Women who need abortions will still seek them out. But they will be of the unsafe, potentially fatal kind. Where do kkkonservative kkkristians get off calling themselves "pro-life?"
I'm seeing more and more pushback from Dems against the Christian Nationalists and the like. It is trickier for Democrats than Trumpublicans, as Dems have to not turn off folks of various faith traditions whereas Trumpubs can go full theofascist with little consequence.
My friend Aime is running for re-election here in Hiawatha (Iowa). She's rather outspoken with regard to pushing back against the "fascists". She could use your support, if you're so inclined.
Democrats have become a LOT more vocal, PERIOD, particularly since the coming of Donald Trump. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Katie Porter, Jamie Raskin and many other Dems have had no compunction about calling their Republican colleagues on their bullshit in no uncertain terms, and I see that as not only healthy, but NECESSARY. In Trump and too much of the GOP, we are looking at FASCISM, and that is tolerable in no way, shape, or form for the well-being of this country. It's time to be unafraid and outspoken and I'm thrilled to see so many on the left doing just that, as well as taking action to support Biden's policies.
Unfortunately, with the possible exception of Raskin, none of those are in the (firmly entrenched) party leadership. The Democratic party, at the institutional level, continues to ignore the will of the people, not just on abortion but on LGBT rights, Medicare for All, the Green New Deal and a host of other issues. A lot of younger Dems, who are new to congress--Jared Moskowitz, Dan Goldman, et al--are positively brilliant at calling the GOP out. But they have very little real clout in the party machinery. The obvious response to "Will the Democrats care?" is: not until secular voters become major campaign donors.
Note that I almost always vote for Democrats (with the occasional Green or Socialist, never for Republicans). But I can't see that I have anything to gain by deluding myself about what they are. As Gore Vidal often said, there is really only one party in this country, the Money Party.
I still say the Democratic party is at least two parties held together by the external pressure of the fact they are *not* Republicans. If this country ever achieves sanity again, they will separate into a progressive party and a moderate conservative party.
One of the worst things about our entrenched political system is the way it's stacked against the formation of new parties. Not happy with something the Democrats do? There's nowhere to go but the Republicans. Decide the GOP is doing too many bad things? The only alternative is going back to the Democrats. Not happy with something the Democrats do? There's nowhere to go but...etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam. It's little more than a huge game of ping pong, and the net effect is STASIS, an endless continuation of the status quo.
Real democracies--democracies worthy of the name--have more than just two parties. Real democracies have room for more than just two points of view in their governments. But we don't have one of those. What we have is The Greatest Country in the World™ (nudge nudge wink wink).
As a former Iowan who got out as fast as I could after high school, I will gladly make a contribution to those who have stayed and are making it a better place. However, I work in the financial industry and I need permission from my employer first. Mainly to make sure there isn’t a conflict of interest related to municipal bonds.
In rural Mississippi, a seventeen-year-old girl with the initials D.D. found herself pregnant as the result of a fling with a local farmer and, unable to care for the child and fearing the stigma of a pregnancy out of wedlock, sought an illegal abortion. She received no real support from her family, who were both poor and quite conservative- even though the pregnancy, and D.D.'s intentions, were something of an open secret to most of her kin. D.D.'s pregnancy, as fate would have it, coincided with the funeral of the family matriarch, which she had to use as an excuse to travel- riding beside her mother's coffin- to the town of Jefferson, where she'd heard there was a pharmacist who could help her. Instead, he took advantage of her desperation to coerce her into having sex with him, providing her with what turned out to be bogus medication in exchange. D.D.'s father then, upon learning what she was attempting to do, stole the money she'd brought with her to pay for her abortion... and used it to buy himself a new set of dentures instead, leaving D.D. with no options but to carry the pregnancy to term or else attempt the procedure herself and possibly die in the process.
None of the above really happened- it's a side-plot from William Faulkner's 𝑨𝒔 𝑰 𝑳𝒂𝒚 𝑫𝒚𝒊𝒏𝒈, published in 1930.
But the 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 aspect of Dewey Dell Bundren's awful experience that is in any way hard to believe could or would occur in 2023... is that she made the trip riding on a cart pulled by mules.
And the GQP will turn the clock back 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 century if they're given a chance to.
It doesn't matter if that zygote can be considered a complete human with all the rights a human has. The issue is about bodily autonomy. It is about making sure NO ONE is forced to allow the use of their body against their will.
