When people have a rational argument available to them but don't use it, I try to step back and see if I can guess what is really happening. In the entire Kavanaugh debate, the Democrats/liberals had a single strong argument. Statistically, not only in history but up to the present day, if a woman says "He did this," and the man says "I did not," he is more likely to be lying. Whether he is twice as likely or a hundred times as likely is a difficult debate with few hard data points, but I think we are all clear that false denials are more common than false accusations. After all, some of those denials end up as convictions based on hard evidence.
There is a second argument which flows from that which I think is weaker, not fully persuasive, but at least not crazy. Therefore, because this is a perception and not a criminal case, the accused cannot expect marginal or ambiguous cases to go his way. In the absence of other evidence, fair-minded people can decide "Nine times out of ten the man is lying in these cases." It may not be entirely fair, but it compensates some for the statistical disadvantage. There is a key phrase "in the absence of other evidence" in that. Even then I don't like it, as I believe it sets a dangerous precedent which allows unscrupulous people to use accusation as a tool. But I can at least see it.
Sometimes protestors or critics, or Senators running for president, or editorialists would get sorta kinda close to these arguments, as if they were hovering in the background assumed. But mostly they all went to different places, that women had never been believed and this was going to test whether any woman would ever get justice again; that men should not have any part of the evaluation; that Dr. Ford was somehow courageous; that Kavanaugh might be something far worse on the basis of no evidence, that this was all proceeding hastily, that Susan Collins is a rape apologist. In short, to insane arguments. Hypocrisy is an easy argument in Washington. One of your guys did something similar last year or last decade and you didn't care so much then, didja? But this was at a new level, an insane level. These were hypocrisies separated by no time at all. The Ellison assaults were not something from 2015, they were current. There was an old Joe Biden quote that FBI investigations weren't as valuable as people thought. Democrats singing a different tune last week is just politics as usual. Republicans have done the same. But then the Democrats switched back again, just a week later. Comey tweeted out that the FBI was going to nail Kavanaugh because his little lies would explode out, and Senator Blumenthal tried to elegantly predict the same, in Latin. This week
What then, does this mean? They had a good argument, and passed it by in favor of bad arguments. When smart people get stupid it means something. I don't like to guess at other people's motives too much. The difference between seeing another point-of view and projecting is easy in cold definition, but not so clear cut in practice. If I imagine being in his head and thinking what the action would mean if I were doing it, is that insight or projection?
I have a little theory, but I am going to play with this in my head while doing some physical labor tomorrow, which often brings new perspectives.