Looks Like End Of Roe Isn't Going To Impact Turnout

[BabyBoomer50s]

The election of Maya Flores in Texas last month was a test of how the changing abortion landscape impacts elections. Texas passed the toughest pre-Dobbs abortion law in the country. Blue state Democrats howled. Then the Dobbs decision was leaked. Blue state Democrats howled again. Then a Hispanic GOP woman was elected in a district that Obama won by 22.1% and Hillary won by 21.5%. Blue state Democrats are still howling. Beto is howling too.

 

[Rightguide]

Reality suddenly interferes with Biden's hallucinations about the filibuster:

Biden admits Dems don't have the votes to ax Senate filibuster​

Democrats currently control the 50-50 Senate with Vice President Kamala Harris acting as a tie-breaking vote in the chamber

One day after calling for the Senate to exempt abortion rights legislation from clearing the filibuster's vote threshold, President Joe Biden conceded that such a plan lacked enough support within his own party to succeed.

Biden acknowledged that his party's lack on unanimity on the issue would prevent the Senate from codifying abortion rights, but asserted that “ltimately, Congress is going to have to act to codify Roe into federal law," according to The Hill.

“The filibuster should not stand in the way of us being able to do that, but right now we don’t have the votes in the Senate to change the filibuster,” Biden lamented. “That means we need two more votes.”

Biden's comments prompted sharp criticism from Republicans in Congress and members of a his own party. Democratic Sens. Krysten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia both promptly asserted their opposition to such an effort, effectively stone-walling the president's proposal.

More here: https://justthenews.com/politics-po...its-dems-dont-have-votes-ax-senate-filibuster

 

[ll74]

Reality suddenly interferes with Biden's hallucinations about the filibuster:

Biden admits Dems don't have the votes to ax Senate filibuster​

Democrats currently control the 50-50 Senate with Vice President Kamala Harris acting as a tie-breaking vote in the chamber

One day after calling for the Senate to exempt abortion rights legislation from clearing the filibuster's vote threshold, President Joe Biden conceded that such a plan lacked enough support within his own party to succeed.

Biden acknowledged that his party's lack on unanimity on the issue would prevent the Senate from codifying abortion rights, but asserted that “ltimately, Congress is going to have to act to codify Roe into federal law," according to The Hill.

“The filibuster should not stand in the way of us being able to do that, but right now we don’t have the votes in the Senate to change the filibuster,” Biden lamented. “That means we need two more votes.”

Biden's comments prompted sharp criticism from Republicans in Congress and members of a his own party. Democratic Sens. Krysten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia both promptly asserted their opposition to such an effort, effectively stone-walling the president's proposal.

More here: https://justthenews.com/politics-po...its-dems-dont-have-votes-ax-senate-filibuster

Everyone already knows that.

 

[Wrong Element]

"This is going to have no political impact AT ALL. Also, our political agenda is so unpopular that it can only be imposed by unelected judges."

 

[YDB95]

JohnEngelman said:
Another difference is that Democrats are more likely to hate Trump than are Republicans likely to hate Biden.



When I did a Google search for "I hate Trump" I got
About 127,000 results.
https://www.google.com/search?q="I+hate+Trump"&source=hp&ei=TwrAYv38N-Hj5NoPgqi0gA0&iflsig=AJiK0e8AAAAAYsAYXzzHO9XituXAETyUN8e3kHvXP6AC&ved=0ahUKEwi94Ofq7Nn4AhXhMVkFHQIUDdAQ4dUDCAk&uact=5&oq="I+hate+Trump"&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6DggAEI8BEOoCEIwDEOUCOgsIABCABBCxAxCDAToOCC4QgAQQsQMQxwEQowI6BQgAEIAEOgsILhCxAxCDARDUAjoICAAQgAQQsQM6DgguEIAEELEDEMcBENEDOgsILhCABBDHARCjAjoLCC4QgAQQxwEQrwE6CAguEIAEELEDOgsILhCABBCxAxDUAjoICC4QsQMQgwE6DQguEIAEEMcBEKMCEAo6EwguEIAEELEDEIMBEMcBENEDEAo6BQguEIAEOggIABCxAxCDAToICC4QsQMQ1AI6CAguEIAEENQCULIVWOHXAmCj2gJoAXAAeACAAasGiAHSKZIBDTAuMy4zLjIuMy4xLjKYAQCgAQGwAQo&sclient=gws-wiz

