Althouse: At the Freedom Café...

October 9, 2018

At the Freedom Café...

... you're free to talk all night (and shop Amazon through the Althouse Portal all night).

134 comments:

Ignorance is Bliss said...: You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for

She has a point. Trump did promise to drain the swamp.; 10/9/18, 7:49 PM
walter said...: Gonna weigh in on Sen. Baldwin vs Vuky debate, Althouse?
https://youtu.be/TF_VnN1FWqs
You seem pretty hands off with her..; 10/9/18, 7:56 PM
Jersey Fled said...: Freedom Skateshop?

There was a group of 4 or 5 boys who used to hang out in the shopping center where I had a small shop. I watched them for years trying to hit what I guess is a pretty basic skateboard stunt - basically flipping the skate in the air and landing on it again. They did it hour after hour. I never saw them hit it once.; 10/9/18, 7:57 PM
Ray - SoCal said...: Sigh, why won’t Hillary just go away?

She’s the gift, that keeps on giving.

I’m surprised she actually said that, how tone deaf, but typical.

Positive, is more votes for the GOP!; 10/9/18, 7:58 PM
traditionalguy said...: Iowa sure likes Trump. He must be good for the Midwest. He is making farmers great again. The crowd knows all the lines and recites them with their leader. Imagine what a crowd like that would cost Soros. And Trump's crowd shows up for free. That is the art of the deal done right.; 10/9/18, 7:59 PM
Andrew said...: I'm assuming that Trump is going to drop some bombs this month, before the midterms. I expect that at the very least he will declassify more "Russia collusion" docs, and expose the true nature of the scandal. I also hold out the hope that Justice Kavanaugh will be vindicated, and Dr. Ford exposed. (Sen. Feinstein was clearly worried about something, if you've seen the close-up video of her behind Schumer.)

I'm curious what the rest of you think. What will be the October surprises that potentially alter the course of the election? What "3d chess moves" will Trump be playing next?; 10/9/18, 8:00 PM
rehajm said...: Hill didn’t get enough face time on TV vs the competition. Warren wasn’t even on the committee and she got good air time. That cannot stand.; 10/9/18, 8:01 PM
Original Mike said...: “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about," Clinton said in an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour. "That's why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and/or the Senate, that's when civility can start again.”

So, the democrats are the uncivil partner here. You heard it from the horse’s mouth.; 10/9/18, 8:02 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: I went to hear the Supreme Court arguments today. In a remarkable display of poor judicial temperament, Kavanaugh badgered the attorneys and interrupted his colleagues when they tried to ask the attorneys questions. About halfway through, he declared it was "Miller Time" and started chugging beers until he became a "sloppy drunk." At this point, slurring his words, he yelled, "Hell yeah I [burp] I [burp] did it! I moved on little Chrissy like a bitch! When you're a senior on the football team, they just let you grind into them!" At which point, he dozed off, snoring lightly. When the argument concluded, Kagan elbowed him to wake up. He stood up, pinballed off the bench, and stumbled back behind the curtains.; 10/9/18, 8:02 PM
rehajm said...: I saw an artist rendering of the Supremes- it looked like RBG was asleep...; 10/9/18, 8:04 PM
Anonymous said...: @Andrew I don't think there is going to be an October surprise from Trump. There may be one from the Congressional committees, but I think the Dems screwed up so badly with Kavanaugh that Trump doesn't want to be seen as playing that kind of sleazy gotcha game right now. Now is the time for a bit of being the class act in town. I think his best move is to keep hammering on the economy and the Democrats' outrageous behavior. Let the DOJ/FBI malfeasance simmer then bury any number of people after the mid-term when Dem screaming will have absolutely no effect.

Best case Rosenstein goes and takes Mueller with him, or Rosenstein stays and forces Mueller to close up shop. Big changes after the mid-term. I hope for some serious blood letting.; 10/9/18, 8:10 PM
Roughcoat said...: Agree with Khesanh. Trump doesn't need an October Surprise. The Democrats are self-destructing quite nicely, so why bother? Surprises can backfire.; 10/9/18, 8:16 PM
Hagar said...: After watching the swearing in show, I began wondering if Justice Kennedy arranged this deal, i.e. offered to resign if Trump would nominate Kavanaugh as his replacement, and it would be a win-win all around.; 10/9/18, 8:17 PM
Roughcoat said...: I'm almost ready to declare Trump the most astute, adroit politician of our time. Maybe I will, after the midterms.

He's also the best, most effective president in recent memory. So far.; 10/9/18, 8:19 PM
YoungHegelian said...: Today, when I thought about all the recent left-wing protest activity I asked myself 'Where did all the money to organize this stuff come from?". And, then I remembered. I wonder how much of the money was funneled from the Obama admin Wall Street Settlements.; 10/9/18, 8:28 PM
stevew said...: RBG isn't sleeping, she has that old person, rounded shoulder thing going on.

Sox are up 4-0 in the 5th. Too early to be confident, Yankees can put up a lot runs in a hurry.

I'm 61, working in a high-tech field in which the average age is mid to low 30's. Time is running out. I work hard and produce, but sooner or later someone is going to wake up and decide they can pay someone younger half what they pay me for similar output. They'll fuss and kvetch over how they can legally move me out. Little do they know that a decent severance package would make that immediately possible.