Everywhere that the issue has come to a vote of the people, reproductive rights have been upheld. The NSGOP is trying to prevent the people from voting on those rights. This is what the Democrats need to remember. This is what they need to talk about.
True, the GOP is trying to prevent people from voting on it, or voting at all with any effectiveness. Look at Ohio’s Issue 1, requiring a 60% win rather than a simple majority. Just like the senate, the minority get to govern through simple stubbornness. If you’re in Ohio vote no. Get your friends to vote not. Get your enemies to vote no.
I believe part of the plan is to poison the process.
Over and over again people are trained to see their vote as futile. And when a hard fought for result is obtained, it takes but a pen stroke to overturn. Promises are promised but aren't delivered at all, or are gutted in committee, or over the years through court process. Representatives sent to deliver a message are squelched or outright censured. Demonstrations at the grass root levels never get amplified and if they do are swarmed by powerful astroturfed groups and cast as revolutionary or reactionary or both. And we then expect the younglings to participate. Once the halter was taken off the beast by Citizens United, what little volume each of our voices had was drowned out by the bellows of oligarchs.
It's disheartening, and downright depressing. That's why I come here - to be refreshed with spirit. The determination and grit I read about here really gets the juices flowing and hope still breaths.
You are right. I just think of the way groups fighting for basic civil rights are vilified by conservative Christians. The anti-fascist party known as antifa is vilified as a terrorist group. Black Live Matter is vilified as racist. And of course, any anti forced birth group are called murderers. LGBTQ people, who just want to exist, are called 'groomers'. The projection is loud with the conservative Christians. But this is what they do to rile up the base. They try to make bogey men out of people who just want the America they were promised.
Yes much like the myths many live by, so too do they cast others in negative light to keep their group tightly bound. It's a tribe, a cult, a hallucination - they're very human trying to stay together. But they forget the damage they cause along the way. It's this blindness that infuriates me. One because I'm subject to it myself (every now and again one of my blindspots is pointed out and I get angry, but as it happens more and more and I learn and the anger gets smaller).
Thank you Tinker, you sums it up great. I have thought a lot about US, and don't want to visit US right now. The SC and republicans and other behave like the nazis i 1932, right befor the coup d'état in Germany. I am actually a bit afraid.
Am I misunderstanding that there is a third, far bigger issue: we have lost the Supreme Court. Not just in the sense of being able to count on a largely liberal counterweight to a potentially conservative legislature and/or executive, but as in, we can expect the same 'partisan at all costs' swing here as elsewhere.
I hope I'm misreading the situation here, because if not, it seems to me that we've already lost this fight for a generation at least.
before long we will have a goddamned theocracy and civil liberties will be gone. The theocracy will ban this and any other boards. Will we be forced to wear colored patches and be stripped of jobs and property for the greater glory of jesus? Will we be locked into ghettos like the kkkatlik church did to Jews? Will blame for any crime be pushed on us and so many of us killed for any crime committed by others?
I read David I. Kertzer's "The Popes Against the Jews." The church made the Nazis look like an ice cream social.
Yeah, Democrats care. That’s why they put up a pro-choice candidate in 2016 named Hillary Rodham Clinton. Trump won and stacked the Supreme Court with rightwing extremists and here we are. Elections have consequences and we’re going to get screwed because too many of us couldn’t support Clinton for stupid reasons.
She did win the popular vote. And despite the growing progressive wing, the Democrats only put up center right candidates because they are afraid of losing the middle. Besides, Clinton had a 3 decade smear campaign to overcome.
Trump didn't "win" so much as he was handed the White House on a silver platter.
Russian interference in the election that was confirmed by the FB!, the CIA and the DoJ. A bungled investigation of Hillary by James Comey, who didn't follow the rules with her but DID follow the rules for Trump. An Electoral College that failed to follow the will of the people as they are required to BY LAW in 30 states plus DC. And tantrum voters throwing away their votes by going with Independents who had ZERO chance of winning.
Trump didn't expect to win and was shocked to find himself President-elect.
You can make all the excuses you want but people simply didn't like Hillary. It didn't help that it was proven, via Assange, that the DNC rigged the primary against Bernie. The electoral college is a flawed system, but I don't know where you got the 30 states not following the will of the people. The flaw lies in not having a popular vote. That is where the system is rigged for Republicans.
