LogFAQs > #933746163

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, Database 6 ( 01.01.2020-07.18.2020 ), DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 262: Witless Protection
LordoftheMorons 01/31/20 3:52:29 PM #403:	HeroDelTiempo17 posted... uh This would be the exact reason she asked that. If you already have very little reason to believe he'll vote for witnesses you have nearly nothing to lose. Even your 10-5% example is nothing. From a gaming/gambling perspective you make that play every single time. If she wanted to increase the odds that he'd tiebreak I don't see how implying that he or the Supreme Court had already lost legitimacy when he had yet to make any consequential decisions was going to do that. --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:933746163] in Politics C... [t:78366000]...</cite> <quote>HeroDelTiempo17 posted... </cite> <quote>uh This would be the exact reason she asked that. If you already have very little reason to believe he'll vote for witnesses you have nearly nothing to lose. Even your 10-5% example is nothing. From a gaming/gambling perspective you make that play every single time.</quote>If she wanted to increase the odds that he'd tiebreak I don't see how implying that he or the Supreme Court had already lost legitimacy when he had yet to make any consequential decisions was going to do that. --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1