-sw; 10/9/18, 8:33 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: Baldwin is polling 12 points ahead of Vukmir.; 10/9/18, 8:34 PM
rehajm said...: I’m taking the over on RBG outlasting Trump, even when he gets a second term.

But only a modest wager...; 10/9/18, 8:40 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: Real Clear Politics Generic Congressional Vote Poll

Looks like Republicans didn’t get the bump they were looking for.; 10/9/18, 8:40 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: In reality, Justice Kavanaugh displayed impeccable judicial temperament today, as he always does while on the bench. A couple of times, he and Kagan started asking their questions at the same time. He stopped to let her go first both times. Another time, he interrupted a lawyer to ask a question -- something judges do all the time -- but then he did something judges rarely do. He said, "sorry for interrupting you."; 10/9/18, 8:45 PM
Humperdink said...: "I’m taking the over on RBG outlasting Trump, even when he gets a second term."

This will be interesting to watch. In the truest sense, RBG will leave the Supreme Court "quietly", as in feet first. How will it be played as her health fails?; 10/9/18, 8:49 PM
rhhardin said...: Melania breaks silence ... First Lady sits down for solo TV interview ... Talks about husband's infidelity ... MORE

Women love this stuff.

Assuming Trump comes off as the bad guy.; 10/9/18, 8:53 PM
gilbar said...: rehajm said...
I’m taking the over on RBG outlasting Trump, even when he gets a second term.

It's very hard to die, when you're a reanimated corpse; 10/9/18, 8:54 PM
rhhardin said...: Mueller will deliver a bombshell this month, just as a show of bad character.; 10/9/18, 8:54 PM
walter said...: Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
Baldwin is polling 12 points ahead of Vukmir.
-
Incumbency and $$$$..certainly not based on her performance...mindless Dem lockstep she is..; 10/9/18, 8:57 PM
steve uhr said...: Since Trump believes Ford's testimony was a hoax, presumably he will ask doj to investigate subornation of perjury by us senators. Oh wait, such a criminal investigation would have to look at whether Ford's testimony was truthful or not. Guess we won't see any referral after all.; 10/9/18, 8:57 PM
madAsHell said...: I never saw them hit it once.

Sexual frustration writ large!!; 10/9/18, 8:58 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: If RBG's health declines to the point where any rational person would retire, but Trump is still President, she will arrange for someone else to run things in her chambers. As long as she can croak out her vote during the justices' conferences, she'll stay on the Court.; 10/9/18, 8:59 PM
JackWayne said...: As an Astros fan, I’m damn glad the Yanks are going to be eliminated. The east coast writers and broadcasters can’t see past the Appalachians. Bergman nailed it with a tweet today, pointing out it’s nice for the world champs to finally get a prime time game.; 10/9/18, 9:00 PM
wildswan said...: "if we ... win back the House and/or the Senate, that's when civility can start again.”

When we get power, you guys can be civil - or else.; 10/9/18, 9:01 PM
Michael K said...: I began wondering if Justice Kennedy arranged this deal, i.e. offered to resign if Trump would nominate Kavanaugh as his replacement, and it would be a win-win all around.

I think that was the deal.Did you notice Kennedy swearing him in ?

This feels like 1994 to me, not matter what Inga imagines.; 10/9/18, 9:01 PM
walter said...: But..her super-duper workout regimen!; 10/9/18, 9:01 PM
Michael K said...: Oh wait, such a criminal investigation would have to look at whether Ford's testimony was truthful or not. Guess we won't see any referral after all.

I think they will probably let her sink into deserved obscurity but individuals, like those that exposed the Bush AWOL Hoax, will keep digging. We might even get copies of her therapist notes and her polygraph.

Wouldn't that be interesting.; 10/9/18, 9:03 PM
Rusty said...: That would be the senates job,steve. And since Ford and friends could offer no evidence that anything happened between herself and Kavenaugh then, yes prosecution for purjury would be in order.
Kavenagh, if he were a vindictive man, could go after her and Pelosi for defamation.; 10/9/18, 9:05 PM
madAsHell said...: I don't think there is going to be an October surprise from Trump.

Agreed!! This reminds me of something that Napoleon said.; 10/9/18, 9:06 PM
walter said...: U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin was supposed to get some fundraising help from two lawyers who represent the woman who has accused U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault.

Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, longtime Baldwin supporters, were scheduled to a host a "cocktails and conversation" event with the first-term senator scheduled for Oct. 1 in Washington, D.C.

The Baldwin campaign said another fundraising event will be held that date without the involvement of the lawyers.

An old email invitation had their names listed as hosts.

Katz and Banks represent Christine Blasey Ford, a research psychologist, who has accused Kavanaugh of assault while they were in high school in suburban Maryland.

Since 2011, Banks has given the Wisconsin senator $5,200 and Katz has given $8,100, records show.

Baldwin announced her opposition to Kavanaugh shortly after he was nominated by President Donald Trump to fill the seat vacated by retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Responding to news of the invitation, Baldwin's challenger, Republican Leah Vukmir, blasted the first-term senator.

"In the most despicable manner, Senator Baldwin, who opposed Judge Kavanaugh within 48 hours of his nomination and refused to meet with him, planned a political fundraiser with the lawyers of Dr. Ford who is now accusing him of sexual assault," Vukmir said in a statement.

