Abortion and the election
Updated by Bendintheriver
There have been some pretty big voter registration additions since the SC ruled abortion as a state side issue. The overwhelming majority have probably been young rat women. As I said months ago, it is a very big issue for many, but I didn't believe it would win an election for the rats. My point is, Reps could have done without the decision prior to the election. Just think about how apathetic the rats would have been without their signature issue driving voter registration drives. If Reps win, how much more of a landslide would this be? There are many rats who believe this is the only issue that matters. Screw the shitty economy, the violence, the massive drug trade across our open border. To many rats nothing else matters (another reason we can never let them be in control again). This is about taking over all of congress not just the House. Did the timing of the decision hurt the Rep chances in the Senate?
I am cautious about the vote today. I don't trust the West Coast and rat policy that they can continue to accept votes until November 15th. This morning I am reading all sorts of declarations by rat pols that the counting will not be done for several days. That is a recipe for cheating. If you recall in 2020, all of the states that had delayed results skewed at the last minute to only rat candidates. Not one Republican won a delayed decision in a tight race.
In PA they had large mail in vote counts before anyone even had a chance to see the disastrous debate by Fetterman. The debate was delayed until the last minute so that all the rat votes could come in prior to fetterman being revealed to be the fraud that he is. It was a stroke of genius by the rats. Not as amazing as shutting down free speech during the 2020 election but clever all the same.
There will be some disappointments, but the House should be comfortably Rep. My circle of political junkies are split down party lines on the Senate with one exception and that is my friend who still works in the Senate. He is a democrat but he feels the Senate goes Rep, or at least that is the sentiment on the hill. He called it for Trump the day before the election and he was on The Bitch's team so who knows.
Let's just hope that Reps take over both halls of congress because just owning the House does nothing but tie up whacko rat legislation.
I am cautious about the vote today. I don't trust the West Coast and rat policy that they can continue to accept votes until November 15th. This morning I am reading all sorts of declarations by rat pols that the counting will not be done for several days. That is a recipe for cheating. If you recall in 2020, all of the states that had delayed results skewed at the last minute to only rat candidates. Not one Republican won a delayed decision in a tight race.
In PA they had large mail in vote counts before anyone even had a chance to see the disastrous debate by Fetterman. The debate was delayed until the last minute so that all the rat votes could come in prior to fetterman being revealed to be the fraud that he is. It was a stroke of genius by the rats. Not as amazing as shutting down free speech during the 2020 election but clever all the same.
There will be some disappointments, but the House should be comfortably Rep. My circle of political junkies are split down party lines on the Senate with one exception and that is my friend who still works in the Senate. He is a democrat but he feels the Senate goes Rep, or at least that is the sentiment on the hill. He called it for Trump the day before the election and he was on The Bitch's team so who knows.
Let's just hope that Reps take over both halls of congress because just owning the House does nothing but tie up whacko rat legislation.
Comments
Sort by:
21 - 40 of
1022
Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
Updated by PurpleThrobber
Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.The argument is bullet proof. Abortion is killing a biological fetus. The realty is that's not going to be mandated either across all states or at the federal level in mine, your or your kids' lifetims.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
So one can die on the sword of Yes or No and be forced to watch as full term abortions are performed when the other side triumphs. Or one can put some reasonable fences around the barbarism at, say, 15 weeks and then win hearts and minds.
Me and God will work that out at the pearly gates.
Updated by creepycoug
Person.Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.The argument is bullet proof. Abortion is killing a biological fetus. The realty is that's not going to be mandated either across all states or at the federal level in mine, your or your kids' lifetims.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
So one can die on the sword of Yes or No and be forced to watch as full term abortions are performed when the other side triumphs. Or one can put some reasonable fences around the barbarism at, say, 15 weeks and then win hearts and minds.
Me and God will work that out at the pearly gates.
Fair enough, but given the nature of the particularly misunderstand of abortion, it's set up as a government overreach matter, and that doesn't bode well for elections, which is what this place cares about.
That's all I'm saying. The way the issue has been framed, it should surprise nobody that people got out and voted on it as an issue.
Because it is set up as an election issue, the more reasonable approach is to get it OFF the agenda as an election issue and find a compromised solution.Person.Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.The argument is bullet proof. Abortion is killing a biological fetus. The realty is that's not going to be mandated either across all states or at the federal level in mine, your or your kids' lifetims.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
So one can die on the sword of Yes or No and be forced to watch as full term abortions are performed when the other side triumphs. Or one can put some reasonable fences around the barbarism at, say, 15 weeks and then win hearts and minds.
