Truly, we are afforded kindness for our slavish devotion to the lesser of two evils.
Idaho conservatives are trying to set the date of life beginning *way* before conception
- Thread starter TheMysteriousGX
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Truly, we are afforded kindness for our slavish devotion to the lesser of two evils.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,512
- 4,288
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
We're OK with women who perpetrate making money from them, in the form of ~220 monthly installments paid by the victim. So clearly the moneymaking isn't a problem...
It's an SB8-style bill, except that only the family of the potential child is allowed to sue over it. There is an exception that says in cases of rape the rapist isn't allowed to sue, but no such exception for the rapists family.
Still waiting for a blue state to write an SB8 style bill that's obviously unconstitutional in a way Republicans would strongly oppose, fight it with their own arguments why they don't have standing, and use how the Republicans finally kill it as a roadmap to how to attack SB8-style bills using that one as precedent.
Is a vasectomy an abortion? Or did they also ban adult women being sterilized in there somewhere? Because presumably you aren't talking about vasectomies for children as being a thing you'd generally support?
Ironically once they can express a position on whether or not they want to live, we treat them wishing to no longer live as a serious problem, rather than a morally neutral thing that should be meaningless (aka progressive view on abortion).
I'd like to introduce you to the asshole from my state, Mr Joe Manchin.
Yep. I still say they are controlled opposition, both sides paid for from the same coffers and all.
They provide not being Republicans, and that's all it takes sometimes.
Republicans vote out of party loyalty and a sense of civic duty.
Democrats vote out of fear of Republicans.
Democrats win when there's enough fear to rouse enough of their voters to actually go vote.
If Dems could animate their voters without relying on fear of the other party as a sole/primary motivator, they'd win most elections nationwide (pretty sure they'd still lose Wyoming, though).
Well sometimes "something" is the individual mandate or toppling Libya, so "something" isn't always good. I want things I think are good.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,512
- 4,288
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
If no one can decide on something good for dinner then you end up going hungry.
This isn't dinner, this is politics. If your understanding of politics is that shallow and disconnected from reality, you have no business lecturing anybody on anything.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,512
- 4,288
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
That's so funny, I was about to say your understanding of politics is shallow and disconnected from reality. Cause right now, we have to take what the voters give us, shitting all the time on the party that best represents you doesn't help much. You want to shit more on the opposing party and just push yours to better represent you.
You realize that's what I (and many others) are doing right? You're the one who doesn't do that. You're the one that supports a party when it doesn't support you. And you have literally no clue on how to push a party to better represent you. You'll vote for a hundred Manchins and then complain when others say they don't want that. And you have exactly 2 positions. Platitudes and "but republicans". You'll say "but republicans" even if the democrats shoot themselves in the foot 100% on their own with literally no republican help.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,512
- 4,288
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Are you? Cause it sounds like you are just shitting on the democratic party as a whole and implying that they are totally worthless, which just give republicans a better image. Unless you have a few million people in certain strategic locations, you are limited to D or R, there is no third choice on a national level.
I don't mind the democratic infighting since it lets me know that if we did have a one party state under them, we would be ok. Politics isn't about only getting your way, its supposed to be a give and take of a good negotiation. We have one party that has said "fuck it" and wants to make it just them getting their way and the other is trying to govern and pass progressive legislation and has to deal with half the people who are of the "fuck it" variety and a few people on their side that don't agree with how they are trying to do it.
You want to know what's funny, republicans have the same issues also, but they are good at ignoring them and moving on so it looks like they have party unity. They didn't harp much on the failed repeal of the ACA, they ignored the fail of the wall. They are quick to move on from failures and pretend they are successes and moving on to shit on democrats. Seems like the left loves to make itself look bad and never forget the failures while ignoring the successes.
I don't know why anyone would think that.
Looks at the last year of broken promises, continuations of Trump policies, and mountains of unforced errors.
What you have is a growing left flank who will actually try to accomplish goals instead of floundering uselessly. It's the centrists who are holding things up and saying "fuck it". I would think the infrastructure bill/BBB would have illustrated exactly which wing of the party is the problem here.
Hilariously rich when the center is still blaming the left for losing elections in their own districts. Hillary is the queen of not letting shit go. Centrists are leaving politics over the left holding them to campaign promises, but somehow it's never centrists fault when they do dumb shit or throw their toys in a hissy fit. And it's always the actual politicians who do this, not internet randos.
if their concern is "the potential to give life to another generation" then vasectomies should be a concern. Considering they already believe marriage is about making a family, it should track that they would be against marriage for people who have had vasectomies. But obviously they don't because just like the same sex marriage debate, their issue isn't actually family values, it's oppressing LGBT people.
Now hang on there... make the "vasectomies" reversible, and non-invasive, and done at birth so as to minimise trauma? Could be a good policy for a future earth.
Yes, that's a funny thing about right wing parties. It might be as brutal a knife fight as anywhere up at the top, but once the new dictator is in they're very good at falling in line (or at least seeming to) behind the new authority.
That, I guess, is one of the things about respecting authoritah, whereas the left thinks they all have a say and shit festers in public view forever.
Well, they'll try.
The bigger question is whether they will.
Firstly, I cannot help but feel that a lot of the further left underweigh just how much there is a deep-seated concern about Commienazis in middle America, and how much people suddenly go cold at the reality of things like tax rises even if they answer polls saying they're okay with them (from the safety of it not going to happen).
Secondly, if they do overcome the hoodoo and get elected, I suspect they'll then run smack bang face first into the reality of the US political system and find themselves just as legislatively impotent and paralysed as everyone else is who gets elected, because that's the way the US system works.
But you only truly find out when you get there. I'm all for giving them a shot: someone needs to do something differently, and infinitely better progressives than the growing, authoritarian, nationalist and unhinged Republican wing that Trump has fully unleashed.
Even floundering uselessly is better (or not as bad as) actively making things worse, so there's that.
They have been winning. That's the dirty little secret is that every election cycle now centrists lose seats while the progressive wing gains seats. Yes, we'll see what happens when they're big enough to call shots, but the idea that they're unpalatable is a load of hokum. Running on things like M4A and the Green New Deal is actually more electable than stolid half-assed centrism, even in swing districts. Even if people want to cry about electability, centrism is still the wrong answer.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,512
- 4,288
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Unless they have big enough numbers to overcome that 50% needed for some legislation and the 60% needed to break a filibuster then it doesn't really matter. Maybe they will be good at dealing, but if you have a party that just likes to kill any legislation like the republicans currently do, then good luck. You could remove the filibuster but one party wont remain in power forever and when the switch happens then republicans can pretty much do what they want with impunity. You also have to realize that doing nothing and making it look like a good thing is something republicans are pretty good at doing, especially since they are kinda on the small government bandwagon or at least making it seem like it.
Shame democrats are trying to play that game too, except it backfires horribly for them. Double shame that we can never talk about why democrats are a losing party because whenever a hint of introspection comes up, "but republicans".