Baldwin has said she'll meet with Kavanaugh.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/09/20/lawyers-kavanaugh-accuser-no-longer-host-baldwin-fundraiser/1369843002/

(meeting never happened); 10/9/18, 9:07 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: "I think they will probably let her sink into deserved obscurity but individuals, like those that exposed the Bush AWOL Hoax, will keep digging. We might even get copies of her therapist notes and her polygraph.

Wouldn't that be interesting."

It will also be interesting if someone records her talking in a normal voice, rather than the "little girl" voice she used at the hearing.; 10/9/18, 9:07 PM
Ken B said...: Uhr
I notice you didn’t ask for an investigation into her lawyers. But she testified that she did not know of the offer to travel to her. (That's odd since I knew about it.) Either she lied or they committed a disbarment offense. Investigation of them will let us know which. But you aren’t interested are you? You don’t really believe they lied to their client, do you?; 10/9/18, 9:08 PM
walter said...: Blogger Mr. Majestyk said...
It will also be interesting if someone records her talking in a normal voice, rather than the "little girl" voice she used at the hearing.
--
The "cloth" is mighty!; 10/9/18, 9:09 PM
wildswan said...: Robert Plomin and other behavior geneticists are publishing new research based on new techniques of genome wide analysis that shows, they say, that our personality, behavior and character traits are in our DNA. This presents me with a moral dilemma. If I accept these results of "science" then I have a powerful argument to prove "scientifically" in the way the secular culture accepts, what I have long contended - that we are persons from the moment of conception. But I know this "research" is coming from eugenic society members many of whom featured in the debates of the Nineties on the Bell Curve as supporters of Charles Murray in The Bell Curve or as researchers who work he used. They are the baddies. Dancing with the devil usually works out badly. So .... Hmmm.; 10/9/18, 9:12 PM
walter said...: Ken B said...he testified that she did not know of the offer to travel to her.
--
It was "unclear to her.
I mean, talkin' weasel words...; 10/9/18, 9:20 PM
Anonymous said...: @ Inga Not to burst your bubble , but you will note that all those polls were taken before the Senate vote. They may or may not be accurate, but they precede whatever bump has been touted. At this stage of the game, no polls and certainly no coverage by the MSM can be trusted to reflect reality. Regardless of which side one is rooting for wagering a lot of money based onpolls is a fool's errand.; 10/9/18, 9:27 PM
Michael K said...: Blogger gilbar said...
rehajm said...
I’m taking the over on RBG outlasting Trump, even when he gets a second term.

It's very hard to die, when you're a reanimated corpse

Check the taxidermists in the DC area.; 10/9/18, 9:28 PM
walter said...: Roy Orbison is on tour..; 10/9/18, 9:33 PM
Anonymous said...: @madasHell "Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake" Sound advice.; 10/9/18, 9:33 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: I sometimes wonder how the Dems would have tried to take down Judge Kethledge if Trump had nominated him instead of Kavanaugh.; 10/9/18, 9:34 PM
Jupiter said...: Inga...Allie Oop said...

"Looks like Republicans didn’t get the bump they were looking for."

"Deal!" cried the losers, as the winners laughed and joked.; 10/9/18, 9:34 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: Yankees are goin’ down!; 10/9/18, 9:36 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: “Inga Not to burst your bubble , but you will note that all those polls were taken before the Senate vote.”

The Senate vote took place on Oct. 6th. The CNN Poll took place over 10/ 4 to 10/7. Democrats up by 13.; 10/9/18, 9:38 PM
Michael K said...: Inga is in for a shock.; 10/9/18, 9:42 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: @Majestyk,

The Dems were loaded for bear against anyone perceived to be the 5th vote against Roe. Didn’t matter if it was Kavanaugh, Kethledge, Barrett or anyone else. If Merrick Garland were to express even a smidgen of doubt about Roe, he’d be dropped like a hot sweet potato too.; 10/9/18, 9:42 PM
brylun said...: Just wondering how accurate the CNN poll was in 2016?; 10/9/18, 9:43 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: I decided to use my writing impulse for something other than blog comments and got a book published.

New Persia: Before the Storm.

Any other authors besides Michael K here?; 10/9/18, 9:45 PM
Anonymous said...: RBG: life expectancy tables give her 7 more years. She must have read them and figures she can make it. I am willing to bet against the tables.; 10/9/18, 9:46 PM
Big Mike said...: @steve uhr, I assume that Feinstein knows that a thorough investigation of Ford’s claims would not turn up anything damaging to Kavanaugh, or else she would have gotten the FBI right on it back in July, when she first received Ford’s letter.; 10/9/18, 9:50 PM
Birkel said...: brylun,
The correct perspective on CNN is "how close to actual election results were the CNN polls from four weeks before the election."