When I did a Google search for "I hate Biden" I got
About 13,000 results.
https://www.google.com/search?q="I+hate+Biden"&ei=hQrAYoneKOSGptQP0I2tgAs&ved=0ahUKEwjJtLiE7dn4AhVkg4kEHdBGC7AQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq="I+hate+Biden"&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BggAEB4QBzoICAAQHhAHEAo6CggAEB4QDxAHEAo6BQgAEIYDOggILhDUAhCRAjoFCAAQkQI6CwguELEDENQCEJECOgsILhCABBDHARCvAToLCAAQgAQQsQMQgwE6BQgAEIAEOggIABCABBCxA0oECEEYAUoECEYYAFCDC1jJLmDjMmgBcAB4AIABnAKIAcwMkgEFMC44LjKYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=gws-wiz

Right, and saying "I hate Biden" is the only way you could possibly express that opinion.
There is no way you have failed to notice the literally hundreds of posts questioning Biden's mental fitness, or accusing anyone who doesn't like Trump of having an imaginary mental illness, or calling Democrats communists, just for the tip of the iceberg.

The election of Maya Flores in Texas last month was a test of how the changing abortion landscape impacts elections.

Not really. It was for a seat that's going to go up against another Democratic incumbent in November, so the Dems didn't put a lot of resources into it.
Now, the election in Nebraska last week, where the Dems nearly picked up a solid red seat despite being outspent 10 to 1, that points to a changing landscape.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Right, and saying "I hate Biden" is the only way you could possibly express that opinion.
There is no way you have failed to notice the literally hundreds of posts questioning Biden's mental fitness, or accusing anyone who doesn't like Trump of having an imaginary mental illness, or calling Democrats communists, just for the tip of the iceberg.


Not really. It was for a seat that's going to go up against another Democratic incumbent in November, so the Dems didn't put a lot of resources into it.
Now, the election in Nebraska last week, where the Dems nearly picked up a solid red seat despite being outspent 10 to 1, that points to a changing landscape.

Posters for Literotica are not a representative cross sample of the American electorate.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Laws are only enforceable when they conform to popular mores. During the 1950's abortion was illegal in every state in the United States. Birth control devices were difficult to acquire. Nevertheless, the illegitimacy rate was very low. Since then a high percentage of Americans have come to value casual sex and sexual variety, and to have little interest in marriage and procreation. Consequently, laws against abortion will not be enforceable, even in Republican states. In the long run, and possibly the short run, overturning Roe will be bad for the GOP.

 

[Sugar Baby Wanted]

It will be great when states totally ban abortions and throw those whores in jail, like your forefathers would have wanted.

You add so much value to this forum with your tremendous insight. Almost every post!

 

[YDB95]

During the 1950's abortion was illegal in every state in the United States. Birth control devices were difficult to acquire. Nevertheless, the illegitimacy rate was very low.

No, John. The rate of acknowledged illegitimacy was very low. This had less to do with abortion than with the fact that it was still considered OK to ostracize out-of-wedlock mothers. That's not something we want to go back to. And well-to-do women who wanted abortions then were able to get them. That will remain the case now, too.

 

[JohnEngelman]

No, John. The rate of acknowledged illegitimacy was very low. This had less to do with abortion than with the fact that it was still considered OK to ostracize out-of-wedlock mothers. That's not something we want to go back to. And well-to-do women who wanted abortions then were able to get them. That will remain the case now, too.

If you can document that there were nearly as many illegal abortions per capita during the 1950's as legal abortions now, please do so.

The wide spread illegitimacy rate is a national disaster. Children raised to adulthood by both biological parents living together in matrimony usually have many fewer problems in life than other children.

 

[YDB95]

If you can document that there were nearly as many illegal abortions per capita during the 1950's as legal abortions now, please do so.

