Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

I am not disagreeing with you here, but just curious as to how Roe v Wade will be impacted given the ruling by the supreme court?  Power to decide in regard to what is legal and not legal with respect to abortions is left to the state so no matter who the president is that isn't going to change unless the Supreme Court reverses its decision which I don't see happening.

I'm not sure that's completely accurate.  There has been a lot of talk of the issue going through Congress to be 'codified'. Not that that means it's sure fire going to pass....

Regardless, let's not pretend the voting population is truly fully aware of what is capable and what is not, or for that matter even have a realistic view of what is going on.  The point is there is a whole lot of pissed off women around the country, and they are going to be voting even if they don't really know what they are voting for.

Edited by WrestlingRasta
  • Brain 1
Posted
1 minute ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I'm not sure that's completely accurate.  There has been a lot of talk of the issue going through Congress to be 'codified'. Not that that means it's sure fire going to pass....

Regardless, let's not pretend the voting population is truly fully aware of what is capable and what is not, or for that matter even have a realistic view of what is going on.  The point is there is a whole lot of pissed off women around the country, and they are going to be voting even if they don't really know what they are voting for.

Ahhh...gotcha...guess I can't argue that...not that I was trying to.  

  • Bob 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

In 2020 he only had 42% of the women. He only had 17% of Black voters. He only had 32% of the 18 to 29 voters. So lets say that is a 4% increase across the board. I would say that group is around 100 million voters. Times 4% that is 4 million more votes than in 2020. Trump only needed an additional 70,000 votes in the 7 key swing state to win in  2020. It will be interesting to see how the numbers change going forward after the new car smell starts to wear off in a week or so.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

In 2020 he only had 42% of the women. He only had 17% of Black voters. He only had 32% of the 18 to 29 voters. So lets say that is a 4% increase across the board. I would say that group is around 100 million voters. Times 4% that is 4 million more votes than in 2020. Trump only needed an additional 70,000 votes in the 7 key swing state to win in  2020. It will be interesting to see how the numbers change going forward after the new car smell starts to wear off in a week or so.

Of course that does matter much in general.  The only thing that really matters is can he swing enough women, black & young voters in the key states.

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
1 hour ago, ionel said:

Of course that does matter much in general.  The only thing that really matters is can he swing enough women, black & young voters in the key states.

Yes. The polls in the swing states are the only thing that matters right now. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, red viking said:

Considering his promotion of the horrible events that occurred on Jan 6 and his desire to assert total control over the federal reserve and federal workers, this is a REAL concern. 

Did you vote for the Federal Reserve, its policies, or any member of its board?  My democratic self did not.  For example, I would abolish the 2% inflation target as it is part of the problem.  No inflation should be the target.  I have not yet seen the referendum on whether or not Americans believe we should make devaluing our money (i.e. our property and our work effort) a national policy.  Neither has your democratic self.  No one has ever voted democratically on Fed policy.  Therefore, no threat to democracy.

The chief executive of an organization (the executive branch of the government) having influence over the nature of the employment of those in that organization is not very radical nor anti-democratic.  Therefore, no threat to democracy.

Jan 6th is a nothing burger.  Never was a burger.  Just grandmas taking selfies on a stroll between the velvet ropes for 10 or 15 minutes.  The big scandal of Jan 6th was the decisions by the Speaker of the House and the DC Mayor when requests for security were denied by those brilliant ladies.  Again, no threat to democracy.

A presidential nominee whom nobody voted to represent them:  A direct threat to democracy.

  • Bob 1
  • Fire 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Lipdrag said:

Did you vote for the Federal Reserve, its policies, or any member of its board?  My democratic self did not.  For example, I would abolish the 2% inflation target as it is part of the problem.  No inflation should be the target.  I have not yet seen the referendum on whether or not Americans believe we should make devaluing our money (i.e. our property and our work effort) a national policy.  Neither has your democratic self.  No one has ever voted democratically on Fed policy.  Therefore, no threat to democracy.

The chief executive of an organization (the executive branch of the government) having influence over the nature of the employment of those in that organization is not very radical nor anti-democratic.  Therefore, no threat to democracy.

Jan 6th is a nothing burger.  Never was a burger.  Just grandmas taking selfies on a stroll between the velvet ropes for 10 or 15 minutes.  The big scandal of Jan 6th was the decisions by the Speaker of the House and the DC Mayor when requests for security were denied by those brilliant ladies.  Again, no threat to democracy.

A presidential nominee whom nobody voted to represent them:  A direct threat to democracy.