The results are not pretty.; 10/9/18, 9:51 PM
walter said...: She's also a colon and pancreatic cancer survivor; 10/9/18, 9:53 PM
walter said...: I want to see a Ginsburg + Obama workout video..; 10/9/18, 9:55 PM
Michael K said...: A pretty good analysis of the Kavanagh hysteria.

spoiler, Inga won't like it.; 10/9/18, 9:55 PM
steve uhr said...: Ken B. You have mischaracterized her testimony but I have no problem investigating all the players in this sorry episode.; 10/9/18, 9:58 PM
steve uhr said...: Question -If Ford was lying, why did she place Judge in the room? So there would be two eye witnesses refuting her testimony instead of one? Doesn't make sense.; 10/9/18, 10:01 PM
Ken B said...: No uhr. Her lawyers have a responsibility to make the issue clear, and it really is impossible to be “unclear” about the offer. You are simply making the case she lied.; 10/9/18, 10:01 PM
exhelodrvr1 said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/9/18, 10:02 PM
Big Mike said...: I wonder what those polling firms were actually measuring when they do a generic Congressional vote poll. One firm says Dems up +2., another says Dems +14. I’ve had numerous graduate-level statistics courses, so I am prepared to accept some variance as being natural. But that much variability is ridiculous.; 10/9/18, 10:03 PM
Darrell said...: If Ford was telling the truth, would she have left her best friend there with two potential rapists, having just attacked her? It would be one of the biggest dick moves ever, if she did.; 10/9/18, 10:04 PM
Darrell said...: Judge was placed in the room because they thought he was a weak link, one they could get a soundbite out of. Like. I guess since I have blackouts, it could have happened as she said.; 10/9/18, 10:07 PM
walter said...: Hard to believe these polls account for Republican voting folk who would never reveal that to pollsters.; 10/9/18, 10:09 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: "Question -If Ford was lying, why did she place Judge in the room? So there would be two eye witnesses refuting her testimony instead of one? Doesn't make sense."

Judge was a friend of Kavanaugh who was a hard drinker who became an alcoholic. So placing Judge in the room gave credence to Ford's claim that Kavanaugh was drunk that night and the type of guy who *would* get drunk. At the same time, because Judge was friend of Kavanaugh and a drunk (indeed, a blackout drunk), that would make his denial of the attack easy to explain away.; 10/9/18, 10:11 PM
Gahrie said...: The Senate vote took place on Oct. 6th. The CNN Poll took place over 10/ 4 to 10/7. Democrats up by 13.

Hillary was a lock.; 10/9/18, 10:24 PM
Inga...Allie Oop said...: Wow the mob at the Trump rally screaming “Lock her up”, meaning lock up 85 year old Diane Feinstein.; 10/9/18, 10:28 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: Let's be honest about the House poll numbers. They suck for R's. The Senate poll numbers look good for R's. If you think the House numbers are BS, then why are the Senate numbers any good?

More likely than not, there's going to be a Democratic House. They'll have two years to cause trouble. Who knows after that.

I've lived long enough to see a lot of elections, and the polls are wrong rarely enough that it's a big deal when it happens. The only time I remember a House election shocker was 1994.; 10/9/18, 10:30 PM
Darrell said...: Maybe they heard of Feinstein's twenty-year Chinese spy that the MSM refused to talk about.; 10/9/18, 10:33 PM
walter said...: Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
Wow the mob at the Trump rally screaming “Lock her up”, meaning lock up 85 year old Diane Feinstein.
--
She's too old?; 10/9/18, 10:34 PM
narciso said...: Oh that detail:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/freebeacon.com/politics/new-yorker-reporter-suggests-ran-ramirez-accusation-show-true-pattern/amp/; 10/9/18, 10:34 PM
Churchy LaFemme: said...: If Ford was telling the truth, would she have left her best friend there with two potential rapists, having just attacked her?

You might, Rabbit, you might.; 10/9/18, 10:36 PM
narciso said...: Yes but Cavanaugh or something:

http://tennesseestar.com/2018/08/29/police-records-show-keith-ellison-abused-another-woman-in-2005/amp/?__twitter_impression=true; 10/9/18, 10:37 PM
walter said...: You may be right John lynch,
Bu do polling techniques factor in aversion to disclosure? (post..err..'94); 10/9/18, 10:37 PM
Gahrie said...: Wow the mob at the Trump rally screaming “Lock her up”, meaning lock up 85 year old Diane Feinstein.

If so, that's a switch. The "lock her up" chant is usually aimed at Hillary.; 10/9/18, 10:39 PM
Trumpit said...: "Question -If Ford was lying, why did she place Judge in the room? So there would be two eye witnesses refuting her testimony instead of one? Doesn't make sense."

Good point. Was Mr. Judge a figment of her imagination, too? Some imagination! The Deplorable Trumptard Trolls twist the truth to align with their woeful prejudices, and suit their infantile psychological needs. They are liars, fools, misogynists and damnable trolls. Schlump is the worst of the worst. These absurd commenters are best ignored. May the big lie stick in their throats.; 10/9/18, 10:39 PM
FullMoon said...: Liberal Logic. Defending a Ohio University Student Senate member who claimed to have received death threats arrested for making false alarms

"Ashley Adams 2 hours ago

So what? The fact it didn't happen isn't what matters. What matters is that it could have happened. Had the police not treated the victim as a suspect, then they wouldn't have investigated her. Instead they would have focused on educating the public to not be homophobic bigots. The fact their story was questioned is unacceptable. The police re-victimized them by questioning their story. It doesn't matter if it happened or not. The questions of looking into them should have never happened to begin with. Had they not done that, then this could have been used to get out positive messages against homophobic hate. Instead it is now being used to attacked a member of LGBTQ+ community. That's shameful and disgusting.

