SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[shimerra]

You stretch these things to make them seem ridiculous, but part of running for political office is portraying a desirable image, visiting people to at least make it seem like you give a shit about them, kissing babies, and just generally pandering the shit out of everyone you can. This is part of the game, you can't avoid it, at least not if you want to win. And you can moan and be unhappy about it all you want but people are still people and these are the things that matter to more than enough people to make a difference. Complaining about it is not going to make it stop being a thing.

So, instead, hold accountable the politician who refused to do those things despite how important they felt it was for them to win. Clinton hobbled herself out of hubris, you can't blame people for recognizing that hubris and rejecting it.

- - - Updated - - -



Oh, yeah, forgot this. The "Blame Bernie" crowd. It was all Bernie Sanders fault that Clinton lost, had nothing to do with her at all.

Sure can blame people when the other option was Donald J Trump who before the election we knew for sure 1 and probably 2 supreme court justice notations. That's outside of the hundreds Trump and McConnel packed the lower courts with. Life time appointments 100% avoidable with any dem president. Not to mention the hundreds of executive orders that were outright stupid and harmful, blatant corruption and incompetent nominations, and just overall pissing off our friends and allies left and right. You want to talk about hubris? Not voting for someone who will be vastly more likely to block policies you don't like and pass ones you do and is perfectly qualified for the job because you can't imagine having a bear with them/going to the movies seems like textbook hubris. And given that Trump could probably be diagnosed as narcassitic, definitely hubris adjacent, and not voting for Hillary means he's more likely to win I'd say your choice of words was poor.

And Hillary was never as undesirable as half ya'll made her out to be. But to anyone who thought about voting Bernie or was slightly left leaning Trump was not just undesirable. He was passing a kidney stone every day of your life levels of undesirable compared to Hillary. Hence the justified annoyance/criticism for those who avoided voting for Hillary not because of policy but because of 2 year old nonsense like "likeability". That exact stupidity is why the person who is best for the job doesn't get elected and we end up with the best suck ups. And while Hillary failed to play around that bit of human nature and should be blamed for that there is zero issues with also blaming the people stupid enough to think like that and vote according to those thoughts. You w

She'd have won in any other system but she knew the rules and unfortunately pandering to morons wasn't her strongest point and it's a requirement for politicians to be elected you seem in favor of.


I don't blame Bernie. Nor do most of us based on what I read on these forums. Guy did his best and lost in a race that honestly was always going to be uphill for him and no matter what you think of him you can't deny he at least acts on what he feels is best for his voters and objectively pushed the party a bit left. Would have happily voted for him just as I did Hillary and Biden. I blame the idiots who stayed home because they were butt hurt and had to lie to themselves that Bernie who has now lost to the "worst candidates ever" twice was going to be more electable in a country where even the supposed left wing party screams bloody murder when they hear the word socialism and decided not voting, or in rare cases voting for Trump out of spite, was the better choice. And then now as those same people freak out as conservatives do exactly what anyone who can zip their own pants without help knew they'd do I've got every right to call out the stupidity of their decision making process about who to vote for.

[uuuhname]

Here's the link again - https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/54581...p-survey-finds

12% of them.

.... and you you didn't think that proves my point?

[Edge-]

.... and you you didn't think that proves my point?

Depends on where they lived, actually. Because yeah, that could have been the difference between states like WI and PA and a few others that Trump narrowly won by less than 1-2% or less.

We can discuss Hillary's failure to campaign in some of those states for sure, but the way voting and the EC works, depending on where those folks lived they could have absolutely "made the difference".

But again, it's not "all" on them, nobody is saying that.

[masterhorus8]

Depends on where they lived, actually. Because yeah, that could have been the difference between states like WI and PA and a few others that Trump narrowly won by less than 1-2% or less.

We can discuss Hillary's failure to campaign in some of those states for sure, but the way voting and the EC works, depending on where those folks lived they could have absolutely "made the difference".

But again, it's not "all" on them, nobody is saying that.

I think uuuhname is saying that there were only 41.66 Bernie voters.

[Flurryfang]

They are supposed to fail and perish... or at least they are supposed to be someone else's problem.

That is the mindset of the majority of them... they do not care and if they fall that's less of "them" in our great society. It's a fairly selfish mindset.

This world would be a better place if we had less people with this mindset sadly.

Thats the thing, i never understood this view point, that many pro-life people have, that they won't support child-care and bills giving money to single/young mothers.

Like, its nearly the exact same thing as providing an abortion - its about improving the situation, whether it is removing the problem or making it easier to manage.

[Paranoid Android]

Yep this is the Dems.

Nancy Pelosi just sent out her first email fundraising off the decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

[Captain N]

Thats the thing, i never understood this view point, that many pro-life people have, that they won't support child-care and bills giving money to single/young mothers.

