It is genuinely remarkable that so many of those idiots still think theological patriarchy is a viable strategy in this day and age. I think we’ll be safe (as in, demographics will make it not viable for them to remain a political party) by 2030, but the next two presidential elections are gonna be a fucking nightmare.
2030 is too far away and i think that’s naive. we need them gone now. you don’t understand how ingrained conservative thinking is in rural areas. they aren’t going away. they’re making new ones every day.
We’ve been saying conservatives will be marginalized soon since the 90’s. I really hope it happens in my lifetime. The infestation has only gotten worse.
And had Gore won it may very well be true, but just cause something seems inevitable doesnt mean it is. Nothing great has been achieved through ignorant inaction.
Nothing great has been achieved through ignorant inaction.
Agreed. Physical training, education and preparation will save innocent lives. Successfully resisting the conservatives will require it.
It’s a great idea to join a local John Brown Gun Club and learn to shoot, even for non-combatants. First-aid / trauma-aid classes and MMA classes are also extremely helpful, even for pacifists.
Conservatives are not pacifists and will not be kind or merciful to those who are unable to defend themselves.
still think
This is where you went wrong - they don’t “think” that, as in they sat down and logically reasoned it out, they “know” that, as in they were told it from a pastor behind a pulpit, who they pay part of their salary to. If they thought it then they could be convinced by the presentation of facts to now think differently, but since their belief comes from authority, there is really no way around that kind of brainwashing. That I know of at least, in anything like a mere few years.
I honestly don’t know if our democracy will survive this challenge. What country has ever survived after devolving into a mere two party system, such that neither side does anything except try to block the other one? (That’s a legit question btw, if anyone knows the answer)
I think we’ll be safe (as in, demographics will make it not viable for them to remain a political party) by 2030
If it were not for gerrymandering and several other kinds of election tampering, that would have happened at least a decade ago.
As it is, they’re still clawing away at democracy to such a degree (and meeting so little resistance other than empty words for the press from the only ones with the power to stop them) that they’re likely to remain competitive indefinitely unless something changes dramatically.
the next two presidential elections are gonna be a fucking nightmare.
Sadly, it’s much more likely that every presidential election for the rest of my life will and I’m “only” 41.
Considering it’s gotten them power thus far, it seems to be working pretty well for them.
I don’t disagree that it’s morally repugnant… but to say it doesn’t get them what they want is naive.
Oh, what I meant was that this whole “frighten all people who have a uterus such that they’ll vote against you in vastly overwhelming droves” strategy doesn’t seem like it’s gonna end well for them. I just hope it doesn’t end well for them quickly.
Most conservative women that I know aren’t one bit frightened. They should be, but they are not. They still think that nothing will happen to them, and they will go on thinking that despite all evidence to the contrary.
On the other hand, what they are frightened of and angry about is the LGBTQIA+ agenda being pushed onto schools. Do NOT overestimate the level of logical thought that such people are willing to put into voting, as compared to respecting authority structures (chiefly, the ones they are told to respect at church, while conversely disrespecting the other stuff they are told to do so with, also at church).
It is a viable strategy as long as you don’t depend on actually winning elections.
Fucking disgusting how they talk about it. As if it’s just another political stratagem that went a little awry. Fucking fuckers.
Because it was. It was a great wedge to capture religious types and people who were vaguely “in favor of not killing babies” but didn’t comprehend the reality of abortion bans. Now that they actually killed roe and we’re seeing the devastating impact, they can’t tout it as a success. And since roe is already dead, they can’t use it as a wedge to activate voters. So it goes away.
Worst thing that can happen to conservatives is achieving their stated objectives. Not only do people realize how terrible it is, but they also have to go find another issue to scare people about.
Be careful about this attitude. I personally haven’t been affected by the abortion ban, so to call it a ‘devastating impact’ is a bit of a bridge too far. I do understand that it’s devastating for many, but especially those who really want zero abortion they see it as a wild sucess and are fearful that if those ‘devil worshiping democrats’ get back into office, that they’ll undo all those years of their hard work. They are still using it as a wedge issue.
I can’t tell if you’re joking, but if a 10 year old having to cross state lines for an abortion, then the first state going after the doctor in the second state with legal action isn’t a bridge too far but my language is, you might live in a bubble.
