chapotraphouse
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
and what is she DOING about that concern? cheerleading for the people who did jack shit about it for the last forty years and literally did NOTHING when Roe went down on their watch even when the news was leaked months in advance for damage control
Honest question, am I being too cynical in thinking the Dems are running on abortion rights this time purely as a way to juice turnout, or did Roe getting overturned and their base's reaction to it actually change it into being a priority? I know they had half a fuckin' century to "try" and pass abortion rights as law and passed on it every time including a supermajority in Obama's first term where the Obungler said "it wasn't a priority," but I feel like the liberal electoral base for the Dems was shocked and pissed by SCOTUS striking down Roe in a way that the party was unprepared for.
I know a Harris administration won't have a Senate supermajority or House majority most likely so it's all hypotheticals and SCOTUS or the parliamentarian or some other bullshit would block it if they did, but I feel like liberals finally realized how fucked they are trying to accomplish anything they care about now that the SCOTUS is fucked for decades with no plans of impeaching Thomas/Alito/Kavanaugh or packing the court. The Dem's base is desperate to "get back to normal" on reproductive rights, and the party has no real path to accomplishing that. I know a decent chunk of libs will be satiated by just having "vote harderer" scolded at them and having candidates just say "I support a woman's right to choose," but a lot of them are pissed that the Biden admin did jack shit trying to fight SCOTUS other than putting out statements saying they disagreed with the ruling. Is reinstating Roe through federal legislation actually something they're gonna take seriously moving forward, or is it just the new shiny football for their voters to try to kick?
purely as a way to juice turnout
That's a bingo.
The dems are boldly lying about Roe and it's why I phrased my title like I did. That woman is at the goddamned convention so she's politically plugged into the democratic party and yet she's already mentally accepted decades of inaction.
The only way to restore Roe is to first cripple the power of the GOP justices. If the dems ignore that reality - then restoring Roe is DOA right now. Imagine the dems win in the election and actually pass a law. After that the GOP justices will simply say it's unconstitional. And that's that. The same is true for any congressional efforts to try to "reform" the supreme court. GOP justices can say anything they don't like is unconstitional.
Without radical judicial reform and/or packing the court everything the dems are saying about the court and Roe is a lie. Plus the GOP justices gave the president extraordinary powers for "official acts". But if Harris becomes president - she surely won't use that power to streamroll over the GOP justices or for any other purpose. All of this makes me insane.
At this point I don't understand how people believe anything any politician says they're going to do. I just don't understand how it's possible to keep charlie browning this shit.
The very word "Trump" is a liberal thought terminating cliché. This joke of a "ban" is the only policy or position Kamala has made if you don't count the empty "Restore Roe!" posturing. Entirely unlike Biden - Kamala's team realized that she, Walz, or their proxies simply need to say "Trump" about every 30 seconds and the libs will be triggered with anger, worry and fear. So - no actual positions or policies need to be put forth to get their base to vote. And Kamala's team figures many independents and some republicans are triggered by "Trump" in the same way.
Her phrasing is so liberal. She could have said "My grandchildren, granddaughters, must have the same rights..."
subconsciously liberals almost always seem to avoid language that seems too "forceful," even when it comes to basic human rights. insisting on any means is authoritarian and something the trumpies do
they must vote, pray, and compromise (their dignity). when it doesn't work out, they blame disillusioned non-voters and go into waiting for the next election, where they'll proudly choose the oligarchs that promise stagnation over regression every 2 years for the rest of their lives and wonder why everything keeps getting worse
your comment reminded me of this passage
The question of “free press” and “free speech” is not separable from the question of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie versus the dictatorship of the proletariat. The idea of “political plurality” as such turns out to be the negation of the possibility of achieving any kind of truth in the realm of politics, it reduces all historical and value claims to the rank of mere opinion. And of course, so long as someone’s political convictions are mere opinion, they won’t rise to defend them. And so the liberal state remains the dictatorial organ of the bourgeoisie, with roads being built or legislation being passed only as commanded by the interests of capital, completely disregarding the interests of workers. Under regimes where political plurality is falsely upheld as a supreme virtue, the very notion of asserting oneself as possessing a truth appears aggressive and “authoritarian.”
My chud parents say the same thing. And honestly I have no idea what they mean.
These ppl only care about the right to bare arms. And if you tell them that the right to privacy is gone, they'll say something about Tik Tok and then forget it in ten minutes.
Boomers have convinced me we need to establish a maximum voting age
"My biggest concern is whether the football will still be there when I run at it to kick it."
imo the reason they decided to ban abortion is because they're well aware they're going to need a lot more babies and soon. why? probably because a giant war is nearing and it's gonna hurt when hundreds of thousands to millions of americans die and there's no one coming up to replace them.
Grandchildren's granddaughters? Or is grandchildren for the boys and granddaughters are separate and not considered grandchildren?
I think the gist is "My grandchildren - especially my granddaughters - ..."
oh it makes sense when you put it that way, now i feel dumb