Excuses? The Russian interference is a confirmed fact. The bungled investigation by Comey is a fact. The EC not doing what it was supposed to do is a fact.
We have a popular vote, which H. Clinton won handily. Had the system been rigged for Republicans, Trump would've won the popular vote. He lost, both in 2016 and 2020, the first time a POTUS candidate/incumbent President has ever done so. If the system had been rigged for Republicans, Biden would never have been POTUS. Or Obama before him. Or Clinton before him. Or Carter before him. Or...well, you get the idea.
Trump falsely claimed the system was rigged against him. He was very passionate about that. Then he "won." When he was asked if he still thought the system was rigged, he said he did but since he won, he didn't care. Oh, NOW he didn't care?
Yea, I know trump is a tyrant but you are just rambling. I agree that the electoral college is rigged for Republicans but that is about the only legit excuse you have. Sure, Russia hacked the DNC but the files revealed their corruption. The DNC throttled Bernie and planned to label him an atheist cuz that is more despised than Jew. Those are your people. Also, Russia had troll farms endorsing Trump. Welcome to the modern era of social media.
You and the DNC should try learning from past mistakes, moving on, and quit the blame game. Unfortunately, that's not happening. Marianne is far superior to Joe, but Joe is a shoe in. Oh well.
That is ENOUGH, and I mean from both of you. I've never much liked Hillary, but christ knows a patch of slime mold would have been better than Trump. But you are both beating a dead horse--beating it, flaying it, and dancing among the bones. I was sick to goddamn death of the 2016 election right after it ended. Arguing about it now is, to put it mildly, as waste of time and energy.
I voted for her despite despising her. Maybe if the DNC stopped shutting out progressive candidates people on the left would be less resentful of their centrists. They are doing it again by not permitting a primary debate with half dead Joe. The mainstream media is mocking Marianne Williamson and not giving her any airtime.
It's not that simple and Bernie was a far superior candidate if you believe in left wing causes. You are just making excuses. Blame it on sexism, Russia, etc, etc. Blame it on everything but Hillary as a person.
I agreed with Bernie and voted for Clinton for that reason. I did so despite thinking she is a shitty, neo-liberal war hawk. And yes, Bernie did end up endorsing her, yet she continues to blame him, among her myriad excuses, for losing. She is despicable.
As a conservative, I can say... does it matter if people care or not. With the flood of dark money, I meant free political speech, various voter suppression acts, I meant voter security, and gerrymandering, I meant whatever euphemism we have for that, we have affectively defended "the will of the people" from it biggest enemy, "voice of the people".
I, and many, many more people are upset about the religious banning abortion and that American women don't have the right to decide about issues concerning their own bodies. Considering that it is wrong to stop an embryo that has just developed to becoming a human, contains less than 10 cell, when the brains of a fly has more than 100.000 cells, killing a fly is much worse than proceeding with an abortion.
The hypocrisy of the so-called "pro-life" movement is all too well documented. Whether it's the death penalty, or stand your ground laws, or sport hunting, the EPA, indoor smoking bans... on every single other issue, they show their true colors and favor the exact opposite of the life-affirming position. They're not pro-life- they're pro-𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨... and a fetus can't really suffer until it becomes a baby, can it?
Here's the thing: evangelicals may oppose abortion, but how many of them seek out such care when they themselves are behind that daunting 8-Ball? I doubt that any survey or poll could ferret out that information, but considering how hypocritical they can be on other issues, I can't see where the issue of what to do about an unwanted pregnancy would be any different.
As for the political issue, I think the Dobbs decision went a long way towards firing up the pro-choice side of the equation into being ready to FIGHT. My sense on this is purely anecdotal, from watching news reports and just what I hear around. For the evangelicals, this may be a case of: "Be careful what you wish for. You might GET it."
And just between you, me, and the lamppost, I don't think they're going to like what they get.
The talking heads and politicians outlawing abortion will never have to worry about losing their access to it, should they or their families (or their inconvenient mistresses) have a need. Wealth makes the law irrelevant. It's the base that will suffer... and given the underage pregnancy rates that the deepest of deep red states have, I rather think they're going to learn their lesson in the blood of their daughters- if they learn it at all.
If we as Dems do not get out and vote in record numbers in 2024 I fear that not just the country and our civil rights, but for the very Constitution we depend on will be damaged beyond repair.