As soon as they saw that maybe the threats came from them, they should have stopped the investigation. There was no reason for them to continue or to make them out to be a criminal. They could have got rid of the data that pointed to them, and let them continue on with spreading the message against anti-gay hatred."; 10/9/18, 10:39 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: I've noticed before elections the side which is about to lose drums up a lot of hopeful bullshit to talk themselves into winning. It never works. I stopped reading a lot of pundits after the 2006 election when they spent October shoveling happy talk bullshit to their Republican readers when all polls showed what a train wreck the election was going to be for the GOP.

What matters is the votes. Polling is how we guess how that will go. Doesn't always work, but it's what we have, so we need to take it seriously.

I guarantee Republicans would rather have the poll numbers reversed.; 10/9/18, 10:41 PM
Gahrie said...: So what? The fact it didn't happen isn't what matters

This should be the new slogan of the Democratic Party.; 10/9/18, 10:41 PM
walter said...: " guarantee Republicans would rather have the poll numbers reversed."
Of course,
but doesn't address my question.; 10/9/18, 10:43 PM
Anonymous said...: The Sox squeaked it out in the ninth. Now. no matter what happens, the Sox can't lose to the Yankees!; 10/9/18, 10:45 PM
narciso said...: Yes but back then it was iraq,war and the Katrina narrative that was dragging republicans down and w' s unwillingness to challenge either

https://www.thenewneo.com/2018/10/09/what-was-behind-the-kavanaugh-attack/; 10/9/18, 10:47 PM
narciso said...: This,is,supposed to be a bad thing:

https://t.co/ei7X5Je1hE" / Twitter; 10/9/18, 10:48 PM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: walter-

Hell if I know.

I don't pretend to understand polling, but I do have a memory of their track record. I have heard all the BS before the GOP loses the House or Senate, and I'm hearing it again.; 10/9/18, 10:48 PM
narciso said...: If Karl Rove is,saying something, it's likely the opposite.; 10/9/18, 10:54 PM
Darrell said...: There is no Blue Wave.
Voters know voting for a Democrat is fucking crazy. And Republicans know they can't sit on their hands if they want the winning to continue.; 10/9/18, 11:06 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: If you go to a Trump rally, you're part of a "mob".
If you act like an actual brown shirted anti-due process screaming mobster in real life, you're a democrat.; 10/9/18, 11:07 PM
narciso said...: Meanwhile across the ocean;

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1028966/france-protests-emmanuel-macron-nantes-latest; 10/9/18, 11:08 PM
Darrell said...: Bill and Hillary are going to have to bus in public employees on the clock if they want to fill a 2000-seat venue. Trump fills the 10, 20, 30,000 stadiums with no problem and crowds left outside.; 10/9/18, 11:15 PM
Darrell said...: Democrats got Colon Bowel to shoot his mouth off today. You don't do shit like that if you are miles ahead.; 10/9/18, 11:17 PM
walter said...: Blogger John Lynch said...
I have heard all the BS before the GOP loses the House or Senate, and I'm hearing it again.
--
Fair enough. What to make of 2016 polling?
I just think more and more peeps are viewing polling as surveillance.
I know I tell 'em to go away.; 10/9/18, 11:22 PM
Original Mike said...: ”I just think more and more peeps are viewing polling as surveillance.
I know I tell 'em to go away.”

I made the mistake of answering a couple of polls. All of a sudden I was inundated. I stopped reponding.

Congratulations on the new book, John Lynch.; 10/9/18, 11:27 PM
Jaq said...: Why did she put Judge in the room? Because she knew his name too and was pressured to 'recover' her memory of the 'event.'

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/implant-false-memory.html

Participant 2: Honestly, I don’t remember. Like, I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Participant 1: Very odd. I don’t remember this taking place at all.

Shaw: When a person is having trouble remembering, repeatedly thinking about an event will usually lead to a more complete memory for it. So I’d like to take you mentally back to the scene where the event happened. And what it does is it puts you back into your 14-year-old you, and it gives you the context for helping you remember. I’d like you to relax, close your eyes, and focus your attention on trying to retrieve this memory.

Participant 2: Ok.; 10/9/18, 11:28 PM
walter said...: Crack busts in:
"Stop this New Age bullshit and propose some reparations!"; 10/9/18, 11:42 PM
rcocean said...: "If RBG's health declines to the point where any rational person would retire, but Trump is still President, she will arrange for someone else to run things in her chambers. As long as she can croak out her vote during the justices' conferences, she'll stay on the Court."

That's what Marshall and Douglas tried to do, but even they had to retire when their health got too bad. Douglas in fact tried to stay on the court after he had a stroke and obviously couldn't hear cases with his full mental capacity. He litteraly had to be forced to retire by the other Justices.

Ginsberg will stay until she dies. She will be carried out feet first.; 10/9/18, 11:46 PM
rcocean said...: BTW only 4 justices since 1950 have died in office. And Stevens stayed on the court till he was almost 90. So, I wouldn't expect Ginsberg to leave anytime soon.; 10/9/18, 11:47 PM
narciso said...: Marshall was 83, Douglas was just short 80 when he stepped down, so probably.; 10/10/18, 12:08 AM
cubanbob said...: When it comes to the polls, who knows? A lot of them are sketchy in their methodology, others are push polls and some may actually be true. I suspect more and more conservatives refuse to be polled. And there is a difference among polled at large, polls of registered voters and polls of likely voters. The problem with polls is that they are mostly national but elections aren't national. Every congressional district is a world of its own and each state has its own issues for the senate. The Democrat-Communist are more likely to pick up seats in the house where the districts are more purplish yet lose in the senate races. My home state of Florida may well have a schizophrenic elections results: a Communist governor replacing a Republic governor who in turns replaces a Democrat senator and send a few more Democrats to the house while passing state constitutional ballot amendments further limiting state taxation. Thank God my state's constitution doesn't allow for state or local income taxes and caps property taxes on homesteads. And the likelihood of those taxation limits being repeal are zero for now.; 10/10/18, 12:13 AM
Yancey Ward said...: "I saw an artist rendering of the Supremes- it looked like RBG was asleep..."