The point is that the average Joe isn’t a 10 year old pregnant girl. Of course it’s horrible, but a large majority of people aren’t seeing (paying attention) to that. They haven’t and won’t feel the consequences for many years. They see this as hyperbole.
And the tiniest percentage of abortions are late term abortions, performed unexpectedly to save a live or prevent suffering. And yet THAT’S all Republicans talk about. Bans cause more harm than they prevent by a significant margin, but since the average republican isn’t a raped child they don’t care? Is that supposed to make me more charitable towards them??
I’m not asking for charity towards Republicans. You’re not changing the extremes of either party.
Using terms such as “devastating impact” when the average Joe Republican hasn’t felt ANY impact isn’t going to win votes, but rather make them think that the Republican side who simply is letting it slide is more reasonable, whether it’s true or not.
My parents voted for Trump twice. They’re anti-abortion and they’re HAPPY about the abortion bans. Again… HAPPY. Sure they, along with the majority of Right-Leaning folks would agree that a 10 year old shouldn’t have to have a baby, but they contrast it against all the arguments of “not killing the unborn” and see it as an overall win. Calling out individual horror stories is a good tactic, but you’re not winning any votes away from Trump and the Republicans by “yelling” at them about a “devastating impact”.
It’s the same thing with a LOT of issues. I live in the middle of the country so sea rise doesn’t affect me, right? People have their heads stuck in the sand and if something doesn’t affect them personally, it turns them off of your cause to speak in extremes. Global Warming hasn’t killed anyone they personally know, so calling it extreme isn’t going to ring true for them. The fact that we have had the warmest year on record, the most storms, the biggest swings in temperature, those are all FACTS, (just lil a 10 year old having to have an abortion) that DOES affect them and WILL help them to understand.
Again, you’re not going t change the extremes, but we need to fight for the people that might just be willing to stay home On Election Day or just skip the President box… I’m working on my parents constantly, but it HAS to be a slow burn or they’ll just shut down and ignore all the facts.
So yeah republicans don’t care until they’re personally affected, that’s not new. The impact isn’t any less devastating simply because people are too ignorant to understand it.
we need to fight for the people that might just be willing to stay home On Election Day
That’s my point from the first comment I made. Republican candidates are removing abortion from their sites because there’s been a significant swing in voter support, mainly among women. They were already running slim margins in many areas, and lately they’ve been slaughtered in elections, polls, and referendums.
Yeah it’s a typical “made up issue” in order to distract from the politics that is actually important to peoples lives. And both parties are playing that game.
I haven’t read the whole article but I can guarantee that mainstream media is also not talking about the actual mechanisms at play here. They are “in on it”. They are taking it at face value that the GOP is actually serious, and thus are helping distract from real issues. Because they are owned by the same people that this benefit from this distraction. And this emotionally charged topic is helping them to sell advertisement.
Now that it’s actually impacting people horribly it’s the same for democrats: They could have passed a federal abortion right law, but it’s actually beneficial for them to drag it out. They could have stacked the supreme court but that is not in the interest of their masters.
And that way papers like the independent are still contributing to propaganda.
As if it’s just another political stratagem that went a little awry.
that’s all it ever was to them. they don’t believe in anything other than their own power.
Yeah they have to. Those who desire power or money above anything else are more likely to achieve it. Because of this almost all powerful politicians or billionaires are some type of sociopaths or very narrow minded “emotionally removed” person. Otherwise they fall behind competing with other sociopaths.
I’ve never heard a name or seen a discussion for this phenomena. It seems to me to be the defining characteristic of those in power and the most important thing to understand in order to fix the systems of power.
https://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828 https://www.amazon.com/48-Laws-Power-Robert-Greene/dp/0140280197
A lot of people are talking about it. Both from a clinical, adaptive standpoint and from a “how-to guide from experienced sociopaths to budding young sociopaths” perspective
Thanks that’s very interesting, I’ll have a look. I’m thinking more from a political and economic perspective of “democracy can never work as long as certain rules and mechanism are in place and not even known because never discussed”. People keep talking about ideology and reform and stuff but maybe it can never work like this.
Chris Ryan calls it Rich Asshole Syndrome.
Removed by mod
Conservative women. They love to pretend they are pro life. Until their own ectopic pregnancy…
“But this is different.” I have straight up heard that without any thought to the irony or interest in this one time exception.