The radical-right-wing nutters already have plans in motion (they have 30+ states signed up now & only need 2/3rds of states-- 33 or 34 I believe) to convene a Constitutional Convention where the very foundations that our Constitution is based on will be in danger of being muted to the point that the country will be a fascist-run Christian (only) White Evangelical favoring theocracy with the church and the wealthy oligarchs doing anything they please.
If so, say good-bye to most of our civil rights and any chance that we will be able to "tax the rich", get universal healthcare or the Constitutional promise of equality that it's supposed to produce. It'll become a document that will be unable to deliver a government "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" -- THAT will go backwards to a distant dream that we still have not achieved.
Do you have a citation for that number? I don't deny I fear a Constitutional Convention, but last I heard there weren't that many red states.
The scary thing is it looks like the middle will keep their heads in the sand telling us it can't happen here until it's too late and revolution is our only option.
I'm not sure where I saw that 2/3rds of states and how many there currently are-- but, if I do run across it I will try to send it to you. Don't hold your breath--lol. Try Google instead. <3
Maybe it's time to push for amendments to state constitutions that require a binding referendum before the state legislature can ratify any amendments or new Constitution.
OT - Remember that idjit in the "real" Dunedin who fired 30 rounds from an AR-15 at his pool guy?
When I first read the TBT article, I saw a very interesting tidbit. But, for whatever reason it was removed, and I couldn't find it in the half-dozen articles from other sources.
The guy a lot of people said was untrained and shouldn't be allowed to have guns? Well, his name is: Lt. Col. Bradley Hocevar, US Army Ret.
The training didn't take. He behaved incredibly irresponsibly with a deadly weapon.
He couldn't see what he was aiming at and he didn't take into account the possibility of collateral damage. Even I as someone who has never been trained in firearms I know that goes against training and common sense.
I still say he has no business being allowed near a gun. He has demonstrated he can't handle one responsibly.
The fact he was trained makes his irresponsibility even more egregious. In a sane state he would be charged with something like 'reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon' castle doctrine notwithstanding. You can bet if he'd shot at a cop who hadn't identified himself, he'd be facing charges. If he lived.
Seen at this year's Pride Parade here:
YOU CAN ONLY BAN SAFE ABORTIONS
Women who need abortions will still seek them out. But they will be of the unsafe, potentially fatal kind. Where do kkkonservative kkkristians get off calling themselves "pro-life?"
"If abortions are outlawed, then only outlaws will get abortions."
https://tinyurl.com/yvcucnrw
He's kind of cute.
A bit "preppy" – is that the word? Sort of a male version of Christian girl autumn.
He qualifies as 'preppy', but I usually picture a preppy male in a pastel polo with the collar turned up and khakis.
Isn't that the new Nazi wear?
PR. It sounds better than pro-control of women.
Pro-control of women is what they want to say but keep to themselves...for now.
Brilliant!
I'm seeing more and more pushback from Dems against the Christian Nationalists and the like. It is trickier for Democrats than Trumpublicans, as Dems have to not turn off folks of various faith traditions whereas Trumpubs can go full theofascist with little consequence.
My friend Aime is running for re-election here in Hiawatha (Iowa). She's rather outspoken with regard to pushing back against the "fascists". She could use your support, if you're so inclined.
https://qctimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/watch-now-aime-wichtendahl-speaks-at-lgbtq-rally-at-iowa-capitol/video_9e94ee04-49fb-59fc-a7a1-79b7f7d92341.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aime_Wichtendahl
https://secure.actblue.com/donate/americandreamstartshere
Democrats have become a LOT more vocal, PERIOD, particularly since the coming of Donald Trump. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Katie Porter, Jamie Raskin and many other Dems have had no compunction about calling their Republican colleagues on their bullshit in no uncertain terms, and I see that as not only healthy, but NECESSARY. In Trump and too much of the GOP, we are looking at FASCISM, and that is tolerable in no way, shape, or form for the well-being of this country. It's time to be unafraid and outspoken and I'm thrilled to see so many on the left doing just that, as well as taking action to support Biden's policies.
I just hope it's enough.