Cute, but you know as well as I why we can't account for the number of illegal anything with any certainty. What we do know is what women went through before Roe, and which they're going to be going through again in many parts of the country. It pays to know your history.

The wide spread illegitimacy rate is a national disaster. Children raised to adulthood by both biological parents living together in matrimony usually have many fewer problems in life than other children.

That's not only anecdotal, it's probably wrong. There is nothing good about growing up in a family where your parents hate each other. Trust me on that one!

 

[JohnEngelman]

Cute, but you know as well as I why we can't account for the number of illegal anything with any certainty. What we do know is what women went through before Roe, and which they're going to be going through again in many parts of the country. It pays to know your history.

Because you claim that there were as many abortions per capita during the 1950's as now it your responsibility to substantiate your claim. I am unaware of any evidence for your claim.

 

[JohnEngelman]

That's not only anecdotal, it's probably wrong. There is nothing good about growing up in a family where your parents hate each other. Trust me on that one!

Effects of Out-of-Wedlock Births on Society​

Dr. June O’Neill, of Baruch College, City of University of New York, in recent research on underclass behaviors, confirms the linkage between crimes and single-parent families. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, O’Neill found that young black men raised in single-parent families were twice as likely to engage in criminal activities when compared to black men raised in two-parent families, even after holding constant a wide range of variables such as family income, urban residence, neighborhood environment, and parents’ education. Growing up in a single-parent family in a neighborhood with many other single-parent families on welfare triples the probability that a young black man will engage in criminal activity.8)...

Meanwhile, a major sociological review from the University of Wisconsin concludes that teens from single-parent families are much more likely to become delinquent than are teens from intact families. Family disruption drives up delinquency rates because of the way it “hampers the formation of attachments to parents and the transmission of antidelinquent definitions from parent to child.” Adolescents from broken homes often “associate with delinquents learn…definitions favorable to delinquency and consequently, violate the law.”11) Another study revealed that neighborhoods with a high quantity of fatherless families also have an increased number of acts of teen violence. The statistical data showed that “a 1% increase in the proportion of single-parent families in a neighborhood is associated with a 3% increase in an adolescent’s level of violence.”12) Hence, adolescents living in neighborhoods with more intact families are less likely to commit a crime.

https://marripedia.org/effects_of_out-of-wedlock_births_on_society#fn__11

 

[ll74]

Good ole Sowell

 

[Rotadom]

I need to know what Ayn Rand's take is. Where does Marx stand? Funny how people cite the people they normally hate when it fits their narrative.

 

[YDB95]

Because you claim that there were as many abortions per capita during the 1950's as now it your responsibility to substantiate your claim.

That's not what I said. Read my post (#35) again.

I am unaware of any evidence for your claim.

As is always the case with everything that doesn't fit your narrative.

 

[mayfly13]

It will be great when states totally ban abortions and throw those whores in jail, like your forefathers would have wanted.

and use their spawns for target practice
in future school shootings,
as the Second amendment secretly intended

 

[Rightguide]

Back to the subject. It doesn't look like a big bump for the Democrats in November, by then the country will be fucked up in ways much closer to the hearts of the American majority than the long-forgotten abortion issue. They will be totally absorbed with finding food they can afford and how much it costs to drive to the point of sale and back home again.

 

[YDB95]

Back to the subject. It doesn't look like a big bump for the Democrats in November, by then the country will be fucked up in ways much closer to the hearts of the American majority than the long-forgotten abortion issue. They will be totally absorbed with finding food they can afford and how much it costs to drive to the point of sale and back home again.

But enough about what you hope will happen.

 

[lovecraft68]

Lol...wait until November

I vote person over party because I'm fairly center in my politics and my ballot will usually feature votes for repub and dem candidates.

This year I'm spite voting and clicking the box of any independent on the ballot. I'd rather cast my vote for someone with no chance than have to decide between red and blue shit.

My cousin argues that somehow I'm handing the election to one side or the other by doing that because they're losing my vote...my response is if I've decided I'm not voting for either major party this year, they didn't have it to begin with. More so that I've never been affiliated with either and was never a locked in vote.