Taxidermist was falling down on his job this morning.; 10/10/18, 12:53 AM
Yancey Ward said...: Steve Uhr asked:

"Question -If Ford was lying, why did she place Judge in the room? So there would be two eye witnesses refuting her testimony instead of one? Doesn't make sense."

It makes perfect sense- Ford had read Judge's book. In that book, Judge tells the story of his own alcoholism in high school. That was why she put him in the room- she knew that Judge's history could be used to tarnish Kavanaugh- indeed, the media did exactly that in story after story about the two childhood friends' history. If Kavanaugh had had a friend who wrote a book about assaulting girls as a teenager, that guy would have been the one in the room with Kavanaugh. Indeed, Judge's alcoholism isn't the only detail from Judge's book that Ford lifted to give her story weight.

In any case, Judge's denial would not have hurt Ford's story any more than Kavanaugh doing so. What hurt Ford, and I think the thing she didn't expect, was Keyser denying the story so forcefully- Keyser denied even knowing Kavanaugh. I think Ford expected her friend to back her up to some degree whether or not Ford was telling the truth- that was a gamble that was designed to get corroboration when Ford had none- it failed.; 10/10/18, 1:09 AM
Yancey Ward said...: Democrats have polled better on the generic ballot for my entire life, include times when the Republicans made big gains and held their position. Like 2016, I will wait for the real poll that can't be rigged.; 10/10/18, 1:11 AM
William said...: Alger Hiss was an impressive liar. He kept it up right to the end. And right to the end the left believed in him and his lies. He used to give paid lectures at Harvard and receive standing ovations...... Someday I'd like to read a novel or see a movie that explains his motivations and the credulity of the people in his orbit. It was a huge con, he got away with it, and still they believe....... If, at this late date, they're not skeptical about Alger Hiss, I don't put much faith in their ever looking askance at Ford.; 10/10/18, 1:36 AM
William said...: Wendell Wilkie died before FDR. I would have thought Scalia would outlive Ginsburg. Death pools are tricky bets. Ginsburg is the favorite, but I see some dark horses gaining ground on the inside,; 10/10/18, 1:39 AM
FIDO said...: Read that ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THREE missing kids were found in a sex trafficking ring.

This was in Detroit. I believe the Feds should take over that city. But I bet the legislature there turns a blind eye to illegals, even if they aren't officially a sanctuary city.

I wonder how many of those kids WERE illegals? Do you think the news will report THAT?

Is there a death penalty in Michigan? No.

There is something off with the moral compass of Michigan. I blame the Spartans.; 10/10/18, 2:20 AM
FIDO said...: I saw an artist rendering of the Supremes- it looked like RBG was asleep...

Don't worry. That will have no bearing on any decision she makes. It never has before.; 10/10/18, 2:23 AM
Ralph L said...: Judge was put in the room to explain how Ford got away. He knocked Kav off of her.

I hadn't known that Scalia smoked.; 10/10/18, 2:27 AM
FIDO said...: Let's be honest about the House poll numbers. They suck for R's. The Senate poll numbers look good for R's. If you think the House numbers are BS, then why are the Senate numbers any good?

Let me square that circle for you.

My side doesn't answer polls. So to try to make up for that, they add a few extra points to rural voters.

Here is the issue: my side, urban, suburban, and rural, no longer trusts the doxing, uncivil, lying untrustworthy media and academy. We are not going to 'out' how we feel to such people.

Now, everyone is not as fervent as that. But how many people is that? Five percent? Ten percent? More?

So whatever poll you read...I'm not on it. Nor are a lot of other people. So if the House polls are bad...they MIGHT be bad. If our Senate polls are good...they are frigging spectacular!

Because the bias is ALWAYS in one direction: undercounting Republicans. And it's a strategy. "Oh...you guys are going to lose, so don't bother coming out'. Just like you tried to pull.

Trump burst that bubble and has made your polling far less accurate. We are many...and we know this now.; 10/10/18, 2:40 AM
Original Mike said...: I wonder at steve uhr’s claim to be a former federal prosecutor.; 10/10/18, 2:49 AM
FIDO said...: Since the 2016 elections, some polling companies have continued to survey “registered” or “likely voters,” a practice usually deployed near election time. These include pollsters at The Economist, Rasmussen, Fox News and USA Today.

But most of the major liberal news and polling organizations, including Reuters, CBS, CNN, Gallup and CNBC only survey “adults” from age 18 and up, which includes a large number who never or only rarely vote. This cohort seldom follows public policy controversies as closely as “likely voters.”