Unfortunately, with the possible exception of Raskin, none of those are in the (firmly entrenched) party leadership. The Democratic party, at the institutional level, continues to ignore the will of the people, not just on abortion but on LGBT rights, Medicare for All, the Green New Deal and a host of other issues. A lot of younger Dems, who are new to congress--Jared Moskowitz, Dan Goldman, et al--are positively brilliant at calling the GOP out. But they have very little real clout in the party machinery. The obvious response to "Will the Democrats care?" is: not until secular voters become major campaign donors.
Note that I almost always vote for Democrats (with the occasional Green or Socialist, never for Republicans). But I can't see that I have anything to gain by deluding myself about what they are. As Gore Vidal often said, there is really only one party in this country, the Money Party.
I still say the Democratic party is at least two parties held together by the external pressure of the fact they are *not* Republicans. If this country ever achieves sanity again, they will separate into a progressive party and a moderate conservative party.
One of the worst things about our entrenched political system is the way it's stacked against the formation of new parties. Not happy with something the Democrats do? There's nowhere to go but the Republicans. Decide the GOP is doing too many bad things? The only alternative is going back to the Democrats. Not happy with something the Democrats do? There's nowhere to go but...etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam. It's little more than a huge game of ping pong, and the net effect is STASIS, an endless continuation of the status quo.
Real democracies--democracies worthy of the name--have more than just two parties. Real democracies have room for more than just two points of view in their governments. But we don't have one of those. What we have is The Greatest Country in the World™ (nudge nudge wink wink).
Well if we win the revolution we can hopefully learn from Jefferson et.al's mistakes and write a better Constitution.
I sometimes think we would be better off with a parliamentary system.
Only sometimes?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Third_Republic
As a former Iowan who got out as fast as I could after high school, I will gladly make a contribution to those who have stayed and are making it a better place. However, I work in the financial industry and I need permission from my employer first. Mainly to make sure there isn’t a conflict of interest related to municipal bonds.
Having been a candidate myself, I very much understand. Thanks much. 🙂
In rural Mississippi, a seventeen-year-old girl with the initials D.D. found herself pregnant as the result of a fling with a local farmer and, unable to care for the child and fearing the stigma of a pregnancy out of wedlock, sought an illegal abortion. She received no real support from her family, who were both poor and quite conservative- even though the pregnancy, and D.D.'s intentions, were something of an open secret to most of her kin. D.D.'s pregnancy, as fate would have it, coincided with the funeral of the family matriarch, which she had to use as an excuse to travel- riding beside her mother's coffin- to the town of Jefferson, where she'd heard there was a pharmacist who could help her. Instead, he took advantage of her desperation to coerce her into having sex with him, providing her with what turned out to be bogus medication in exchange. D.D.'s father then, upon learning what she was attempting to do, stole the money she'd brought with her to pay for her abortion... and used it to buy himself a new set of dentures instead, leaving D.D. with no options but to carry the pregnancy to term or else attempt the procedure herself and possibly die in the process.
None of the above really happened- it's a side-plot from William Faulkner's 𝑨𝒔 𝑰 𝑳𝒂𝒚 𝑫𝒚𝒊𝒏𝒈, published in 1930.
But the 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 aspect of Dewey Dell Bundren's awful experience that is in any way hard to believe could or would occur in 2023... is that she made the trip riding on a cart pulled by mules.
And the GQP will turn the clock back 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 century if they're given a chance to.
It's very simple, kkkonservative kkkristians: If you don't have a uterus, you don't have a say.
Even for those who have one. You don't want an abortion ? Don't get one. It's as simple as that.
Won't someone please think of the blastocysts?
Bonne lecture
https://srh.bmj.com/content/41/2/84
Unfortunately there are six elderly fascists in black robes who disagree with you, and only one of them has a uterus.
It doesn't matter if that zygote can be considered a complete human with all the rights a human has. The issue is about bodily autonomy. It is about making sure NO ONE is forced to allow the use of their body against their will.
Everywhere that the issue has come to a vote of the people, reproductive rights have been upheld. The NSGOP is trying to prevent the people from voting on those rights. This is what the Democrats need to remember. This is what they need to talk about.
Get out and vote.
Instead of "abortion", let's refer to it as *eviction*....property rights and all that. You want to take in the newly-evicted, that's on you.
True, the GOP is trying to prevent people from voting on it, or voting at all with any effectiveness. Look at Ohio’s Issue 1, requiring a 60% win rather than a simple majority. Just like the senate, the minority get to govern through simple stubbornness. If you’re in Ohio vote no. Get your friends to vote not. Get your enemies to vote no.
