# How Partisan are You? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 3, 2018, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-partisan-are-you/822384 "2018-10-03T18:31:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 23
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2018, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-partisan-are-you/822384/23 "2018-10-03T21:29:53Z")
> [@The\_Controvert](#): > > With respect, I am not attempting to push it away from an examination of partisanship. In the test, the evidence that has come to light is unchanged. However, I do believe the lens through which we view the evidence shades it, through subtle and possibly unconscious means. …we don’t need no “stinkin test.” Leeann Tweeden was a right-wing conservative who went on national TV to claim that President Obama was born in Kenya. Back when she made accusations against Al Franken I said this: > [@Now, Al Franken](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/176): > > …I don’t think her claims on TV are relevant to evaluating the accusers honesty or plausibility at all. Just like I don’t think what she was wearing was relevant, if she was wearing make up or not or what her sexual history was. > > Do you know why sex workers almost never come forward to the police when they are sexually harassed or assaulted? Its because they are judged on their job: they are judged on their past history, and they are (more often than not) dismissed because of a perceived lack of credibility. Accusations should be treated on their merit. And this one has plenty of merit. We have a photo. We have a credible story. We have a contrite accused. You are digging into her past for one reason only: to find a reason to disbelieve her, to dismiss her. Don’t fool yourself into thinking you are doing it for any honorable reason. I accepted Tweeden as more credible than Franken. I accept Ford as more credible than Kavanaugh. I did that not based on the political views of Tweeden or Franken or Ford or Kavanaugh. I did it based on all the information I knew about both cases. So how partisan do you think I am? > [@](#): > > If we really switched the party affiliations, the left and right leaning media channels would be singing a different tune. This is mere speculation: I don’t think what actually happened in the real world bears this out. > [@](#): > > The idealogical echo chamber would change. Your friends might be pushing the opposite side. The evidence might have been presented to you differently. You, yourself might be pushing a different set of arguments because you want to be right and you believe your side to be more correct. Or maybe people will stand by their morals and principals and assess the evidence through an impartial lens, as I and many others did with Franken. > [@](#): > > Some examples of opposite arguments: > > A: I’m with Ford because accusers ought to be believed > B: I’m with Kavanaugh because false accusations without corroborating evidence can be dangerous > > A: Kavanaugh is lying about the yearbook > B: It is laughable to make this about a yearbook from 30 years ago with some juvenile entries. We don’t know that he’s lying; he could be truthful, but his truth happens to not match your interpretation of the entries. And Ford has an equally damning yearbook that would undoubtedly have been trotted out. > > A: Kavanaugh is not a victim whatsoever > B: A good and innocent person had his name and reputation trashed by a hazy, mistaken accusation of sexual assault. He will never be able to work, teach or coach again. His family has been destroyed, because they will be endlessly hounded by people who believe the accuser, or get asked about it relentlessly. He will forever be treated like a criminal. > > A: I believe the women > B: I believe the women also – the hundreds of women who rushed to support the innocent judge > > A: Kavanaugh does not have the demeanor to sit on the highest court > B: Wouldn’t you be pissed if you lived an honest and decent life and some random stranger accused you of a heinous crime that runs counter to everything you believe in? And now you are forever lumped in with the likes of Bill Cosby and Weinstein. And the matter is out of your hands and you have no recourse. The problem with thought experiments is that they reveal more about the person who created the thought experiment than it does about the people the experiment is directed too. We learn a lot about you here from this response. You see things in a binary fashion. You can’t see nuance. You are exceedingly partisan. Unless you want to take the time to listen then \*\*you \*\*are the one that will remain in an ideological echo chamber, not the rest of us. The reality is that Kavanaugh should not have even made the shortlist for the Supreme Court even \*\*without \*\*the allegations from Ford an co. And based on everything that we know the Democrats (as they are at the moment) would never have nominated such a ridiculous candidate as Kavanaugh. And if they did: they wouldn’t have held back any emails. They wouldn’t have continued to back Kavanaugh when they found out his true character. Lets stop pretending that “both sides are the same.” We have clear and empirical evidence that “both sides” are not. We shouldn’t be having this discussion. There are more than enough suitable candidates for the Supreme Court from the conservative side who would have sailed through the nomination process if only they had been nominated. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-partisan-are-you/822384)._