SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[The Casualty]

But that's kind of my point in a way and I know how this is going to sound, but imho until most the baby boomers die out there isn't much to be done or win.

I mean this in a general sense to anyone who needs to hear it - please don't hang hope on the oldest generation dying to change things. I'm in my late 30's now, and I see how the gen X'ers and us later millenials are turning out. We'll have more Matt Gaetz's, Lauren Boebert's, Marjorie Taylor Greene's, and their followers to contend with long after the last boomer is gone. All the while the Overton Window will keep moving further to the right, and we'll be fighting to get back to where we are today.

[Endus]

See above? Seriously the only thing you guys want to say is ad hominem?

EDIT: I'll tell you right now. If an honest voter in America feels defeated, it sure as shit ain't the voters fault. Stop blaming him and maybe talk about how shit and rigged the system itself is.

That's not possible.

The "rigged" nature (it isn't, really) is entirely because of who actually votes and who doesn't. Expecting those who are already largely getting the system they're voting for to change things is completely irrational. Protect your own interests.

Even in cases where measures are put in place to bar your vote. If you're not taking the kind of action that civil rights advocates took during women's suffrage and race laws barring voting for blacks, then you're not fighting this issue, you're sitting there and accepting it.

[Endus]

You're from Canada right? Why don't you come down to Georgia and tell your average black voter how fair and totally not rigged the system is then.

They can put barriers between you and the polls to disincentivize you voting, but giving up and not voting means they win.

And in the USA, it's mostly about such barriers.

And, to repeat, if your response is to not vote when you're legally entitled to, then you're sitting there and accepting it. I get the whole making it awkward for poor people to vote, by not making it a federal holiday and reducing polling stations to increase travel/wait times, and all that, but you need to accept the personal costs.

The only way you're gonna have a shot at making the system fair is by making every effort to vote. All of you. You're given the opportunity to fight, and the battlefield may not be fair, but giving up and surrendering without even trying isn't a reasonable response.

[Fugus]

I have always and do vote since I was 18. Very bad assumption on your part.

When I say "You" I don't mean specifically YOU unless you are one of the ones refusing to vote. I mean it to be group inclusive with the rest of your generation and those with your views. I include my own generation with this as well.

No clue of your age but I turn 41 this June and the only ones who seem to want to vote also seem to be the ones you would least want their views in any position of power.

Quite literally, if you have a population of 50,000 voting age people with and 5,000 of them are pedophiles with 90% of them voting religiously while 40,000 of them are firmly against it but only 10% of them vote, don't be surprised if the age of consent gets lowered to 5 years old. And I am not exaggerating on it as much as you think considering that 13 states have no minimum age for marriage licenses and have issued them to girls as young as 12 whom that adult can now legally do whatever he wants to her so long as it isn't recorded.

So, you need to vote, you need to get your friends to vote, and the moment they start complaining ask them if they voted and when they say they didn't tell them to shut the fuck up until they are willing to vote to do something about it but they have no right to complain if they aren't willing to do something about it and to stop expecting enough other people to vote to bail them out for their apathy.

[The Casualty]

Not even close, no. Why do you think the Matt Gaet'z and MGTs exist in the first place? Who are they trying to please?

They exist because people like them have always existed. There will be zoomers like them as well. They are trying to please themselves and get power, and it is coincidental that they support Trump. With him and his supporters, they get to say the quiet parts out loud. But make no mistake, without him and the old guard facilitating them, they would still be garbage and still be trying to do all those same things. They'd just latch onto people like Ron Desantis who is in his early 40's. Trump's rallies weren't all full of octo/septuagenarians. Things do not get better by sitting and waiting out the clock.

[Lynarii]

You're from Canada right? Why don't you come down to Georgia and tell your average black voter how fair and totally not rigged the system is then.

The thing is, the apathy and the fatalism that you're espousing, that's an intentional thing that the corrupt are trying to push. Promoting it is working for them and their goals. We're not saying that it is an easy thing to fight against, the barriers and the apathy and the difficulties are things that have been built up brick by brick for generations, and it's nothing if not an imposing wall to stare at and think "That's what is in my way??"

But they wouldn't have needed to put so much effort into building that wall if it wasn't important to them. If they weren't legitimately threatened by the idea of people actually voting and filling their civic duties. Frankly, they wouldn't spend so much time and money trying to keep people down if those people never had the power to rise in the first place. The mere fact that they have to go to the lengths that they do to prevent people from voting demonstrates a very real fear of the actual power that is in play if those people make it to the polls.

[Fugus]

Not even close, no. Why do you think the Matt Gaet'z and MGTs exist in the first place? Who are they trying to please?