It's not a good solution but let's hope the sc continues to fuck up to motivate more young voters to move their ass.
I believe part of the plan is to poison the process.
Over and over again people are trained to see their vote as futile. And when a hard fought for result is obtained, it takes but a pen stroke to overturn. Promises are promised but aren't delivered at all, or are gutted in committee, or over the years through court process. Representatives sent to deliver a message are squelched or outright censured. Demonstrations at the grass root levels never get amplified and if they do are swarmed by powerful astroturfed groups and cast as revolutionary or reactionary or both. And we then expect the younglings to participate. Once the halter was taken off the beast by Citizens United, what little volume each of our voices had was drowned out by the bellows of oligarchs.
It's disheartening, and downright depressing. That's why I come here - to be refreshed with spirit. The determination and grit I read about here really gets the juices flowing and hope still breaths.
You are right. I just think of the way groups fighting for basic civil rights are vilified by conservative Christians. The anti-fascist party known as antifa is vilified as a terrorist group. Black Live Matter is vilified as racist. And of course, any anti forced birth group are called murderers. LGBTQ people, who just want to exist, are called 'groomers'. The projection is loud with the conservative Christians. But this is what they do to rile up the base. They try to make bogey men out of people who just want the America they were promised.
Yes much like the myths many live by, so too do they cast others in negative light to keep their group tightly bound. It's a tribe, a cult, a hallucination - they're very human trying to stay together. But they forget the damage they cause along the way. It's this blindness that infuriates me. One because I'm subject to it myself (every now and again one of my blindspots is pointed out and I get angry, but as it happens more and more and I learn and the anger gets smaller).
Thank you Tinker, you sums it up great. I have thought a lot about US, and don't want to visit US right now. The SC and republicans and other behave like the nazis i 1932, right befor the coup d'état in Germany. I am actually a bit afraid.
"There are two downsides, though."
Am I misunderstanding that there is a third, far bigger issue: we have lost the Supreme Court. Not just in the sense of being able to count on a largely liberal counterweight to a potentially conservative legislature and/or executive, but as in, we can expect the same 'partisan at all costs' swing here as elsewhere.
I hope I'm misreading the situation here, because if not, it seems to me that we've already lost this fight for a generation at least.
before long we will have a goddamned theocracy and civil liberties will be gone. The theocracy will ban this and any other boards. Will we be forced to wear colored patches and be stripped of jobs and property for the greater glory of jesus? Will we be locked into ghettos like the kkkatlik church did to Jews? Will blame for any crime be pushed on us and so many of us killed for any crime committed by others?
I read David I. Kertzer's "The Popes Against the Jews." The church made the Nazis look like an ice cream social.
At least. Unless a democratic bloc can behave as the conservatives do - by doing what needs to be done.
The Dems might not court us, but we better get our act together and vote as a bloc otherwise abortion rights will be the least of our worries.
Yeah, Democrats care. That’s why they put up a pro-choice candidate in 2016 named Hillary Rodham Clinton. Trump won and stacked the Supreme Court with rightwing extremists and here we are. Elections have consequences and we’re going to get screwed because too many of us couldn’t support Clinton for stupid reasons.
She did win the popular vote. And despite the growing progressive wing, the Democrats only put up center right candidates because they are afraid of losing the middle. Besides, Clinton had a 3 decade smear campaign to overcome.
Trump didn't "win" so much as he was handed the White House on a silver platter.
Russian interference in the election that was confirmed by the FB!, the CIA and the DoJ. A bungled investigation of Hillary by James Comey, who didn't follow the rules with her but DID follow the rules for Trump. An Electoral College that failed to follow the will of the people as they are required to BY LAW in 30 states plus DC. And tantrum voters throwing away their votes by going with Independents who had ZERO chance of winning.
Trump didn't expect to win and was shocked to find himself President-elect.
Russians may have interfered, but it was stupid, God-fearing 'muricans who pulled the proverbial lever and elevated Trump to power.
Not denying that. Just saying.
You can make all the excuses you want but people simply didn't like Hillary. It didn't help that it was proven, via Assange, that the DNC rigged the primary against Bernie. The electoral college is a flawed system, but I don't know where you got the 30 states not following the will of the people. The flaw lies in not having a popular vote. That is where the system is rigged for Republicans.
