Democrats Rage Against Supreme Court Threat To Abortion Rights

TPM Article Topics
#143

It’s like you think concurrent causation is superseding causation relieving one of moral responsibility for the foreseeable consequences of the actions of the only person one can control.

Insurance law. Thought so. Is this the cut & paste denial you send to customers filing a claim, e.g., the plane may have crashed into your house but your back deck isn’t covered in the crash b/c it was old and rotting before the crash.

A single or concurrent causation, it doesn’t matter which, bad decisions were made and HRC couldn’t own up to them. If you need to see the whining and victimhood responses from HRC after she lost, it’s out there. As to why she can’t admit to her mistakes, it might have something to do with her spoon-fed political path, as the president’s wife and then being gifted Moynihan’s NY senate seat. And her coronation as presidential candidate made it impossible to even consider the possibility of losing to a pig like Trump.

#144

I disagree. I’m from an all-college educated suburb of Boston and I know many non “sticks” women who vote strictly GOP in every election and would be thrilled if Roe is struck down.

I think it’s casually classist to believe only women in lower socio-economic climes are limiting their own right to choose.

I follow a very thoughtful woman on Twitter and she was predicting great protests and upheaval if Roe is struck down. I offer the possibility that it will be a far more limited response and millions of women won’t make much of a ruckus at all, which is scary and sad.

Oh, and if you think this will finally rouse younger 18-24 year-old voters to show up at the polls, you’d lose that bet too. I say it won’t.

#145

I see the blame Stein voters argument is back out in force.
Blame people who voted for someone they were genuinely excited about. Someone they believe in.

Not blame the party who ran the most unpopular candidate (for their party) in recent history. Not blame the people who said. “Hold your nose and vote for this person you don’t believe in because her family and friends control the party apparatus.”

No, it’s the fault of the people who voted their conscience and their beliefs.

And I voted for HRC.

#146

Yes, there are Catholics living in your city en masse, pun intended.

1 Like
#147

NO

Absolutely … show your support in the preliminaries - cheer … campaign … donate … be idealistic … shout for who ever you think is close to perfect …

But when it gets to the championship round - in the election process that this nation utilizes -

  • in hard cold reality - ultimately it comes down to a hard binary choice
    … it will be either “A” or “B” … and it will not be … “c”

  • You will get Chicken or Beef … if you order Lamb … you may really want “Lamb” … but you will NOT get it - you will get what ever the majority (sort of … electors & stuff) decided

… if you are totally OK with both choices - if you say I don’t have any preference at all between Chicken or Beef - then fine - your vote for Lamb doesn’t cause you to face consequences

… but if you looked at the two main choices and said … well, I can basically live with holding my nose and gagging down "beef " … but I have an intense and very, very toxic reaction to “chicken” and it could kill me … well then … HELL! when faced with making a vote - that for all practical purposes comes down to - hold your nose vs die … probably best not to opt out … best not to take a pass on casting a vote to optimize between the only two plausible outcomes. The democratic process of this nation involves scrutiny, pragmatism and sometimes compromise and finding the optimal choice among the plausible options …

#148

I get the argument / I voted for HRC -

But what the Dems did in 16 was say, “Hey, the Republicans are offering their voters spoiled beef. We’re offering you liver and onions - now thank us for it.” Guess what? No matter what you say, some people just can’t choke down liver and onions so they sought out a 3d option.

#149

But really … really … honestly … in hard cold facts … if somebody can grasp that it truly is “Liver and Onions” vs toxic - gonna kill you - spoiled beef … you will still have to some how try to live with the “liver and onions” (and I HATE liver - but it would not kill me) or deal with the toxic “gonna kill you”- spoiled beef

and that an idealist vote for a 3rd party might be a valid message to send if the contest was clearly clearly not at all in doubt … but that was not the case … and even then it is not wise because surprises happen.

also - other than superficial / stylistic / demeanor / impressions … what was so truly & substantively (facts & policy & over-arching political theory) … “LIVER AND ONIONS” about HRC?

