It’s Barrett....(Democrat Hysteria Game Thread)

SFGbob

NorthwestFresh said:

SFGbob said:

Have you ever read Michelle Obama’s Princeton thesis?

The late Christopher Hitchens take on Michelle Obama's thesis.

I direct your attention to Mrs. Obama’s 1985 thesis at Princeton University. Its title (rather limited in scope, given the author and the campus) is ‘Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community.’ To describe it as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn’t written in any known language.

I miss Hitch, in Michelle's defense because I'm know for my fairness, I'd be embarrassed if anyone were to read something I had written when I was in college.

I have a published paper from college and I went to a “state” school in Eugene. Michelle Obama is a community college level intellect. Her disaster was at Princeton. An embarrassment.

I can't write now. I was much worse in college. But you're right, I would have never gotten into Princeton in the first place. Her thesis is actually fun to read. Hitch is right, it's mostly incoherent but her sense of victimhood that we all see today was already well established. Fucking woman got into a school she had no business being admitted to on account of her skin color and then cries about how tough it is being black at Princeton, yeah, she is a victim.

Sledog

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

She’s Catholic. The DNC are atheists and will throw everything they’ve got against her Catholism

Way to alienate the Hispanic vote who are almost entirely Catholic, DNC

But the Cuban chick is a Cuban chick. That might have appeased the Floridas, but as we’ve seen here on HCH, not everyone can distinguish among the Hispanos, and among those that can, many don’t care. Reasonable amounts.

Picking the non-ethnic conservative, while considering the ethnic one was the smart move.

I’ll note that both selections are out of step with the traditional academic elitism that accompanies SCOTUS appointments. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, undergrad and law school, have traditionally dominated the appointment pools.

The Cuban woman went to Columbia LS, which is up there too and way better than Notre Dame, but went to FIU undergrad, which is very low brow.

Barrett was undergrad at Rhodes College, not exactly a tippy top liberal arts college, and Notre Dame LS, which is not elite. #26 in USNWR, current ranking, is even higher than it’s been historically. It’s not even Georgetown. Top law firms don’t interview there.

Way Moore Catholic Highspanics than just Cuban. Gong for the big win.

Barrett has broader appeal is my guess as to why she was picked.

creepycoug

Sledog said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

She’s Catholic. The DNC are atheists and will throw everything they’ve got against her Catholism

Way to alienate the Hispanic vote who are almost entirely Catholic, DNC

But the Cuban chick is a Cuban chick. That might have appeased the Floridas, but as we’ve seen here on HCH, not everyone can distinguish among the Hispanos, and among those that can, many don’t care. Reasonable amounts.

Picking the non-ethnic conservative, while considering the ethnic one was the smart move.

I’ll note that both selections are out of step with the traditional academic elitism that accompanies SCOTUS appointments. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, undergrad and law school, have traditionally dominated the appointment pools.

The Cuban woman went to Columbia LS, which is up there too and way better than Notre Dame, but went to FIU undergrad, which is very low brow.

Barrett was undergrad at Rhodes College, not exactly a tippy top liberal arts college, and Notre Dame LS, which is not elite. #26 in USNWR, current ranking, is even higher than it’s been historically. It’s not even Georgetown. Top law firms don’t interview there.

Way Moore Catholic Highspanics than just Cuban. Gong for the big win.

Barrett has broader appeal is my guess as to why she was picked.

That’s essentially what I said.

Why do you think she has “broader appeal”?

NorthwestFresh

SFGbob said:

NorthwestFresh said:

SFGbob said:

Have you ever read Michelle Obama’s Princeton thesis?

The late Christopher Hitchens take on Michelle Obama's thesis.

I direct your attention to Mrs. Obama’s 1985 thesis at Princeton University. Its title (rather limited in scope, given the author and the campus) is ‘Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community.’ To describe it as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn’t written in any known language.

I miss Hitch, in Michelle's defense because I'm know for my fairness, I'd be embarrassed if anyone were to read something I had written when I was in college.

I have a published paper from college and I went to a “state” school in Eugene. Michelle Obama is a community college level intellect. Her disaster was at Princeton. An embarrassment.

I can't write now. I was much worse in college. But you're right, I would have never gotten into Princeton in the first place. Her thesis is actually fun to read. Hitch is right, it's mostly incoherent but her sense of victimhood that we all see today was already well established. Fucking woman got into a school she had no business being admitted to on account of her skin color and then cries about how tough it is being black at Princeton, yeah, she is a victim.

Never ask her to reach something from a grocery store top shelf if you’re a short, white grandma in what was initially a photo-op and portrayed a such at the time.

doogie

SFGbob said:

Look at those fucking little props.