Why do they exist? Because out of over 8 billion people fuck ups like this are bound to be in the bunch by just the laws of probability.

Why do they get elected? Because the idiots who support them vote religiously while those against them do not. These are younger people marketing themselves to the older racists and religious zealots and cult members whom are coming out to vote. If I remember correctly MTG got in because she ran unopposed so she was in before a single vote was even cast.

How do you get them out? Out vote the zealots who are pushing for them in large enough numbers that they can't tip the scales.

[Twdft]

But again, she did win the popular vote. But voting is secondary to corruption and rigging the system.

Trump 62 million votes
Clinton 65 million votes
eligible voters who did not vote at all: 93 million

Y'all could even have had another person be president without any Clinton/Trump voter changing their mind.

[VMSmith]

If an honest voter in America feels defeated, it sure as shit ain't the voters fault.

Well, we certainly can't blame the candidates for not appealing to people, or not actually accomplishing what people would like to see done once they do get voted in, right?

[Fugus]

I was more meaning the exact demographic, mostly old white people. That demographic won't be around too much longer. And I'm 35 since you asked. Hell I can finally run for president now maybe that's the answer to get the changes I want lol.

@Endus and @Lynarii I understand your message and what you're saying. And I know you are both right, but being right isn't enough obviously. And it's also because of what @Twdft gave for the 2016 example of the sheer amount of people that just don't vote. I can't control 93 million people so just waggling your finger at me saying "just vote" when I already do and have like I'm making any bit of difference when almost 100mil aren't voting at all, and those that do vote mostly do under false pretenses, assumptions or just plain stupid reasons.

When I was 15 I believed "every vote counts" and I have always voted in every presidential election I could, even when deployed. I tried to partake in state elections when possible, but moving around a lot made that hard so I can't claim I've done good there. But at 35 now I'm just like fk it I'm moving to Mexico this shit is broke and won't be fixed during my lifetime most likely.

As for why that demographic exists, a lot of that can be attributed that Rupert Murdock and Fox spending decades priming them to entertain this stuff. In the 90's I actually believed a lot of the right wing stuff myself until I started going to college for computers and started looking into actual Net Neutrality which was an issue long before Obama came into office and then start branching out from there learning stuff as I went.

Then you combine that with the racism that still is a huge issue now, far more than I even considered before Trump had them drop the mask. It is their bread and butter demographic when combined with religious people.

I personally didn't even vote myself until Sanders ran because it largely just felt like I was throwing my vote away regardless of which one I voted for because neither of them actually wanted to fix anything until he came along with proper policies and a record of practicing what he preached. But ever since watching how much the GOP lied under Obama and just how much damage they caused for their own gain along with learning how many things actually work which shows just how damaging their stuff is. Voting is a major thing to keep things going.

But understand why if feels like voting feels futile, it isn't that voting itself is futile, it's that too many just refuse to do it thinking things will magically fix themselves without their efforts or things are already doomed no matter which and just refuse to put in the efforts. They are their own worst enemies on this. If they just took the initiative things could be majorly better by now.

Think of it this why, why do you think they tried so hard to sideline Sanders? Why do you think when AOC won they tried to change their rules to keep more like her out? It isn't because those views weren't popular. It was because those aren't the views they like and largely only want to pay lip service to them without ever actually having to push for them many times. And they don't have any real faith in those voters coming out even if they wanted to because they historically never have, so they risk running off the more religiously reliable conservative voters for less faithful progressive and liberal ones creating a lose/lose for them.

If you kept voting and pushed enough to start doing the same, Sanders could have won, people like him and AOC could have gotten in all around the nation. All these views that they keep calling "Pie in the Sky" or god knows what else would be given real chances and looks and things could actually improve.

Hell, that "Hope and Change" is partly what got Obama elected, he just reneged on that part with the DNC largely having no issues with doing so because their age demographic never wanted it to begin with.

Easiest way to think about it, who are the politicians SUPPOSED to represent? The voters. Now, while they largely don't anymore with the GOP trying to marginalize the voters views as much as possible, the voters can still overrule them if they actually try because, while the GOP can put their thumbs on the scale, they haven't yet been able to fully break that scale yet and they know if they push it too far, the torches and pitchforks will start coming out except this time they won't be chanting "Blood and Soil" but instead will be going after the actual sources of their issues, namely THEM. They are trying their best to push and control it, but they have their limits and if you and the rest just start using the rights you have faster than they can remove your rights, you can remove them.