Excuses? The Russian interference is a confirmed fact. The bungled investigation by Comey is a fact. The EC not doing what it was supposed to do is a fact.
We have a popular vote, which H. Clinton won handily. Had the system been rigged for Republicans, Trump would've won the popular vote. He lost, both in 2016 and 2020, the first time a POTUS candidate/incumbent President has ever done so. If the system had been rigged for Republicans, Biden would never have been POTUS. Or Obama before him. Or Clinton before him. Or Carter before him. Or...well, you get the idea.
Trump falsely claimed the system was rigged against him. He was very passionate about that. Then he "won." When he was asked if he still thought the system was rigged, he said he did but since he won, he didn't care. Oh, NOW he didn't care?
Yea, I know trump is a tyrant but you are just rambling. I agree that the electoral college is rigged for Republicans but that is about the only legit excuse you have. Sure, Russia hacked the DNC but the files revealed their corruption. The DNC throttled Bernie and planned to label him an atheist cuz that is more despised than Jew. Those are your people. Also, Russia had troll farms endorsing Trump. Welcome to the modern era of social media.
You and the DNC should try learning from past mistakes, moving on, and quit the blame game. Unfortunately, that's not happening. Marianne is far superior to Joe, but Joe is a shoe in. Oh well.
That is ENOUGH, and I mean from both of you. I've never much liked Hillary, but christ knows a patch of slime mold would have been better than Trump. But you are both beating a dead horse--beating it, flaying it, and dancing among the bones. I was sick to goddamn death of the 2016 election right after it ended. Arguing about it now is, to put it mildly, as waste of time and energy.
I voted for her despite despising her. Maybe if the DNC stopped shutting out progressive candidates people on the left would be less resentful of their centrists. They are doing it again by not permitting a primary debate with half dead Joe. The mainstream media is mocking Marianne Williamson and not giving her any airtime.
She was the most qualified candidate for POTUS in 2016.
People just couldn't get past their sexism/misogyny and vote for a woman to be President.
Segplène Royal was too in 2007, look what happened and we can't blame it on gerrymandering and electoral college (only for Senate).
It's not that simple and Bernie was a far superior candidate if you believe in left wing causes. You are just making excuses. Blame it on sexism, Russia, etc, etc. Blame it on everything but Hillary as a person.
Bernie himself said he would vote for Clinton to keep Trump out of the White House and tried to sway his supporters to follow his lead.
They didn't listen to him and we got Trump.
I agreed with Bernie and voted for Clinton for that reason. I did so despite thinking she is a shitty, neo-liberal war hawk. And yes, Bernie did end up endorsing her, yet she continues to blame him, among her myriad excuses, for losing. She is despicable.
If the massive support Bernie enjoyed had stood firmly behind him and done what he'd asked of them, Trump wouldn't have stood a chance.
Instead, far too many went the tantrum route, deciding that was more important than the country.
'But...but...all the candidates are bad...'
South Park covered this: Giant Douche or Shit Taco. You still need to vote.
As a conservative, I can say... does it matter if people care or not. With the flood of dark money, I meant free political speech, various voter suppression acts, I meant voter security, and gerrymandering, I meant whatever euphemism we have for that, we have affectively defended "the will of the people" from it biggest enemy, "voice of the people".
Fair redistricting ?
I, and many, many more people are upset about the religious banning abortion and that American women don't have the right to decide about issues concerning their own bodies. Considering that it is wrong to stop an embryo that has just developed to becoming a human, contains less than 10 cell, when the brains of a fly has more than 100.000 cells, killing a fly is much worse than proceeding with an abortion.
The hypocrisy of the so-called "pro-life" movement is all too well documented. Whether it's the death penalty, or stand your ground laws, or sport hunting, the EPA, indoor smoking bans... on every single other issue, they show their true colors and favor the exact opposite of the life-affirming position. They're not pro-life- they're pro-𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨... and a fetus can't really suffer until it becomes a baby, can it?
Here's the thing: evangelicals may oppose abortion, but how many of them seek out such care when they themselves are behind that daunting 8-Ball? I doubt that any survey or poll could ferret out that information, but considering how hypocritical they can be on other issues, I can't see where the issue of what to do about an unwanted pregnancy would be any different.
