” is a pretty simple and damaging story for Joe Q. Public

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Too many WWC males and Thomas is part of that too. A mainstream moderate female from Midwest, was what Collins wanted Trump to chose from, when she asked him to expand the list