If you notice, this is basically the GOP struggling to hold onto every ounce of control they have because they know the moment they lose control enough that their fuckery is undone, they are done as a major party. The moment they lose Texas which is already turning deeper purple or Florida they are done. The moment they lose the ability to Gerrymander, they are done. They are pushing this because they can't keep control otherwise while the DNC has quite a few in it whom are honestly more like the GOP than they openly admit.

Once the GOP falls and the gerrymandering isn't enough, the nation will likely snap back to the left hard where the DNC will likely not like it where they will have their voters overwhelmingly pushing for the stuff they only wanted to talk about and them having to fight more challengers from their left in the primaries if not having their party split into the new, less extreme, conservative party against an actual left wing party or at least a less right wing one.

If it weren't for our 2 party system the GOP would have died a long time ago with the 2 party system being the main thing keeping it on life support now.

[Mihalik]

Quoting me directly and referring to me as 'you' sure seems like they were talking to me? lol

"Every vote counts" sure sounds good and makes me feel all tingly inside sure, but life experiences have just simply taught me differently. Look at wtf we are even dealing with now...in 2022. I'll say it again. You're vote doesn't mean shit for anything outside local stuff if you don't own a fortune 500 company first.

The fundamental problem is that if you don't go and vote the lunatics will take over the asylum.

It's bad now, what do you think it will look like once they take hold of both houses, the executive and the judiciary?

What will happen when the bureaucracy that barely held the line the last time is finally given it's mercy kill. When the Pentagon is run by someone like Michael Flynn, the FBI by a Steve Arpaio etc?

It's bad now, but you'll be in for a ride then. It's not just that, but what will you do when the US elections start looking like those in Hungary or worse, Russia. Journalists dying left and right, opposition leaders imprisoned etc?

[Kallisto]

Why do they exist? Because out of over 8 billion people fuck ups like this are bound to be in the bunch by just the laws of probability.

Why do they get elected? Because the idiots who support them vote religiously while those against them do not. These are younger people marketing themselves to the older racists and religious zealots and cult members whom are coming out to vote. If I remember correctly MTG got in because she ran unopposed so she was in before a single vote was even cast.

How do you get them out? Out vote the zealots who are pushing for them in large enough numbers that they can't tip the scales.

You're correct about MTG. Her Democrat opponent basically had to flee the state since Qanon supporters flooded him with death threats that he legit feared for his life and it also caused his divorce.

[Darththeo]

You're correct about MTG. Her Democrat opponent basically had to flee the state since Qanon supporters flooded him with death threats that he legit feared for his life and it also caused his divorce.

The guy withdrew because of his divorce and potential threat and relocating out of state.

He still got 77 thousand votes.

MTG saying she was "elected" when she effectively ran unopposed annoys me.

[Poopymonster]

You're correct about MTG. Her Democrat opponent basically had to flee the state since Qanon supporters flooded him with death threats that he legit feared for his life and it also caused his divorce.

And she's gonna keep riding the Qanon train like it's gonna pump her full of ̶d̶a̶d̶d̶y̶'̶s̶ Trump's acceptance.

[gondrin]

Well, at least one thing stopped being true. The person bringing forward the bill that would criminalize women getting abortions in Louisiana is withdrawing it because they amended the bill to remove the criminal part of it.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bi...a2e6f5061b72cf

After a nationwide backlash, Louisiana House Republicans on Thursday amended a bill to remove criminal penalties for women who have abortions, prompting the bill’s author to withdraw the measure.

House Bill 813, sponsored by Rep. Danny McCormick, R-Oil City, would have allowed anyone who received or administered an abortion to be charged with homicide, a crime that is punishable with life in prison.

But even some Republicans who had supported the bill earlier said they realized it went too far in making it a crime for women to have abortions. The amendment, which would have applied the criminal penalties only to abortion providers, passed 65-26.

McCormick opposed the changes and returned the bill to the calendar. It would require a two- thirds vote to bring it back for a floor vote, rendering it likely dead for the session.

The amendment would have made the bill similar to Senate Bill 342 by Sen. Katrina Jackson, D-Monroe, which is still live in the session.

The amendment approved by the House removed portions of McCormick’s bill that criminalized women who receive abortions. It also clarified that the bill would not have applied to ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages or contraceptives that take affect prior to when a pregnancy can be detected.

The language criminalizing those who receive abortions had been condemned by the state’s leading anti-abortion groups and by Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards, who has signed several anti-abortion bills.

“House Bill 813 is not a pro-life bill,” Edwards said in a statement. “In addition to the fact that this legislation is patently unconstitutional, this bill would criminalize the use of certain types of contraception, as well as parts of the in vitro fertilization process, and it could even serve as a barrier to life-saving medical treatment for a woman who is suffering a miscarriage. To suggest that a woman would be jailed for an abortion is simply absurd.”

