# The Kavanaugh Effect. **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 8, 2018, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189 "2018-11-08T14:43:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/61 "2018-11-08T20:48:20Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > Here’s an easy one. From Dr. Ford’s letter to Feinstein. > > “Both were one to two years older than me and students at a local private school.” > > Corroborated or uncorroborated? If its all coming from the same source its not corroborated. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/62 "2018-11-08T20:50:55Z")
There are four Democratic Senators who voted against Kavanaugh who won in Trump States (Baldwin, Brown, Casey, Stabenow). There is also a Republican ex-Senator who voted for Kavanaugh who lost. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/63 "2018-11-08T20:51:48Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > How about the claim that Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker, prone to going to drinking parties? That one’s pretty thoroughly corroborated, and should have been enough all by itself to keep him off the court. Yes, that is corroborated. So explain to me why heavy drinking in high school and college (and even law school) would be enough to keep him off the court? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/64 "2018-11-08T20:52:45Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > As for the OP: > > I don’t think it mattered in the least. Heidi Heitkamp and Claire McCaskill were going to lose their seats anyway, due to the theme that emerged from the election that “red” states got redder. Thus, even if Nelson and Donnelly had not lost, the number for the Republicans would have been up to 53, giving them plenty of margin for losing states like Nevada (where they did lose) and Texas (where they didn’t). It might not have mattered in North Dakota, where Heitkamp trailed all along, but it was huge in Missouri. Many polls showed the Missouri race a dead heat. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/65 "2018-11-08T20:52:56Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > A couple of key adjectives got dropped there. Yes because for some people “a full investigation” means until they find something to hang him with. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/66 "2018-11-08T20:53:16Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Assuming the accusers are willing to continue speaking out (and they may not be), then yes, and yes. If they are not, then they can and should pursue the possibility that Kavanaugh perjured himself (which seems extremely likely, based on all the evidence) in his testinomy. > > They don’t need to make every step a spectacle. But I see no reason why they shouldn’t pursue these things. And I recall multiple Democrats saying that they would, if they were to win either the House or Senate. You see “no reason” why they shouldn’t investigate something Kavanaguh alleged did when he was 16 or 17 years old, and that alleged took place ~35 years ago? No reason at all? None. Zero. Nada??? I’m just glad that Nancy Pelosi has better political instincts than that. At least I assume she does. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/67 "2018-11-08T20:55:00Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Gee, maybe because the results of the investigation might be useful information to those making the decision on whether this guy is appropriate for SCOTUS? Oh so it really is just about the SCOTUS nomination and not really about justice for Ford. That is what people suspected and that is what pissed them off enough to get off their asses and vote. > [@](#): > > We are demanding it, and Democrats said that once they took either the House or Senate, they would make it happen. So we won the House, and we’ll get the investigation in the new year. And if we don’t, progressives like me will howl like mad at our representatives. Who is this we? I think it is high time that the Democratic party tell progressives like you to sit down and shut up because you are the reason we have Trump. We’ve given you much of what you have asked for and its never enough. We can never focus on other issues because there is always another progressive issue that you want before we tackle things that the other 80% of America is concerned about. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/68 "2018-11-08T20:56:35Z")
> [@Chingon](#): > > Was it a ploy of yours? No, it was a ploy of ours. It was transparently an effort to delay the confirmation vote until after the election. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/69 "2018-11-08T20:56:53Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > You see “no reason” why they shouldn’t investigate something Kavanaguh alleged did when he was 16 or 17 years old, and that alleged took place ~35 years ago? No reason at all? None. Zero. Nada??? I’m just glad that Nancy Pelosi has better political instincts than that. At least I assume she does. What’s the big deal? A thorough investigation into a serious allegation is reasonable. Doesn’t need to be a spectacle. And it would show that we actually are trying to take sexual assault seriously. What’s to be afraid of? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/70 "2018-11-08T20:58:25Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Oh so it really is just about the SCOTUS nomination and not really about justice for Ford. That is what people suspected and that is what pissed them off enough to get off their asses and vote. > > Who is this we? I think it is high time that the Democratic party tell progressives like you to sit down and shut up because you are the reason we have Trump. We’ve given you much of what you have asked for and its never enough. We can never focus on other issues because there is always another progressive issue that you want before we tackle things that the other 80% of America is concerned about. No idea what you’re talking about here. Doesn’t seem to address my actual words. Just your own notions of my evil progressivism. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/71 "2018-11-08T21:00:36Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Why does the investigation have to suspend the vote to conduct the investigation? > > And where is the cry and hue for the investigation now that the confirmation has already taken place. It’s almost as if all the Democrats were really interested in was delaying he process in the hopes of winning the senate. If what they really want is justice, why aren’t they demanding it anymore? Are you serious? It was a confirmation hearing. He was confirmed. And it’s a lifetime appointment. If there was an investigation now and it found out that Kavanaugh was murdering underage hookers, he would still hold his seat on the Supreme Court. The Republicans have made sure that justice is no longer possible. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/72 "2018-11-08T21:01:12Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > No, it was a ploy of ours. It was transparently an effort to delay the confirmation vote until after the election. Well I’m glad you found your answer. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/73 "2018-11-08T21:08:26Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > What’s the big deal? A thorough investigation into a serious allegation is reasonable. Doesn’t need to be a spectacle. And it would show that we actually are trying to take sexual assault seriously. > > What’s to be afraid of? And, of course, it’s entirely reasonable to investigate whether a justice committed perjury. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/74 "2018-11-08T21:10:41Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > What’s the big deal? A thorough investigation into a serious allegation is reasonable. Doesn’t need to be a spectacle. And it would show that we actually are trying to take sexual assault seriously. > > What’s to be afraid of? Let’s take a step back. You said you saw “no reason” not to. That is, if you were making a list of pros and cons for an investigation, your “con” list would be empty. You couldn’t think of even one thing to put in that list. Is that correct? The reason I ask is because, if this is true, I don’t think it makes sense to continue the discussion. Best to just agree to disagree. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/75 "2018-11-08T21:12:05Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Let’s take a step back. You said you saw “no reason” not to. That is, if you were making a list of pros and cons for an investigation, your “con” list would be empty. You couldn’t think of even one thing to put in that list. Is that correct? > > The reason I ask is because, if this is true, I don’t think it makes sense to continue the discussion. Best to just agree to disagree. Okay, no good reason. I was speaking colloquially, not scientifically. I figured that was obvious. Jesus. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/76 "2018-11-08T21:13:54Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > It is NOT a claim in her account that has been corroborated! Do you even know what that word means?? Yes I know what corroborated means. Here’s the results of a quick Google. > [@](#): > > Corroborate. To support or enhance the believability of a fact or assertion by the presentation of additional information that confirms the truthfulness of the item. The testimony of a witness is corroborated if subsequent evidence, such as a coroner’s report or the testimony of other witnesses, substantiates it. Ford’s testimony that that Kavanaugh and Judge were a bit older than her and went to a nearby private school has been corroborated by subsequent evidence. Many other details of her story have been corroborated by subsequent evidence. Claims that her story is completely uncorroborated are pretty clearly false. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/77 "2018-11-08T21:20:03Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Okay, no good reason. I was speaking colloquially, not scientifically. I figured that was obvious. > > Jesus. It wasn’t obvious. Which is why I specifically asked for clarification as to whether you actually saw no reason at all. To which you responded: "What’s the big deal? A thorough investigation into a serious allegation is reasonable. Doesn’t need to be a spectacle. And it would show that we actually are trying to take sexual assault seriously. What’s to be afraid of?" That made things even less obvious. But frankly, even saying that see no “good reason” puts us just too far apart, even after I dropped the hint about what at least one good reason is. Here is the hint again: IT WAS 35 FUCKING YEARS AGO!!! You really don’t think that is at least one good argument for letting this thing go? That it was so long ago that it will be near impossible to get to the bottom of it, and that maybe JUST MAYBE the House has better things to do? ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/78 "2018-11-08T21:20:25Z")
Here’s a [Seth Abramson Twitter thread](https://twitter.com/sethabramson/status/1046594628005363718?lang=en) on corroboration. ---
**Author:** ![MortSahlFan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3bc359/32.png) [@MortSahlFan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MortSahlFan)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/79 "2018-11-08T21:33:30Z")
These political “parties” seem to cloud truth. As if they were opposites, when they’re not… You have right-wing, and right-wing lite. And many times a “D” can get away with the most “R” stuff, and vice-versa… Nixon said the last thing he’d ever do was recognize Red China. And it was 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2018, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189/80 "2018-11-08T21:40:48Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It wasn’t obvious. Which is why I specifically asked for clarification as to whether you actually saw no reason at all. To which you responded: > > "What’s the big deal? A thorough investigation into a serious allegation is reasonable. Doesn’t need to be a spectacle. And it would show that we actually are trying to take sexual assault seriously. > > What’s to be afraid of?" > > That made things even less obvious. But frankly, even saying that see no “good reason” puts us just too far apart, even after I dropped the hint about what at least one good reason is. Here is the hint again: IT WAS 35 FUCKING YEARS AGO!!! You really don’t think that is at least one good argument for letting this thing go? That it was so long ago that it will be near impossible to get to the bottom of it, and that maybe JUST MAYBE the House has better things to do? The House has lots of committees with lots of staffers, and they can do a lot of things at the same time, and I think this should be one of those things. Yes, in this moment, thoroughly investigating allegations of sexual assault (and there are multiple allegations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh) against powerful men should be one of the highest priorities of government, and indeed every American institution. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-kavanaugh-effect/824189.md?page=5)