Values that are loudly stated mean something more than if we just know someone holds certain values. If we flip the script for example, and consider a democrat who has generally been pro-choice, Vs a generally pro choice democrat who campaigns on making pro-choice law so that the roe Vs wade repeal cannot stand. I’d be much more likely to vote for the latter candidate, largely because this stance will put off people who are anti-abortion.
Yeah, they got their base solidified with lying about the abortion bullshit but their base isn’t enough to stay in power, so now they need to lie to the rest of us as well to try and take in as many vote as possible to stay in power, sweet power.
Can’t piss off our base though, do be hush hush about it.
Fuck Republicans
I wonder what other hugely unpopular positions they can poison themselves with. This is what minority rule looks like. The only way we stop this is by defeating Trump and reforming our democracy. Minorities should have enough power to protect themselves from oppression, but not so much that they can impose their views on the rest of the country. This is what’s happening with the far right, which very much is a minority that’s far out of step with mainstream American opinion on virtually everything.
It’s not the only way. It’s just the current way that allows everyone to take as little risk as possible.
So. Apparently he was defeated 4 years ago. When does the fixing everything happen? Why is it gonna magically happen THIS time around?
Ideally the Democrats get Congress too.
In the times they had “control” in recent years and decades, there’s always convenient excuses for why more didn’t get done. I don’t buy pipe dreams and hopes.
I don’t either. There’s always going to be a Manchin or a Sinema doing the GOPs work for them.
Vote blue so dems can do nothing (cause they benefit from all the same skeevy mechanisms) as Republicans tear it all apart from the bottom up instead of the top down so we get fascism in 4 years instead of now
Yep. Any time they gain control, they fail to ever truly change things. They just move the needle a little, but not too much, can’t upset that status quo.
2 steps toward fascism instead of 4.
PROGRESS!
they are lying and they will take this from you if given the opportunity.
As always, when they tell you who they are, believe them. When they profess change, make them prove it.
We asked why
Hahaha.
Grabs their hand holding the anti-abortion sign, bashing then repeatedly in the face with it.
“Why are you hitting yourself? Why are you hitting yourself? Why are you hitting yourself?”
I really hate this “quietly deleting” / “quietly removing” trend in news headlines. Politico’s don’t “publicly announce” things they want to stop talking about, so it’s always going to be “quietly”. It’s not like their teams have to go into some secret room/SCIFF to remove a paragraph of text on a web page…
Seems quiet to me, in a metaphorical sense, if they delete something from PR page which they previously considered important enough to have as a campaign position, but without articulating a new position. They are obscuring their position.
It’s emphasizing that they would prefer people not find out about it, which is different to regular deleting.
I don’t think people delete things intending for them to be found out in general
Edit: I think the ‘silent’ part refers to them continuing the rethoric on twitter while deleting from the website
You can hate it if you want, I guess, but isn’t that what they are doing? They know the polls are against them so they are flip flopping, to use Repub terms, but doing so in a cowardly fashion hoping no one will notice. But we’ve all noticed.
How would you frame these types of stories?
Well duh. It’s an election year. People will actually go out and vote end of the year.
Hopefully.
deleted by creator
We should totally go to truth social and stir up a shit storm about how all these RINOs are going woke and flipping sides on abortion.
I’d do it, except I can’t tolerate those sorts for very long…
Trolling them seems so funny until you have to actually interact with them.
They are quiet quitting, in other words.
The dog caught the car & is desperately trying to escape the pull of the tire.
Holy shit, I thought the us couldn’t get any worse.
I pity you, having to pick between a dementia patient and a man whose only intent is to turn the country into a failing business, with God as his witness.
I’m not a fan of him, but there’s absolutely no evidence Biden has dementia. He’s got a speech impediment and you’re kinda a dick for calling that dementia.
Dick.
This. The dude may be old but he’s still pretty sharp and showing good health, all things considered.
Right wing media loves to take any stutter or blank stare into the top story though. Despite that, I’m sure that there’s a hell of a lot more “senior moment” footage for their guy. It’s pretty telling when they’ve got not much more than schoolyard name calling and rumors to really sling at him though. Can’t fight on Biden on policy, and he’s practically made of teflon.
The real sad part is that it works.
Yes. Albeit, I never mentioned anything about speech. It’s a bit weird that they immediately jumped to that. I’m mostly mentioning the fact that his senior moments severely outweigh other presidents. I mean, come on. The guy is 81.