Shortly after the House came into session, Rep. Tanner Magee, R-Houma and the Speaker Pro Tempore, called Republicans into a caucus meeting, where they stayed for about an hour.

When they returned, the House discussed several other alerts before House Speaker Clay Schexnayder was alerted to a suspicious unattended package outside the chamber. The building was evacuated amid concerns of a bomb threat.

The package was quickly deemed not a threat and business resumed less than an hour later.

After McCormick presented the bill, Rep. Alan Seabaugh, R-Shreveport, proposed an amendment co-authored by 36 other legislators.

Seabaugh, who had voted for the bill in committee, apologized for doing so and for not amending it then.

Discussion of the bill and the amendment yielded colorful debate.

Rep. Barry Ivey, R-Central, asked McCormick whether his bill would criminalize contraceptives, like IUDs, prompting a debate about whether an IUD is a contraceptive or an abortifacient.

Opponents of the bill have argued that the bill could have criminalized not only abortion procedures but many forms of birth control.

The bill states that “human life… should be equally protected from fertilization to natural death.” Many commonly used forms of birth control prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg.

Magee asked Seabaugh whether the language in the original bill could lead to the arrest of people who have previously had abortions, to which Seabaugh replied that it was possible.

McCormick said he opposed the amendment because it does away with “equal protection,” the idea that an unborn child should have the same rights as anybody else.

Once the amendment passed, McCormick pulled the bill.

[Fugus]

Well, at least one thing stopped being true. The person bringing forward the bill that would criminalize women getting abortions in Louisiana is withdrawing it because they amended the bill to remove the criminal part of it.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bi...a2e6f5061b72cf

The question becomes did he withdraw the bill because a similar one to his watered down bill was already in the pipes or did he withdraw it because it no longer treated abortion as homicide for the woman and allowed for birth control or was he so extreme that he withdrew it because it no longer caused the suffering of requiring them endure a still born or ectopic pregnancy.

Really sad when you can not answer that one for sure or even really remove any of the 3 possible options above considering the people involved.

[Ivanstone]

The question becomes did he withdraw the bill because a similar one to his watered down bill was already in the pipes or did he withdraw it because it no longer treated abortion as homicide for the woman and allowed for birth control or was he so extreme that he withdrew it because it no longer caused the suffering of requiring them endure a still born or ectopic pregnancy.

Really sad when you can not answer that one for sure or even really remove any of the 3 possible options above considering the people involved.

Louisiana still has a Dem governor. He's anti-choice but not likely an extremist about it. The GOP also doesn't have a supermajority in their House of Reps so a veto override isn't a guarantee.

[s_bushido]

Well, at least one thing stopped being true. The person bringing forward the bill that would criminalize women getting abortions in Louisiana is withdrawing it because they amended the bill to remove the criminal part of it.

Aw shucks. I thought we might finally have one in the "we actually believe abortion is murder and will punish it accordingly" column. Guess it's back to "we don't buy our own horseshit and simply want to use the charged language to get gullible morons to agree with us" for them.

[Katchii]

That's not possible.

The "rigged" nature (it isn't, really) is entirely because of who actually votes and who doesn't. Expecting those who are already largely getting the system they're voting for to change things is completely irrational. Protect your own interests.

Even in cases where measures are put in place to bar your vote. If you're not taking the kind of action that civil rights advocates took during women's suffrage and race laws barring voting for blacks, then you're not fighting this issue, you're sitting there and accepting it.

I'm not disagreeing with you here, but, these two sentiments seem a bit at odds or at least not complimentary.

You seem to be saying that the system is not rigged because it's the people who vote who decide things, so if things didn't go your way it's because not enough people that support it voted for it. That's 100% accurate.

But in your next sentence you discuss how your vote is barred in some places and that it's your fault if you don't fight for the right to vote. I don't disagree that you should fight for that right, but saying that the system isn't rigged while also accepting and discussing that some people are barred from voting seems weird.

That's exactly WHY the system is "rigged." The fact that some people have to fight for their right to vote while others don't means that it's rigged in favor of those who don't have to fight for their right to vote.

- - - Updated - - -

They can put barriers between you and the polls to disincentivize you voting, but giving up and not voting means they win.

And in the USA, it's mostly about such barriers.

And, to repeat, if your response is to not vote when you're legally entitled to, then you're sitting there and accepting it. I get the whole making it awkward for poor people to vote, by not making it a federal holiday and reducing polling stations to increase travel/wait times, and all that, but you need to accept the personal costs.