Me and God will work that out at the pearly gates.
Fair enough, but given the nature of the particularly misunderstand of abortion, it's set up as a government overreach matter, and that doesn't bode well for elections, which is what this place cares about.
That's all I'm saying. The way the issue has been framed, it should surprise nobody that people got out and voted on it as an issue.
But there's no grift in that.
Abortion was legal before Roe v Wade and is still legal
The GOP ran for 50 years on the decision being an over reach and a right to privacy that doesn't exist. Covid actually proved that there is no right to bodily privacy after street cameras and the rest proved there is no EXPECTATION of privacy in most places
It was theoretical or 50 years. The Christian revival of the 80's latched on to the GOP to change the court and the law. The pro death crowd latched on to the democrats to protect the right to choose death. Moderates said kill to a point then stop at 3 months - the majority view allegedly
No one really thought it would ever change anyway. The Supremes are loathe to change rulings. The fact that it changed with TRUMP judges after the left was already insane was a tipping point
It's like gun control. Nothing will really happen but if it did the GOP would win elections for years
The fact that states like Washington and Patti Murray ran on abortion when it isn't going anywhere is an indictment of the intelligence of voters but losers always say the other side is stupid.
Not sure how many elections can be based on protecting abortion but we'll find out
The GOP ran for 50 years on the decision being an over reach and a right to privacy that doesn't exist. Covid actually proved that there is no right to bodily privacy after street cameras and the rest proved there is no EXPECTATION of privacy in most places
It was theoretical or 50 years. The Christian revival of the 80's latched on to the GOP to change the court and the law. The pro death crowd latched on to the democrats to protect the right to choose death. Moderates said kill to a point then stop at 3 months - the majority view allegedly
No one really thought it would ever change anyway. The Supremes are loathe to change rulings. The fact that it changed with TRUMP judges after the left was already insane was a tipping point
It's like gun control. Nothing will really happen but if it did the GOP would win elections for years
The fact that states like Washington and Patti Murray ran on abortion when it isn't going anywhere is an indictment of the intelligence of voters but losers always say the other side is stupid.
Not sure how many elections can be based on protecting abortion but we'll find out
Abortion was legal before Roe v Wade and is still legalFetterman ran on a Dr. Oz is going to take away your right to an abortion theme.
The GOP ran for 50 years on the decision being an over reach and a right to privacy that doesn't exist. Covid actually proved that there is no right to bodily privacy after street cameras and the rest proved there is no EXPECTATION of privacy in most places
It was theoretical or 50 years. The Christian revival of the 80's latched on to the GOP to change the court and the law. The pro death crowd latched on to the democrats to protect the right to choose death. Moderates said kill to a point then stop at 3 months - the majority view allegedly
No one really thought it would ever change anyway. The Supremes are loathe to change rulings. The fact that it changed with TRUMP judges after the left was already insane was a tipping point
It's like gun control. Nothing will really happen but if it did the GOP would win elections for years
The fact that states like Washington and Patti Murray ran on abortion when it isn't going anywhere is an indictment of the intelligence of voters but losers always say the other side is stupid.
Not sure how many elections can be based on protecting abortion but we'll find out
Dr. Oz could no more do that than walk to the moon.
Stupid Philadelphians believed it.
Abortion was legal before Roe v Wade and is still legalI agree with all that. I'm just sayin' ... when you're right, you're right. And I'm right. Strategery? Of course, it's terrible for that for the reasons I gave: even if privacy is made up and expectations have been lowered, or should have been lowered, it doesn't get more private than what goes on between your legs. That's how the pink hats think of it, that's how most moderates think of it and that's how probably a majority of secular conservatives think of it as well. They are, all of them, grossly misinformed, but the aim of politics is rarely if ever to do the right thing. So now you're maybe a person in Texas, definitely a person in Alabama or Arkansas or wherever, and for sure not a person in Warshington. Some country we have here. And, no, I'm not leaving unless I want to.