As for the political issue, I think the Dobbs decision went a long way towards firing up the pro-choice side of the equation into being ready to FIGHT. My sense on this is purely anecdotal, from watching news reports and just what I hear around. For the evangelicals, this may be a case of: "Be careful what you wish for. You might GET it."
And just between you, me, and the lamppost, I don't think they're going to like what they get.
Evangelical didn't oppose abortion until 5 or 6 years after Roe. About the time segregation stopped playing well outside the deep south.
The talking heads and politicians outlawing abortion will never have to worry about losing their access to it, should they or their families (or their inconvenient mistresses) have a need. Wealth makes the law irrelevant. It's the base that will suffer... and given the underage pregnancy rates that the deepest of deep red states have, I rather think they're going to learn their lesson in the blood of their daughters- if they learn it at all.
There's the rub. Will they learn?
Having LGBT sons and daughters never seems to teach them it's a bad idea to assault the rights of sexual minorities, does it?
How many of them send their not so precious children to torture camps ?
No need to mention religion at all if you're calling out fascism for what it is.
Fond of Franco?
Pining for Perón?
Missing Mussolini?
Nostalgic for Nazis?
Try Trumpism!
Fascism for the 21st Century.
What do you have for hitler and ceauşescu ?
Hankering for Hitler? Craving Ceausescu?
I had hiring and catering. I don't know hankering.
"Hankering" is "a strong desire to have something."
If we as Dems do not get out and vote in record numbers in 2024 I fear that not just the country and our civil rights, but for the very Constitution we depend on will be damaged beyond repair.
The radical-right-wing nutters already have plans in motion (they have 30+ states signed up now & only need 2/3rds of states-- 33 or 34 I believe) to convene a Constitutional Convention where the very foundations that our Constitution is based on will be in danger of being muted to the point that the country will be a fascist-run Christian (only) White Evangelical favoring theocracy with the church and the wealthy oligarchs doing anything they please.
If so, say good-bye to most of our civil rights and any chance that we will be able to "tax the rich", get universal healthcare or the Constitutional promise of equality that it's supposed to produce. It'll become a document that will be unable to deliver a government "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" -- THAT will go backwards to a distant dream that we still have not achieved.
Do you have a citation for that number? I don't deny I fear a Constitutional Convention, but last I heard there weren't that many red states.
The scary thing is it looks like the middle will keep their heads in the sand telling us it can't happen here until it's too late and revolution is our only option.
I'm not sure where I saw that 2/3rds of states and how many there currently are-- but, if I do run across it I will try to send it to you. Don't hold your breath--lol. Try Google instead. <3
https://www.commoncause.org/our-work/constitution-courts-and-democracy-issues/article-v-convention/
says 28. Still scary, but not quite as bad.
2/3 is 34 states.
Yeah which leaves six states not less than 4 as JaBier thought. That isn't a a particularly comforting margin for me.
Maybe it's time to push for amendments to state constitutions that require a binding referendum before the state legislature can ratify any amendments or new Constitution.
https://www.alternet.org/judge-proud-boys-racist/
Good news.
Will SCROTUS make the victims pay the pb's?
I was going to say surely they couldn't go that far – but then I thought. 🙂
OT - Remember that idjit in the "real" Dunedin who fired 30 rounds from an AR-15 at his pool guy?
When I first read the TBT article, I saw a very interesting tidbit. But, for whatever reason it was removed, and I couldn't find it in the half-dozen articles from other sources.
The guy a lot of people said was untrained and shouldn't be allowed to have guns? Well, his name is: Lt. Col. Bradley Hocevar, US Army Ret.
The training didn't take. He behaved incredibly irresponsibly with a deadly weapon.
He couldn't see what he was aiming at and he didn't take into account the possibility of collateral damage. Even I as someone who has never been trained in firearms I know that goes against training and common sense.
I still say he has no business being allowed near a gun. He has demonstrated he can't handle one responsibly.
NEVER EVER go to fla.
You remember the old Jerky Boys phony phone call skit, 'Pablo Honey?' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV2rhZjhY14
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/no-charges-florida-man-fired-205557758.html
ALWAYS FIRE FIRST
The fact he was trained makes his irresponsibility even more egregious. In a sane state he would be charged with something like 'reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon' castle doctrine notwithstanding. You can bet if he'd shot at a cop who hadn't identified himself, he'd be facing charges. If he lived.
Well thank goodness you're not relying on people like him to defend the US – any more. 😁