“If I were to start doing a poll of presidential approval, I personally would do registered voters,” said Kyle Kondik, managing editor of “Sabato’s Crystal Ball,” the web site for independent national pollster Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia.
“If you’re looking specifically at trying to figure out the electoral effects, you’re probably better off doing registered voters or likely voters,” Kondik said.

“When you get down to it, it’s voting issues that matter. A sizable number of Americans may not like something, but if they don’t care about it enough to vote, it ultimately doesn’t matter politically,” said Coombs, whose company only tracks “likely voters.”
.
.
.
The differences between the two surveying strategies is vividly illustrated in polling numbers on Trump’s job approval ratings.

Rasmussen, for example, since Jan. 20, 2017, has tracked Trump’s approval ratings between 42 to 57 percent, based on “likely voter” responses. By contrast, Gallup, polling “adults,” has reported Trump’s approval numbers hovering between 35 to 46 percent, a difference of as much as 11 percent.

.
.
.
Also ignored by most polling companies is how Trump compares to former President Barack Obama.

On July 28, 2016, only 22.9 percent of the public approved of the country’s direction, according to RCP. By July 2, 2017, that figure improved to 32 percent, a nine percent increase over Obama.

“Many of the polls are born to meet expectations,” said Caddell. “I hate to say it, but they are designed for ‘desired results.’ I’ve have some history, and I don’t think the polls have ever had this common problem in my lifetime.”

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/09/exclusive-uh-oh-pollsters-are-screwing-up-again/

Now you add a pretty common meme on the Right not to answer polls. So John...enjoy those poll results. I have a feeling things aren't going to go Pure D in November.; 10/10/18, 3:16 AM
Big Mike said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/10/18, 3:31 AM
Big Mike said...: @Althouse, you were in a skate board store??? Are you and Meade starting s new passtime?; 10/10/18, 3:31 AM
Doug said...: Prediction: RBG assumed room temperature, and Trump nominated ... wait for it ... Merrick Garland.
Trump has his 5-4 majority now that Kavanaugh is sworn in.
Dems have to approve Garland without a fight.
Feminists go nuts because Trump is giving aWoman seat in the bench to a man (shudder).
Democrat party mortally winds itself trying to suppress mindless feminists.
Voters see the most vocal radicals on the dem side insisting on an affirmative action nominee. And vote accordingly in 2020.
Classic Trump move.
So much winning.; 10/10/18, 5:07 AM
stlcdr said...: Picture of a store, yet shop at Amazon. Soon, all we will have is pictures of stores.; 10/10/18, 5:45 AM
Amadeus 48 said...: If Steve Uhr and others want to pursue the Ford story further, I suggest that we find out more about Ford and her then boyfriend "Squi" Garrett. When and why did they break up? She wouldn't even say his name at the hearing. Her story sounds like something a drunken boyfriend might mistakenly try, not some a relative stranger.
Did Ford re-purpose an event in her life to try to keep Kavanaugh from the bench?; 10/10/18, 5:48 AM
Michael K said...: If, at this late date, they're not skeptical about Alger Hiss, I don't put much faith in their ever looking askance at Ford.

How about the movie "Truth, which tries to make the Bush AWOL story still fly after it was proven to be a hoax?

The left still believes that it was too good to not be true. Jere is the movie "review" at IMDB

This movie is based on true events. How CBS caved in to the George Bush administration in 2004 to discredit a true news story. A major plot point hinges on the fact that rich and "connected" sons of influential Texans were allowed to enter the National Guard rather than be drafted and serve in Vietnam. CBS's internal investigators said it couldn't be proved. I know it's true because I served in the National Guard in another state and there were several people who got placed there because of "favors." and connections. Kate Blanchett is really good and totally believable as are the other characters. Maybe there is not so much action as ideas and conversation. But the movie rings very true and deserves to be seen.

Notice no mention of the forged memo?; 10/10/18, 6:02 AM
Darrell said...: The Left doesn't need their narratives to be true. They never believe them to begin with. They only need to be in power so that they can keep on putting out their narratives as if they were true. Folks like Inga can then link to them and post them here.; 10/10/18, 6:09 AM
stlcdr said...: If the Dems win, then what? What’s their message? What’s their plan? All I’ve heard is to roll back the tax cuts - because only the evil rich benefited (which does not match reality). This will cause, at best, economic stagnation. Regardless, they will have to get it through Trump. So begins a desperation of ‘impeachment’. Effectively a wasted space party.

If Republicans win, then it will be because of the Russians (lolz)! As long as the Dems keep up the whining, the economy will keep on humming.

Republicans, as noted above, keep their mouth shut. Democrats are irrational, threatening and violent, with no respect for the rule of law or any common decency.; 10/10/18, 6:09 AM
PJ said...: @Yancey: I will wait for the real poll that can't be rigged.

If only.

Somewhat relatedly, do polls of “adults” make any effort to screen out adults who are not legally eligible to register to vote? That’s a not-insignificant percentage of adults, and it would be foolish to assume that the polling results would be the same for “eligible” vs. “non-eligible.” Of course, many “non-eligibles” closely follow public policy controversies and some will actually vote, but I wouldn’t think that latter number would be high enough to justify including them in the polling base (unless it’s to achieve a desired result).; 10/10/18, 6:11 AM
Michael K said...: Universities are reaching peak craziness.