Looks to me like she has quite a long term stake in the future.

Goduckies

creepycoug said:

Sledog said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

She’s Catholic. The DNC are atheists and will throw everything they’ve got against her Catholism

Way to alienate the Hispanic vote who are almost entirely Catholic, DNC

But the Cuban chick is a Cuban chick. That might have appeased the Floridas, but as we’ve seen here on HCH, not everyone can distinguish among the Hispanos, and among those that can, many don’t care. Reasonable amounts.

Picking the non-ethnic conservative, while considering the ethnic one was the smart move.

I’ll note that both selections are out of step with the traditional academic elitism that accompanies SCOTUS appointments. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, undergrad and law school, have traditionally dominated the appointment pools.

The Cuban woman went to Columbia LS, which is up there too and way better than Notre Dame, but went to FIU undergrad, which is very low brow.

Barrett was undergrad at Rhodes College, not exactly a tippy top liberal arts college, and Notre Dame LS, which is not elite. #26 in USNWR, current ranking, is even higher than it’s been historically. It’s not even Georgetown. Top law firms don’t interview there.

Way Moore Catholic Highspanics than just Cuban. Gong for the big win.

Barrett has broader appeal is my guess as to why she was picked.

That’s essentially what I said.

Why do you think she has “broader appeal”?

Had 5 kids and catholic makes it possible to stay independent votes if they trash her too hard

Sledog

creepycoug said:

Sledog said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

She’s Catholic. The DNC are atheists and will throw everything they’ve got against her Catholism

Way to alienate the Hispanic vote who are almost entirely Catholic, DNC

But the Cuban chick is a Cuban chick. That might have appeased the Floridas, but as we’ve seen here on HCH, not everyone can distinguish among the Hispanos, and among those that can, many don’t care. Reasonable amounts.

Picking the non-ethnic conservative, while considering the ethnic one was the smart move.

I’ll note that both selections are out of step with the traditional academic elitism that accompanies SCOTUS appointments. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, undergrad and law school, have traditionally dominated the appointment pools.

The Cuban woman went to Columbia LS, which is up there too and way better than Notre Dame, but went to FIU undergrad, which is very low brow.

Barrett was undergrad at Rhodes College, not exactly a tippy top liberal arts college, and Notre Dame LS, which is not elite. #26 in USNWR, current ranking, is even higher than it’s been historically. It’s not even Georgetown. Top law firms don’t interview there.

Way Moore Catholic Highspanics than just Cuban. Gong for the big win.

Barrett has broader appeal is my guess as to why she was picked.

That’s essentially what I said.

Why do you think she has “broader appeal”?

Married, female, mother, Catholic, good reputation, highly thought of among the legal crowd, mixed family etc. Appeals across some racial lines due to her religion and adoption. Traditional interpretation of the constitution. Pro life.

creepycoug

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

Sledog said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

She’s Catholic. The DNC are atheists and will throw everything they’ve got against her Catholism

Way to alienate the Hispanic vote who are almost entirely Catholic, DNC

But the Cuban chick is a Cuban chick. That might have appeased the Floridas, but as we’ve seen here on HCH, not everyone can distinguish among the Hispanos, and among those that can, many don’t care. Reasonable amounts.

Picking the non-ethnic conservative, while considering the ethnic one was the smart move.

I’ll note that both selections are out of step with the traditional academic elitism that accompanies SCOTUS appointments. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, undergrad and law school, have traditionally dominated the appointment pools.

The Cuban woman went to Columbia LS, which is up there too and way better than Notre Dame, but went to FIU undergrad, which is very low brow.

Barrett was undergrad at Rhodes College, not exactly a tippy top liberal arts college, and Notre Dame LS, which is not elite. #26 in USNWR, current ranking, is even higher than it’s been historically. It’s not even Georgetown. Top law firms don’t interview there.

Way Moore Catholic Highspanics than just Cuban. Gong for the big win.

Barrett has broader appeal is my guess as to why she was picked.

That’s essentially what I said.

Why do you think she has “broader appeal”?

Married, female, mother, Catholic, good reputation, highly thought of among the legal crowd, mixed family etc. Appeals across some racial lines due to her religion and adoption. Traditional interpretation of the constitution. Pro life.

Lagoa is married, no less Catholic than Barrett, has three kids, serves on a federal court of appeals, served on the FL SC, and spent time in private practice.

She also made it to the Ivy League with no affirmative action - I know this because she is my age and we attended LS at the same time. I know first hand that the law schools, especially those in the east, don’t consider Cubans as diversity candidates. Dean of admissions at Michigan told me that point blank.

So I ask you again: why does Barrett have broader appeal? They seem like almost the same people. Only real differences are Barrett taught in LS and the Cuban has a better LS pedigree and served in her state’s Supreme Court.