The GOP ran for 50 years on the decision being an over reach and a right to privacy that doesn't exist. Covid actually proved that there is no right to bodily privacy after street cameras and the rest proved there is no EXPECTATION of privacy in most places
It was theoretical or 50 years. The Christian revival of the 80's latched on to the GOP to change the court and the law. The pro death crowd latched on to the democrats to protect the right to choose death. Moderates said kill to a point then stop at 3 months - the majority view allegedly
No one really thought it would ever change anyway. The Supremes are loathe to change rulings. The fact that it changed with TRUMP judges after the left was already insane was a tipping point
It's like gun control. Nothing will really happen but if it did the GOP would win elections for years
The fact that states like Washington and Patti Murray ran on abortion when it isn't going anywhere is an indictment of the intelligence of voters but losers always say the other side is stupid.
Not sure how many elections can be based on protecting abortion but we'll find out
Updated by greenblood
Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.I'm pro choice, but I'm not pro tax payer dollars being spent on it. In cases of rape, incest, or where medical complications show that there's a high chance of the mother dying from labor (Can't make somebody sacrifice their own life for another) then I'm cool with my money going to that. But outside of that, I consider it elective surgery, and in that case, either get insurance that will pay for it, or strong supporters should put their money where their mouths are, and give additional funds to Planned Parenthood or create a separate privately funded foundation.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
JFC. Elective surgery. Like a tit job. Nice.Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.I'm pro choice, but I'm not pro tax payer dollars being spent on it. In cases of rape, incest, or where medical complications show that there's a high chance of the mother dying from labor (Can't make somebody sacrifice their own life for another) then I'm cool with my money going to that. But outside of that, I consider it elective surgery, and in that case, either get insurance that will pay for it, or strong supporters should put their money where their mouths are, and give additional funds to Planned Parenthood or create a separate privately funded foundation.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
Well, like the pussy hats, at least you think you're right. You have that in common.
Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!
Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.I'll be your scape goat.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
But to be fair, I thought about it - a lot.
I determined the government has no place whatsoever in the room with me and my doctor.
Covid proved me right.
If you like your moral superiority complex, you can have it.
Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.
Think a little harder, because you're still standing on dead wrong. Privacy has nothing to do with it. Unless you think I can kill you in private just because I want to. Lunacy.Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.I'll be your scape goat.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
But to be fair, I thought about it - a lot.
I determined the government has no place whatsoever in the room with me and my doctor.
Covid proved me right.
If you like your moral superiority complex, you can have it.
You're going to get to your goal of zero abortion a lot faster picking off state by state than trying to get 50 of them to agree all at the same time.Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.
And isn't getting, say, 10 right out of the chute saving babies?
Good pointYou're going to get to your goal of zero abortion a lot faster picking off state by state than trying to get 50 of them to agree all at the same time.Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.
And isn't getting, say, 10 right out of the chute saving babies?
I agree completely but that isn't what we got.Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.
I don’t think I’m right or wrong. It’s called an opinion. You feel differently. That’s cool.JFC. Elective surgery. Like a tit job. Nice.Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.I'm pro choice, but I'm not pro tax payer dollars being spent on it. In cases of rape, incest, or where medical complications show that there's a high chance of the mother dying from labor (Can't make somebody sacrifice their own life for another) then I'm cool with my money going to that. But outside of that, I consider it elective surgery, and in that case, either get insurance that will pay for it, or strong supporters should put their money where their mouths are, and give additional funds to Planned Parenthood or create a separate privately funded foundation.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
Well, like the pussy hats, at least you think you're right. You have that in common.
Updated by creepycoug
While opinion are like assholes, in that everybody has one, some opinions are like dirty assholes. That's where I'd put "elective surgery". Christ, you may as well buy and hat and go march. That's worse than privacy and is devoid entirely of any intellectual rigor of thought.I don’t think I’m right or wrong. It’s called an opinion. You feel differently. That’s cool.JFC. Elective surgery. Like a tit job. Nice.Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.I'm pro choice, but I'm not pro tax payer dollars being spent on it. In cases of rape, incest, or where medical complications show that there's a high chance of the mother dying from labor (Can't make somebody sacrifice their own life for another) then I'm cool with my money going to that. But outside of that, I consider it elective surgery, and in that case, either get insurance that will pay for it, or strong supporters should put their money where their mouths are, and give additional funds to Planned Parenthood or create a separate privately funded foundation.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
Well, like the pussy hats, at least you think you're right. You have that in common.
Hey look, I have an opinion that I should be able to kill you at my election for any reason if done so in private. It's my opinion!
Losing but claiming moral superiority? Sure you aren't a Dem?That’s a Republican election virtue.
21 - 40 of
1022