Just when the dems have some momentum with the unpopular abortion ruling,
they blow it with unpopular student loan forgiveness.
I think you may be seeing a small segment. As unpopular as it is with some, it probably is very popular with others. I don't think it was necessarily the best approach, but I also don't think trillions in tax breaks to billionaires and profitable corporations was very smart. If we are going down a rabbit hole of debt, let's give some $s to people who aren't already hoarding a stash and see if they spend it. The economy is all about the movement of money. Billionaires have a pretty spotty record so far, let's stop repeating the mistakes of reaganomics that have led us here.
Just when the dems have some momentum with the unpopular abortion ruling,
they blow it with unpopular student loan forgiveness.
Not unpopular to the young hip college age voters, although they were likely Democratic-leaning to start.
It's just unpopular with the big money folks, and people who think that national cooperation, that a rising tide floats all boats, is a crime.
I am open to infanticide and am not willing to morally condemn the Inuit, Spartans and others who conducted the practice. Abortion should be a choice between the woman and her professional medical advisors, nobody else. It should be enshrined in law passed by a legislative assembly or assemblies.
My point here is that the journalist is trying to shoehorn a national debate into a local political outcome with no substantive evidence other than innuendo.
Sure, there is some conjecture there, but it is an opinion piece. From what I understand, he far outperformed what the polls said. There is other anecdotal evidence as well. The straight up vote in Kansas. The number of women registering to vote far out pacing men.
Itâs interesting the number of conservatives that are against contraception as well as abortion. Either they donât understand what contraception is or they largely believe women to be breeding stock. It will be interesting to see how the vote goes in Congress affirming universal access to contraception.
update; it appears that vote already happened in the House
The vote was 228-195, with eight Republicans joining every Democrat in voting in favor. All 195 "no" votes came from Republicans.
So what is the reasoning for that? I don't think they are all Catholics.
I am open to infanticide and am not willing to morally condemn the Inuit, Spartans and others who conducted the practice. Abortion should be a choice between the woman and her professional medical advisors, nobody else. It should be enshrined in law passed by a legislative assembly or assemblies.
My point here is that the journalist is trying to shoehorn a national debate into a local political outcome with no substantive evidence other than innuendo.
Talk about trying to jam an election outcome into a national political narrative that is popular with one partisan group..... This reminds me of western journalists trying to spin the Arab Spring into some kind of pro-democracy movement when it was really about cheap subsidized food and fuel.
Do we have polling for this riding before the Supreme Court justices struck down Roe vs. Wade? Or since the riding err district voted for Biden?
In some states, American Women are Free? In others their bodies and movements are watched by the State? That's easily dismissed, ...
When you're not a woman.
Indeed, let's speak of Unlawful Search and Seizure. For every single woman living in the Dysfunctional States of America, HER BODY HAS JUST BECOME THE PROPERTY OF 13 STATES. Legislation has been passed based on personal BELIEF. Not Science.
NOT allowed to make her own personal choices about her own body, she has no future. Economic or otherwise.
As long as this Country dismisses the Death Penalty, War and School Shooting Massacres it has zero credibility implying it values Life. This is just an indulgence in SELECTIVE MORALITY.
Talk about trying to jam an election outcome into a national political narrative that is popular with one partisan group..... This reminds me of western journalists trying to spin the Arab Spring into some kind of pro-democracy movement when it was really about cheap subsidized food and fuel.
Do we have polling for this riding before the Supreme Court justices struck down Roe vs. Wade? Or since the riding err district voted for Biden?
Barry Morphew told law enforcement he figured âall these other guys are cheatingâ and that his wife Suzanne would have voted for Trump anyway, according to an affidavit acquired by KKTV Colorado.
That's it. Everyone else cheats, so I might as well to offset it.
Other people voted down that good (not great) song so I'm gonna give it a ten to offset them.
I don't want all those brownies but other people might take them so I should take them all to make sure I have enough.
Everyone else has a gun, so I'm gonna need one or more to defend myself.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Jul 23, 2022 - 2:12pm
Steely_D wrote:
Since the only objective proof of voter fraud I've seen in the past years has ALL been Republican in nature - and even that is a piddling amount - putting all these voting obstructions in to "prevent voter fraud" is about as honest as the four Supreme Court justices saying they believe Roe is established law.
From The Hill today (more âspecialâ people):
A man who was tried in connection to his wifeâs disappearance pleaded guilty Thursday to submitting a fraudulent ballot on her behalf for President Trump during the 2020 election.
Barry Morphew told law enforcement he figured âall these other guys are cheatingâ and that his wife Suzanne would have voted for Trump anyway, according to an affidavit acquired by KKTV Colorado.
The new voter laws in Georgia that everyone railed against as racist, oppressive and guaranteed to lower turnout and caused MLB's Allstar game to move from Atlanta to Colorado had the opposite effect. They had a record turnout in their last election and there were few complaints overall as well IIRC.
Instead of taking a position that might be defensible*, you go with this?
It's well known (fact? sure) that access to valid ID was more difficult for some of the population. It was very common to have that come up when I was in California; the state went on a multi-year multimillion dollar project to get people to get their ID card, and various orgs stepped in to cover the costs. But that was a couple of generations ago. I have to imagine that the problem is somewhat less than it used to be, but maybe in Georgia it's still serious. So the question to be answered is: how many eligible voters don't have a valid ID? I don't know, but maybe it's not actually a problem.
Doesn't negate the fact that the motivation behind the law is not vote integrity.
The new voter laws in Georgia that everyone railed against as racist, oppressive and guaranteed to lower turnout and caused MLB's Allstar game to move from Atlanta to Colorado had the opposite effect. They had a record turnout in their last election and there were few complaints overall as well IIRC.
FTA: "As critics have correctly said, the law imposes significant new obstacles to voting. It also gives the Republican-controlled state government new power to assert control over the conduct of elections in Democratic counties.
The law does, however, contain some provisions that can be reasonably be described as pro-voting, and critics have not always described all of the text accurately."
But I can imagine that hearing that there are obstacles would be an incentive to get out there and stick it to the Man (aka Good Trouble). No harm in that. Who would be against more people voting?
(Me, for one, if the voters are ill-informed.)
The new voter laws in Georgia that everyone railed against as racist, oppressive and guaranteed to lower turnout and caused MLB's Allstar game to move from Atlanta to Colorado had the opposite effect. They had a record turnout in their last election and there were few complaints overall as well IIRC.