EsophagealFeces

creepycoug said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

Sledog said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

She’s Catholic. The DNC are atheists and will throw everything they’ve got against her Catholism

Way to alienate the Hispanic vote who are almost entirely Catholic, DNC

But the Cuban chick is a Cuban chick. That might have appeased the Floridas, but as we’ve seen here on HCH, not everyone can distinguish among the Hispanos, and among those that can, many don’t care. Reasonable amounts.

Picking the non-ethnic conservative, while considering the ethnic one was the smart move.

I’ll note that both selections are out of step with the traditional academic elitism that accompanies SCOTUS appointments. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, undergrad and law school, have traditionally dominated the appointment pools.

The Cuban woman went to Columbia LS, which is up there too and way better than Notre Dame, but went to FIU undergrad, which is very low brow.

Barrett was undergrad at Rhodes College, not exactly a tippy top liberal arts college, and Notre Dame LS, which is not elite. #26 in USNWR, current ranking, is even higher than it’s been historically. It’s not even Georgetown. Top law firms don’t interview there.

Way Moore Catholic Highspanics than just Cuban. Gong for the big win.

Barrett has broader appeal is my guess as to why she was picked.

That’s essentially what I said.

Why do you think she has “broader appeal”?

Married, female, mother, Catholic, good reputation, highly thought of among the legal crowd, mixed family etc. Appeals across some racial lines due to her religion and adoption. Traditional interpretation of the constitution. Pro life.

Lagoa is married, no less Catholic than Barrett, has three kids, serves on a federal court of appeals, served on the FL SC, and spent time in private practice.

She also made it to the Ivy League with no affirmative action - I know this because she is my age and we attended LS at the same time. I know first hand that the law schools, especially those in the east, don’t consider Cubans as diversity candidates. Dean of admissions at Michigan told me that point blank.

So I ask you again: why does Barrett have broader appeal? They seem like almost the same people. Only real differences are Barrett taught in LS and the Cuban has a better LS pedigree and served in her state’s Supreme Court.

Barrett has a better track record on the 2nd amendment. Good enough for me. Not that Lagoa is bad on it, she just doesn’t have a track record if ruling on it.

creepycoug

EsophagealFeces said:

creepycoug said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

Sledog said:

Sledog said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

She’s Catholic. The DNC are atheists and will throw everything they’ve got against her Catholism

Way to alienate the Hispanic vote who are almost entirely Catholic, DNC

But the Cuban chick is a Cuban chick. That might have appeased the Floridas, but as we’ve seen here on HCH, not everyone can distinguish among the Hispanos, and among those that can, many don’t care. Reasonable amounts.

Picking the non-ethnic conservative, while considering the ethnic one was the smart move.

I’ll note that both selections are out of step with the traditional academic elitism that accompanies SCOTUS appointments. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, undergrad and law school, have traditionally dominated the appointment pools.

The Cuban woman went to Columbia LS, which is up there too and way better than Notre Dame, but went to FIU undergrad, which is very low brow.

Barrett was undergrad at Rhodes College, not exactly a tippy top liberal arts college, and Notre Dame LS, which is not elite. #26 in USNWR, current ranking, is even higher than it’s been historically. It’s not even Georgetown. Top law firms don’t interview there.

Way Moore Catholic Highspanics than just Cuban. Gong for the big win.

Barrett has broader appeal is my guess as to why she was picked.

That’s essentially what I said.

Why do you think she has “broader appeal”?

Married, female, mother, Catholic, good reputation, highly thought of among the legal crowd, mixed family etc. Appeals across some racial lines due to her religion and adoption. Traditional interpretation of the constitution. Pro life.

Lagoa is married, no less Catholic than Barrett, has three kids, serves on a federal court of appeals, served on the FL SC, and spent time in private practice.

She also made it to the Ivy League with no affirmative action - I know this because she is my age and we attended LS at the same time. I know first hand that the law schools, especially those in the east, don’t consider Cubans as diversity candidates. Dean of admissions at Michigan told me that point blank.

So I ask you again: why does Barrett have broader appeal? They seem like almost the same people. Only real differences are Barrett taught in LS and the Cuban has a better LS pedigree and served in her state’s Supreme Court.

Barrett has a better track record on the 2nd amendment. Good enough for me. Not that Lagoa is bad on it, she just doesn’t have a track record if ruling on it.

Ah the one issue litmus test. I thought only the liberals did that.

Anyway, still would like to know why Barrett has broader appeal. Not everyone is looking for a 2A hawk. And Lagoa is conservative enough that she’d be a pretty safe bet on that one critical issue.