Hell, if zero inflation is better than a small amount of inflation why not just shoot for deflation?

  • Bob 1

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Lipdrag said:

Did you vote for the Federal Reserve, its policies, or any member of its board?  My democratic self did not.  For example, I would abolish the 2% inflation target as it is part of the problem.  No inflation should be the target.  I have not yet seen the referendum on whether or not Americans believe we should make devaluing our money (i.e. our property and our work effort) a national policy.  Neither has your democratic self.  No one has ever voted democratically on Fed policy.  Therefore, no threat to democracy.

The chief executive of an organization (the executive branch of the government) having influence over the nature of the employment of those in that organization is not very radical nor anti-democratic.  Therefore, no threat to democracy.

Jan 6th is a nothing burger.  Never was a burger.  Just grandmas taking selfies on a stroll between the velvet ropes for 10 or 15 minutes.  The big scandal of Jan 6th was the decisions by the Speaker of the House and the DC Mayor when requests for security were denied by those brilliant ladies.  Again, no threat to democracy.

A presidential nominee whom nobody voted to represent them:  A direct threat to democracy.

Your desire for 0% inflation shows you are completely ignorant of basic economics. 0% long-term inflation would bring us into a deep depression. 

Making all federal workers political puppets would be a disaster. A significant portion need to be protected so they can do their job without significant political pressure. Be careful what you wish for. It works both ways, for Democrats and Republicans. You want somebody like AOC or Bernie having complete control over who gets hired/fired from agencies like EPA, DOJ, FBI, Dept of Education, etc? 

But anyway, Trump wants extremely low interest rates and was constantly telling Powell to bring them lower. You'd have MUCH higher inflation under Trump. If you look at month-to-month inflation data (not year over year), inflation was already skyrocketing before Biden even had a chance to do anything in 2021. 

Edited by red viking
Posted
3 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Hell, if zero inflation is better than a small amount of inflation why not just shoot for deflation?

You need to learn basic economics. We would go into a depression with 0% inflation or deflation. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, red viking said:

You need to learn basic economics. We would go into a depression with 0% inflation or deflation. 

WKN was being facetious. 

  • Bob 1
  • Brain 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Would it matter to you if they were in a 'well regulated militia' or not? 

Where did Harris say we should take guns away from everybody? 

Posted
2 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

What's going to be real interesting to see is the turn out numbers.  Have a feeling with what has gone on with Roe v Wade, women are going to come out in record numbers. Particularly younger women.

Particularly because the AGs in some of the states that have banned or curtailed the availability of abortion are now trying to make it illegal to leave their state(s) to get the health care that is not longer provided. 

Posted
Just now, ThreePointTakedown said:

Great question, not sure. Probably made up. Just posing a hypothetical. 

Yah; most of what you see from the wingers is made up. Particularly media outlets like Faux Neews. 

Posted
27 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Particularly because the AGs in some of the states that have banned or curtailed the availability of abortion are now trying to make it illegal to leave their state(s) to get the health care that is not longer provided. 

Ummm...AG's now create the legislation around abortion?  Who knew?!?!

  • Bob 1
Posted (edited)

If anyone hasn't read it I recommend FreakEnomics study on abortion.  There are holes in their theory but it is still worth the read

Edited by PortaJohn

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted
3 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

Ummm...AG's now create the legislation around abortion?  Who knew?!?!

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/07/politics/alabama-prosecute-out-of-state-abortion/index.html

Despite getting shut down. Threatening to prosecute(regardless of the legality) will have a chilling effect on people reaching out to try to get the health care the need/want. If that is the point, its a sleazy tactic. 

Posted
1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/07/politics/alabama-prosecute-out-of-state-abortion/index.html

Despite getting shut down. Threatening to prosecute(regardless of the legality) will have a chilling effect on people reaching out to try to get the health care the need/want. If that is the point, its a sleazy tactic. 

What if the people who are sexually active and don't want to get pregnant make a responsible choice and use one of the many different types of birth control. There are dozens of safe birth control options. Birth control pills (1960) condoms (1850) these have been around a long time. So, is it lack of education, lazy or just irresponsible? MOST OF THESE ITEMS ARE FREE. I'm going to take cover now for the incoming barrage. I'm not talking about incest or rape or medical difficulties with the mother or the baby. That is a different conversation altogether.

  • Bob 2
Posted
10 hours ago, red viking said:

Where did Harris say we should take guns away from everybody? 

what did her friends in austrailia demonstrate?

therein lies the clue...

  • Fire 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...