She was not my favorite out of the entire field -and yes, she was weighed down with the tons of crap that the republicans had slung at her over the years … - but seriously, she was competent, she was experienced, she was & is fundamentally aligned with the general goals and objectives of the Democratic Party … she would have preserved the integrity of the Supreme Court, She would not have gutted the Department of State down to levels of total incompetence, she would not have gone to war against the environment, she would not have politicized the CDC & wiped out oversight of infectious disease monitoring … and on and on …

This whole thing that she somehow was just not “good enough” was a bunch of rubbish - it was like a self-destructive virus that infected portions of the Democratic Party - and probably persisted because general population did not fully appreciate the magnitude of Trump’s pathology.

Yes, this is all in retrospect … but here - in the very vivid “here & now” it is painfully obvious that a horrible horrible misfortune was visited upon this nation when - the stars misaligned and ushered a psychopath - Trump - into the Oval Office … and those who chose to withhold their vote - or vote symbolically for a fringe candidate did contribute to the result…
choices have consequences and those who say
"don’t look at me - I sat this one out " … or “I voted for my dream candidate”
… those folks actually participated in making a choice - and we all are facing the consequences

#150

Do you want to be “right” or win elections? Because after 2000 and 2016 we need to learn our lessons.

No coronations.
No candidates with the Clinton stink on them.
No damaged candidates - even if “it isn’t fair that the Republicans told lies” - if the lies stick, then they stick

Yes to expanding the map and not taking any votes for granted
Yes to candidates that resonate with a need of the voters - Hope and change in 08 - Decency and experience in 20
Yes to robust primaries were no one is the “wink wink wink” “nudge nudge” favorite
Yes to candidates who poll well and are well liked even by those who might ultimately not vote for them - we need at least 51% of the popular vote to win

#151

Sad AND true!

#152

OK … but politics is a funny weird dynamic game - the “best” person does not always come out on top - and all of these variables cannot be - never will be - controlled - and that isn’t going to change - - when it gets to the general election … it is a binary choice like it or not …

Note: there are some people in the Republican part who are essentially saying things on your list - but if Trump decides to run - they will be powerless to stop him.

ALSO - one of the other realities of all politics is that people will do what they feel like doing - and not do what they don’t feel like doing - so yes … candidates have to have appeal - have to resonate with the voters … and yes some voters will exercise their right to vote for a fringe candidate.

1 Like
#153

And while they may never accknowlege it, they will carry the shame of what they did to our nation to their graves…

1 Like
#154

Not as much shame as the Democrats for pushing a party establishment figure with a ton of negative baggage against Trump.

#155

Dems have a long-running I’d rather be “right” than win syndrome.

#156

What I am trying to figure out is how the United States Congress could pass an abortion bill that would pass constitutional muster.

#157

I don’t grok.

#158

Forcing women to bear children is just as much as if not more of an invasion of autonomy as forcing MAGA people to be vaccinated.

They are hypocrites of the worst order.

2 Likes
#159

Ten seconds on Google:

https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/do-campaign-visits-pay-off-evidence-from-the-2016-presidential-election/

The “vast commercial industry” in question would be the campaign management, consulting and polling industry. Do I need to prove that it exists too or have you heard of it?

1 Like
#160

However, the findings reported in this article indicate that whether either campaign holds live rallies and whether one holds more rallies than the other will probably have little or no impact on the election results at the state level. Campaign events may have other benefits such as energizing supporters and stimulating donations, but in 2016 they did not appear to have any effect on how well candidates did in the states in which they were held.

Larry Sabato’s Conclusion: “probably” and “did not appear”? Huh?

Do I need to prove that it exists too or have you heard of it?

You don’t have to bother.

#161

Dude. This is how social scientists always talk to the press to keep them from butchering and misrepresenting the findings of statistical analysis that, after all, is premised on inability to disprove the null hypothesis. But whatever.

#162

I have lived and worked in nations where abortion is illegal. It is a major contributor to maternal mortality.

Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available