Just more bullshit that we have to pick a side and adhere to it no matter how awful it is

 

[ll74]

I vote person over party because I'm fairly center in my politics and my ballot will usually feature votes for repub and dem candidates.

This year I'm spite voting and clicking the box of any independent on the ballot. I'd rather cast my vote for someone with no chance than have to decide between red and blue shit.

My cousin argues that somehow I'm handing the election to one side or the other by doing that because they're losing my vote...my response is if I've decided I'm not voting for either major party this year, they didn't have it to begin with. More so that I've never been affiliated with either and was never a locked in vote.

Just more bullshit that we have to pick a side and adhere to it no matter how awful it is

I vote policy. As with most policies, local elections > national elections.

 

[mayfly13]

I vote person over party because I'm fairly center in my politics and my ballot will usually feature votes for repub and dem candidates.

This year I'm spite voting and clicking the box of any independent on the ballot. I'd rather cast my vote for someone with no chance than have to decide between red and blue shit.

My cousin argues that somehow I'm handing the election to one side or the other by doing that because they're losing my vote...my response is if I've decided I'm not voting for either major party this year, they didn't have it to begin with. More so that I've never been affiliated with either and was never a locked in vote.

Just more bullshit that we have to pick a side and adhere to it no matter how awful it is

Interesting!
I'm starting to hear this rhetoric more and more ("screw them, they're all the same"), even in publications like TYT and CNN.

I just listened to Ana Kasparian TYT who went on a rant against Bien, how he did nothing to stop Republicans with Roe-Wade, is still not doing much but is currying for votes. She sees him as a chameleon-Republican at heart and a corporatist.

I'm not American, but the topic interests me because the same f... system is now Worldwide:
Right-ers versus Left-ers, when in fact they're two peas in a pod: sold to corporations and anti-democratic.




How did we all get here?
And why is the system so self-perpetuating and hard to break
despite most laypeople being fed up?

 

[ll74]

Interesting!
I'm starting to hear this rhetoric more and more ("screw them, they're all the same"), even in publications like TYT and CNN.

I just listened to Ana Kasparian TYT who went on a rant against Bien, how he did nothing to stop Republicans with Roe-Wade, is still not doing much but is currying for votes. She sees him as a chameleon-Republican at heart and a corporatist.

I'm not American, but the topic interests me because the same f... system is now Worldwide:
Right-ers versus Left-ers, when in fact they're two peas in a pod: sold to corporations and anti-democratic.




How did we all get here?
And why is the system so self-perpetuating and hard to break
despite most laypeople being fed up?

Democracy doesn't care. Without enough votes, a third party will be tossed.

If you can gather enough support locally for one and then grow from the bottom up, it's a possibility, but not in my lifetime

 

[mayfly13]

Democracy doesn't care. Without enough votes, a third party will be tossed.

If you can gather enough support locally for one and then grow from the bottom up, it's a possibility, but not in my lifetime

you're right.

Sometimes I'm asking myself if an uprising and destroying it all could help us bring this system down.
They were close to it with the Yellow Vests in France and the Iranian uprisings and the anger over the 2008 Wall Street thievery and bailouts.. But nothing happened.
And even if they succeeded like in Sri Lanka or USSR, the system will just reboot itself. Look at Russians with Putin.

And changing the system the peaceful way, through votes isn't helping either.


How the hell did we all get to this dead end situation?
I see what's happening in America, as symbolic of the whole West and EE

 

[dmonty]

today’s Democrat members of the House of Representatives don’t understand the US constitutional system in which they serve. I guess it makes sense, though, because you achieve leftism through ignorance, not knowledge.

Art I to the Constitution holds that “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

The Democrats believe this language means that, if they can pass a bill, they’ve got the power. This ignores the words “Powers herein granted.” When creating a federal government for a conglomeration of thirteen highly independent states, all jealous of their rights and powers, the Founders did anything but grant Congress unlimited power.

Art I, Sec. 8 defines a very short list of powers granted to Congress, all of them essentially procedural (government functioning), rather than substantive (the minutiae of Americans’ lives), to ensure a functioning national government. The states can’t mess with those powers.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo..._reveal_massive_constitutional_ignorance.html