I just don’t get how people are driven to pick the lesser of two evils when there’s much better options out there.
Because spoiler candidates are responsible for the downfall of the earth.
I hold Ralph Nader personally accountable for the state of the climate today. Bush 43 won Florida by a margin of fewer than 600 votes. Nader had 95,000.
I was 15 in 2000. If I was 18, I probably would’ve voted for Nader, and felt like I was doing the right thing. At 38, I realize how naive that was.
It could also be the fact that a lot of modern presidents aren’t fit for presidency as much as they can mislead the people. In a perfect world, you could’ve voted for Nader and not regretted it, because you’d have known that the people that surrounded you weren’t naive. Personally though, I feel like raeganomics was to blame for too many of America’s problems.
The major problem — one of the major problems, for there are several — one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarise: it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarise the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
Another interpretation, and an interesting catch-22, is that they are simultaneously the best and worst contenders for presidency. The act of wanting the presidency warrants at least some ulterior motive, but also requires at least learning how to run a country at the bare minimum. Without the latter, you just can’t run a country.
He has a card for meeting with ambassadors which literally says, in short form, “sit down. Say hello. Answer questions. Leave”.
He forgot how to stand on a bike. Hell, he forgets how to walk up stairs sometimes. Even walking on the ground, he sometimes ignores secret service instructions. He’s 81. 81. And I’m getting flak for calling him out?
I can get people defending Greg abbot for being disabled, because that’s not the point of his dilemma. This is different, because he is literally too old to be fit to serve.
Edit: I also never said anything about speech, where were you getting that from?
Everything you pointed out is extremely dishonest at best. You act like I haven’t seen the same footage. You’re a liar and you have an agenda. I wasn’t born yesterday. Good try, though.
An agenda for who? I’m very interested in who you think I am.
Gee, let me guess …
That said, I hate that the Democrats are focusing so much on abortion. Yes, it’s been an driving force when it’s been on the ballot, but you want something more than just giving people a reason to vote on one issue and hoping it carries over to politicians. Give people something to vote for, not just against.
I’m really worried about turnout.
i don’t know man… it’s kind of a big deal. it’s a woman’s right to choose what she is allowed to do with her body. i’m more concerned about issues like that than i am economic BS. have you already gotten complacent about it?
i think it’s a glaring indictment of what to expect if you let these psychopaths run the country. i think it needs to be center stage.
It’s definitely an important issue, and one Republicans have been distracting their base with for decades. But it’s far from the only one.
If Democrats only have this one issue to hang their hat on… what incentive do they have to fix it? Then they’re in the same boat a lot of Republicans are in now, they got what they wanted and have nothing else to rile their base with.
No one’s saying it shouldn’t be at the forefront… but it also shouldn’t be the only thing. Bodily autonomy is great… but doesn’t really matter as much when you can’t afford to eat or house yourself.
It matters a lot if you’re not in a situation to raise a child. It matters a lot if you’re forced to carry a child to term that is already dead or will die at birth. It matters a lot if you were raped and got pregnant.
Body autonomy is an economic issue. It should have been codified into law, but decades of legal precedent seemed sufficient until the Supreme Court was packed with zealots.
The vast majority of the country supports this, if a politician doesn’t they should be raked over the coals for it.
The point about dems being in the same boat Republicans were is fucking spot on though. They had how long to codify it into federal law? Especially since we’ve known for decades that the Republicans were pushing to kill roe. Now that it’s gone, we’ve seen a massive surge in dem voting, especially among women. If they fix it right away, they risk losing those numbers.
At no point did I say it wasn’t ever important. I even said that it should be at the forefront.
What I did say is only focusing on it is myopic and naive. Trying to create some narrative where if you don’t say it’s the only thing you ever care about they’re you’re wholeheartedly against it is incredibly dangerous. It will backfire on you just like it backfires on the republicans.
You said “body autonomy us great…but it doesn’t matter of you can’t afford to feed yourself”
I pointed out that body autonomy is in fact an economic issue.
Agreed! People should stop worrying about Republicans stripping away our Healthcare bit by bit! It’s not like my Woman ever leaves the Kitchen anyways! And if my DAUGHTER is sick I’ll just rape it out of her and become a Grandpapa!
It’s always carrot and stick. Vote for us because of this terrible thing. No, we won’t give you more than that.
Sorry, what’s your counterargument here?