Like, its nearly the exact same thing as providing an abortion - its about improving the situation, whether it is removing the problem or making it easier to manage.

Because its never been about life. It's always been about control. Control over anything that isn't straight, white, and male.

[uuuhname]

Yep this is the Dems.

Nancy Pelosi just sent out her first email fundraising off the decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

oh yeah, the Dems are going to rack in soooo much money doing nothing off the back of this.

[Paranoid Android]

oh yeah, the Dems are going to rack in soooo much money doing nothing off the back of this.

I always give Trump and Republicans shit for the Grift. Well here is the Dems.

[Endus]

Yep this is the Dems.

Nancy Pelosi just sent out her first email fundraising off the decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

"This is an EMERGENCY. Please give us money so we can talk about maybe trying to get around to thinking about potential solutions in 6 months or so. If we're lucky."

This is the problem with Democrats in general. You're in Congress right now. Fix it now.

"Oh, but the Senate . . . " Okay, if that's a problem, why do you think you'll be able to do shit in 6 months after the Mid-terms.?

Stop admitting that you're toothless and ineffective, and start doing the bare fuckin' minimum of what your job entails, you insufferable leech.

[jonnysensible]

Here is the hard charging Dems!








Always passively fighting for us and not doing shit. I'm talking about this is a weak as you can look people.

Did this or the poem work I haven't checked yet

[D Luniz]

I just fundamentally don't understand the whole "B-b-b-b-but Hillary didn't suck me off enough personally so I didn't vote for her."

I fully recognize I'm about 2000% a pragmatic voter and idealistic voters exist, but I just don't understand the people who think we can afford idealism when so much is at stake. Just don't get it.

they know that in the end, the hammer wont come down on them directly
like the Texas GOP wanting to repeal the (already badly damaged) Civil Rights Act
it wont be them losing their rights, their life will stay the same most likely, so in the end, its all just a thought exercise for them

[jonnysensible]

dems had months to prepare for this its good too see some of them have been busy getting ready in that time

https://twitter.com/RepAndyLevin/sta...05965996138496

[D Luniz]

Children aren't being killed. Unless we're talking about inside schools, in which case yes, they're being killed.

or poisoned formula, or from a lack of pre and post natal care, food insecurity, lax environmental enforcement, etc etc etc

[tehdang]

I mean, if you're just gonna sit here continuing to lie in bad faith, go for it.

Because that's not what happened at all, and we all know if. And you know it. But you're still choosing to lie about McConnell's hypocritical actions.

I kind of understand people that shame anyone who stays home instead of voting for a candidate they dislike horribly. I don’t fully understand someone that thinks horrible candidates can’t be discussed in good faith. You just have to expand your perspective.

Also, McConnell? Is this some juvenile “every post must be about whatever issue I’m most concerned with today?”

[Draco-Onis]

dems had months to prepare for this

Correction they had 50 years to prepare for this but decided to sit on their asses.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, McConnell? Is this some juvenile “every post must be about whatever issue I’m most concerned with today?”

The next part he will go democrats would have totally stolen those SCOTUS appointments if they were in McConnell shoes bath faith line.

[Lenonis]

it's not like evangelicals are going to just stop existing in the next 30 years.

No, but a lot of them will die off and the younger generation isn't tending towards those same levels of religious extremism. Evangelicals as a political force are a dying breed.

oh god absolutely they are - the opinion given by thomas on this ruling said that they should (would) reconsider the precedent on rulings they protect being gay from being illegal, so in the next 30 years there will absolutely be efforts to return to making homosexuality a crime.

That's chicken little levels of absurd. The support for gay marriage has skyrocketed over the last 20 years MUCH less making homosexuality a crime. I mean are you serious here? You think in 30 years we're going to criminalize homosexuality? C'mon.

[uuuhname]

Correction they had 50 years to prepare for this but decided to sit on their asses.

oh yeah, remember when Obama made that promise when he came into office? what ever happened with that?

it's almost like 2016 is just an easy excuse for certain people to lazily pin the blame for their chosen political parties abject failures on.

[Edge-]

dems had months to prepare for this its good too see some of them have been busy getting ready in that time

https://twitter.com/RepAndyLevin/sta...05965996138496

Jesus tap dancing christ on a stick. This is less than an hour old. Fuckin read the room bro, what the fucking fuck. Stop showing us your progress on your yoga attempts to self-felate.

[Crissi]

Jesus tap dancing christ on a stick. This is less than an hour old. Fuckin read the room bro, what the fucking fuck. Stop showing us your progress on your yoga attempts to self-felate.

....*facepalm* (at the dude, not you obv)