4 ms·

*alleged

• dclowd9901 8y ago
  No, you're right: highly respected and professionally stable women often go out of their way to drag themselves and their reputations through the mud to have no effect on the nomination and subsequent appointment of a Supreme Court Justice. That makes perfect sense.
  • concordDance 8y ago
    You're looking at it the wrong way. The question is not what the odds are of a given professional and highly respected woman lying/having false memories. The question is what are the odds of such a person existing. Here's a a scenario with made up numbers where you can insert your own: Imagine your starting population is 60 million, assume only 1 in 100 are very passionate. Assume that only 1 in 100 very passionate people are willing to lie and drag their reputationa through the mud to fight a great evil. Assume only 1 in 100 of those people are respectable. That still would leave 60 respectable people willing to lie and fight hard in order to fight a great evil.
  • billner 8y ago
    She also instantly became a hero to nearly half the country and made hundreds of thousands in a gofundme. It's not all bad
  • Chris2048 8y ago
    Was her reputation damaged? Did she expect no effect?
• outworlder 8y ago
  Even if 'alleged', this should have been enough to stop the confirmation until it was properly investigated. Or frankly, it should have stopped it outright. Few positions are more important, and fewer still require a higher standard of morality than a supreme court position. Why settle for less than a spotless record? The person should be beyond reproach, so much so that an invalid allegation could be easily dismissed(during the confirmation, or any time afterwards). You are placing someone in a position where they are able to influence lives of countless people, with repercussions that can span generations.