Last year, Dudley named the Commission on Institutional History and Community to address the university’s history after the visceral national response to events in Charlottesville, when white nationalists protested plans to remove a statue of Lee from a city park. The commission recommended the university stop holding campus events in Lee Chapel and instead transform the entire building into a museum with a new name.

One of the commission’s major areas of focus was Robinson Hall, named for a founder of the university. John Robinson left his estate, a large farm and 73 enslaved men, women and children, to the college. In 1836, the college sold the slaves and used the funds to build Robinson Hall on the campus’ historic Colonnade.

Why not just burn that fucker down? The whole college .; 10/10/18, 6:22 AM
Michael K said...: Of course, many “non-eligibles” closely follow public policy controversies and some will actually vote, but I wouldn’t think that latter number would be high enough to justify including them in the polling base (unless it’s to achieve a desired result).

California just discovered that "accidentally," 1500 non citizens were registered to vote by the DMV.

I did a search on the LA Times site for the article to link but my search for "1500 non-citizens registered to vote" returned 6500 results.

Hmmmmm.; 10/10/18, 6:27 AM
Marcus said...: Darrell said...
If Ford was telling the truth, would she have left her best friend there with two potential rapists, having just attacked her? It would be one of the biggest dick moves ever, if she did.

ISWYDT; 10/10/18, 6:38 AM
Professional lady said...: I've probably hung up on 5 or 6 pollsters over the last couple of weeks.; 10/10/18, 6:42 AM
Jersey Fled said...: Just for the fun of it, I've been following the NYT poll on the Tennessee Senate race. The interesting thing is that you can follow the results as the poll is being conducted, i.e. as the calls are actually being made. Last time I checked, it took 64 calls to get one response.

So we start with a process where 98.6% of potential voters don't respond. To put it another way, the poll is based on the views of 1.4% of potential voters.

What are the characteristics of those who respond to polling vs. those who do not? These are very unique people, as indicated by the fact that they are so few. Anecdotal evidence would indicate that Republicans respond at lower rates than Democrats. This is supported by the fact that when the polls are wrong, the error is typically in the direction of understating the Republican vote. You probably have to go back to Truman versus Dewey to find an exception.

I used to teach a course in critical thinking. In that course we briefly talked about the reliability of polling data. I always asked if any student had responded to a poll recently. As expected, most had not. But I remember one young lady who was an enthusiastic yes. She said she always responded to polls because they gave her free movie tickets. And she was polled frequently, probably because she was on a list of those likely to respond.

So my informal survey would indicated that polls over sample movie goers.; 10/10/18, 7:14 AM
Andrew said...: I actually agree with those commenters who think Trump and the Repubs should do very little this month, and just let the Dems self-destruct. That might be the wiser course of action. Before the Judge K confirmation,I would have expected Trump to do something dramatic. (Correction: JUSTICE K, mofos.)

Of course, the Dems might launch an October sneak attack, in which case I'm sure Trump will have a counter-attack prepared.

Add me to those who would never answer a political poll. I don't trust the pollsters or the journalists who report them. It became obvious to me years ago that they were propaganda.; 10/10/18, 7:19 AM
DavidD said...: What does it matter whether 51% of the people in any given district or 100% favor a given party when the result is the same regardless?

Polls are meaningless.; 10/10/18, 7:21 AM
Paco Wové said...: "What’s their plan?"

Having power.; 10/10/18, 7:24 AM
narciso said...: He was a gru agent of influence, of course he's be a liar, just like Kim philby.; 10/10/18, 7:45 AM
Big Mike said...: @John Lynch, you raised a point that I would like to answer. Let me illustrate by supposing that there are 3 Congressional districts, and to make the math easier let’s assume each has 300,000 voters (the average district has 711,000 people, so 300,000 voters is close to right). Now let’s give the Democrats a 10 point lead in the polls, 55% to 45%, so the total voters are 495,000 Democrats and 405,000 Republicans. If the Democrats and Republicans are spread evenly then it’s a wipeout for the GOP, and they win nothing. But let me distribute the voters with 160,000 Republicans in two districts and 85,000 in the third. Then Republicans win two seats (160,000 to 140,000) to one Democrat victory by (215,000 to 85,000). Does that seem preposterous to you? In many large cities there are districts that are 90% Democrat and there is nothing anyone can do about it because districts are required to be contiguous, and Democrats prefer to live with other Democrats.

Plus of course there is also Gerrymandering. Back when state legislatures were mostly in Democrat hands the position of the media was a shrug and “That’s politics.” Now thanks to Obama’s inattention to maintaining his own party’s foundations, most legislatures are Republican and districts are deliberately drawn to cram as many Democrats into as few districts as possible. And only now is Gerrymandering a scandal. Hey! What goes around ...; 10/10/18, 8:42 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: "Like 2016, I will wait for the real poll that can't be rigged."

Not sure I agree that ballot box voting can't be faked. Ask yourself why CA registers illegal aliens to vote, and why Dems are so adamant about not cleanIng up voting rolls.; 10/10/18, 9:15 AM
Jim at said...: Inga cites polls taken before the Kavanaugh vote and claims Republicans didn't get the Kavanaugh bump they were hoping for.

Inga isn't very bright.; 10/10/18, 3:41 PM
hugh42 said...: Like that pic of skateboard shop. How did you happen to go in there? Let's see you on a long board!; 10/11/18, 6:41 AM