The only way you're gonna have a shot at making the system fair is by making every effort to vote. All of you. You're given the opportunity to fight, and the battlefield may not be fair, but giving up and surrendering without even trying isn't a reasonable response.

You're hand waving a lot of things away here, by saying it's your fault you don't vote and that you need to do anything you can to vote, when for some that implication is they lose their job or impacts their personal life in a profound way.

If it really was just as easy as having the gumption to get up and vote despite what people think, it wouldn't be such an issue. The problem is it has real consequences for some people who literally cannot vote due to their job circumstance. You've discussed before how being poor is not a choice (which I don't disagree with) and that there is truly no choice for some people to take whatever job they can get their hands on (which I also don't disagree with), but then you're here now saying that a person should be willing to "do whatever it takes" which MIGHT mean giving up that job to go vote and if they don't it's their fault if the vote doesn't go their way...it seems little disconnected.

[Endus]

I'm not disagreeing with you here, but, these two sentiments seem a bit at odds or at least not complimentary.

You seem to be saying that the system is not rigged because it's the people who vote who decide things, so if things didn't go your way it's because not enough people that support it voted for it. That's 100% accurate.

But in your next sentence you discuss how your vote is barred in some places and that it's your fault if you don't fight for the right to vote. I don't disagree that you should fight for that right, but saying that the system isn't rigged while also accepting and discussing that some people are barred from voting seems weird.

That's exactly WHY the system is "rigged." The fact that some people have to fight for their right to vote while others don't means that it's rigged in favor of those who don't have to fight for their right to vote.

Votes generally aren't barred, in the USA (some exceptions with ex-felons). They're just made more awkward to encourage people to not bother; fewer polling stations meaning longer lines and longer travel distances to reach them, for instance, or hoops to jump through to secure particular ID cards (for free; the ones that aren't get tossed as a poll tax) to identify yourself.

Those are bad things; they're not fair or reasonable. I'm not defending them. But they're also eminently surpassable to anyone who cares. Compare this to earlier eras, where people were flat-out denied votes, or had gangs of whites ready to beat any black who turned up to legally vote. Those battles were fought, so yeah, I kind of expect people today to fight too. Deal with the shit, cast your votes, and change the country. It's right there, right in front of you, and 90 million Americans just fuckin' say "nah, can't be arsed to try".

You're hand waving a lot of things away here, by saying it's your fault you don't vote and that you need to do anything you can to vote, when for some that implication is they lose their job or impacts their personal life in a profound way.

Living in a country where taking the time off to vote causes such issues is the result of those same people not voting. It doesn't have to be that way; here in Canada there's legal protections that mandate employers allow time off and such to go vote. And we've got higher voter turnout than the USA, largely as a result of such things. Not 100%, but a significant bump from 66% of the voting public (US) to about 76% in Canada.

The possibility of losing your job or some other personal impact is bad, but so was being assaulted. So was being spat on. That shit only changed because of people challenging that status quo and voting anyway. It's a battle. You need to fight. That might mean you get hurt, but you're already being crushed to death.

I'm not saying there won't be personal costs. I'm saying there are always personal costs to a fight. That doesn't mean it's not worth fighting.

If it really was just as easy as having the gumption to get up and vote despite what people think, it wouldn't be such an issue. The problem is it has real consequences for some people who literally cannot vote due to their job circumstance

The status quo, where women's basic bodily autonomy is about to be struck away by the Supreme Court, is also "real consequences". You're getting real consequences whether you vote or not.

Also; you can vote, regardless of your job circumstance. You might lose your job, but you can vote.

You've discussed before how being poor is not a choice (which I don't disagree with) and that there is truly no choice for some people to take whatever job they can get their hands on (which I also don't disagree with), but then you're here now saying that a person should be willing to "do whatever it takes" which MIGHT mean giving up that job to go vote and if they don't it's their fault if the vote doesn't go their way...it seems little disconnected.

I'm saying if someone breaks into your house and tries to steal your shit, and the government says it's okay for them to steal your shit, you should punch that fucker in the face.

They might punch you back.

But if you don't fight for your stuff, you're gonna lose your stuff, and your passivity in not resisting the status quo means you're complicit with and accept that status quo. You might get punched in the face. Hell, you might lose, and get punched in the face and lose your stuff anyway. But at least you'd have fought for it, rather than just sighed and said "that's just how it's got to be".

Yes, I disagree with the status quo. But the way to get meaningful and rapid change in that status quo is for non-voters to start fighting and voting. There's no disconnect; I'm not arguing it'll be easy or without consequence. But the alternative is just accepting being exploited and abused unjustly and without contest, and I think that's worse.