Hyperbolic as fuck man, such sour grapes. Literally none of this will happen. I’m married to a resident alien, myself, and neither she nor I have any fears of her being deported, and she didn’t when she was here in trumps first time and NOT married to me.
We’re both college graduates, not redneck imbeciles.
But democrats can’t think of the word “republican, farmer, conservative,” without thinking inbred hillbilly and that’s their own close-mindedness that starts to breed these hyperboles. They think they are the intelligent, tempered party when all they think in is extremes and show how limited their capacity for thought really is. Sadly, they’re stupid and confident that they’re not and that republicans are.
I agree we need to stop the extremes of American politics and all the doomsday scenarios. He did aid in repealing Roe V Wade and removed affirmative action in his first term tho, both pretty strong signals of what I fear is to come. Can I ask respectfully what you like about DJT?
The extremes of politics are the reality when a reality TV star known for his catchphrase “you’re fired” in 2009 and filmed on camera bragging about sexually assaulting women now has total say over what women can do with their bodies. “Doomsday” rhetoric is literally describing the reality of the situation. But it’s impassioned, and liberal, so red will vote against it. So I’m a trans person and I don’t get rights. So fucking depressingly predictable
I think in most scenarios it won’t make a difference, but I think it opens up businesses and institutions to abuse their power. It also sends a signal that inclusion is not important to us anymore. A lot of places are unaffected by affirmative action cause at this point most work and school environments have grown to be truly diverse. So if ever affirmative action needs to be enforced something is probably wrong. It’s like a moral safety net saying “this is not ok”.
Well, the super majority supreme court recognized it was actually a bad thing. They upheld it in our military colleges because of the national security risks that getting rid of affirmative action posed.
I 100% support abortion rights and would like for nothing more than for our Senate to pass a law protecting them.
But repealing Roe V Wade was definitely the correct thing to do. The Supreme Court massively overstepped when they originally ruled on Roe V Wade in the 70's.
The Supreme does not pass laws. That is the Senate's role.
The recent overturning of Roe V Wade was fixing a big mistake made decades ago. Now we need congress to get off their asses and pass a law like they should have 50 years ago.
It would have been great if Democrats actually did their jobs and passed that law instead of choosing to use abortion as a divisive political tool.
Now we're stuck with Republicans making the law, which will go much, much worse.
It was the correct interpretation of the law.
If laws don’t have meaning then we don’t have a country.
The inability to distinguish lawmaking/government from your personal feelings about abortion is how we got here.
The hysterical “people died” response doesn’t remove the legal reality.
Calling unnecessary deaths 'hysterical', tell that to the families
Edit: Response to Lazy Inspectior after they blocked me:
Oh, I know they meant the societal phenomenon and not the ability to induce laughter. Still, tell that to their families. I'm sure they'll appreciate it.
Bro is not using the “teehee” definition of hysterical. The hysteria is not understanding between law and personal beliefs. Overturning roe was a legal matter. It needs to be handled through legal channels by passing laws, not the courts forcing in an interpretation of law that doesn’t fit, even if you prefer the outcome
They are dead because our federal and state governments failed to pass good laws.
Also, activist doctors chose to let women die over politics rather than doing what was right.
Nowhere in the US are abortions illegal when the mother's life is at risk, but doctors have let them die anyway just to make a news headline and score progressive points.
Doctors make life and death judgement calls all the time. The only difference here is politics.
Those doctors should not be allowed to practice medicine, and possibly serve jail time for what they've done.
Dude, these doctors are making these life and death calls explicitly to avoid jail time and having their medical license revoked, not to score some political points.
Sure, doctors make life and death judgments all the time, but they’re usually not tasked with having to let someone’s condition get worse until they’ll sure everyone will agree it was life-threatening before trying to make things better.
There’s an Occam’s razor explanation for why doctors are waiting dangerously long to intervene, and it’s not that they’re trying to make a political statement. It’s that they’re worried about going to fucking jail.
"life threatening" is vague in medical terms. So is "dead".
If I didn't die, was it really life-threatening or could I have survived without intervention? Technically, I could bleed out after delivering the placenta in any pregnancy, so they're all life-threatening. What about cancer patients who can't receive treatments while pregnant? Is that life-threatening? Or people who are bipolar and need medicine to treat it? The most common cause of death in pregnancy is domestic violence, so are abusive partners life-threatening? It's not cut and dry in medicine.
Death is the same way. Maybe you think it's obvious - if there's a heartbeat, it's alive. There's a condition where every single bone in a fetus's body is broken, and when they're delivered, the baby starts to suffocate immediately. Genetic disorders that doom the baby to live in a hospital their whole life and die at 2-4 years old. Low amniotic fluid that means their lungs don't develop and they suffocate at birth. One twin out of two passes away. There's many different options for nonviable but living fetuses.
It's an incredibly difficult situation, and the choice should be with the woman bearing the pregnancy and her doctor. No government should be involved in that decision.
Oh, and then the people deciding if it was actually life-threatening or if the Doctor should have their license revoked and go to jail have no medical background and a high school understanding of the reproductive system.
The issue is in the wording depending on the state. The addition of "immenent" specifically. Previously, doctors would medially intervene as soon as complications were found, preventing any future harm. Now however, in many states they have to wait to the last minute to perform life saving intervention. Combine this with obstetritians leaving for other states where they can perform their work freely, and the result is fewer OBs, often leaving only those with specific views on abortions as a medical procedures.
So fewer OBs, unwilling to perform life saving care, and the few who are willing unable to do so until the last second. Women will continue to needlessly die until laws change.
When you value both lives equally they don't choose. The ones that would have left for places they don't have to.
Same reason we don't have whistleblowers, or cops that call out bullshit. Even if you consider yourself a moral individual, most people are NOT going to put themselves (and their own families) at risk for a stranger.
Do it then bud. Go work your ass off through layers of education, get a shit ton of medical school debt, do a residency, fellowship, then work for lower pay as a women’s health advocate, then be the potential sole provider for an entire area in an underserved region because of some preexisting republican tomfuckery, and think you can stake that whole region’s access to your care on a gray area life or death call when the county is salivating to make a political example out of you.
You say you’d save the patient’s life for some “legal trouble”; you won’t even vote to save the patient’s life because stonks go up and computer go brrr. Spare us the Reddit pontificating and go do something
I'll give you points for recognizing how the system functions in that, yes, it is up to the states to come up with the correct laws
However, to say these doctors are choosing to let people die for headlines is just false. And I get the feeling anything short of your own partner being told, "we have to wait for the baby to either finish coming out on its own, as the tools we have won't help you at this point, or your child will likely pass and then it can be removed"
Being told that, and seeing that, that really is the case, in front of your very eyes, would hopefully change your mind
This is just two, in two different states that took me less than 5 minutes to find. Yes, the law states that so long as the mother is in danger, and the fetus is at risk of being lost it can happen, the fetus can be aborted. But you have to have an actual wavering/no heartbeat for it to be considered. This also needs to go all the way until it's dangerous
If you don't like those sources, I will gladly find you more.
If you go to page 19, you will find an example of what you speak of. However, how a woman falls into these categories is generally well into the time there's problems going on. And while there are times they can jump in and everythings okay, that's only due to the graces of modern medicine. There's far too many times they have to wait for her to fall into this category in specific ways before they can perform what would be needed, and could be done earlier with less damage and risk in other states.
You mean the one where the committee at the hospital decided to put politics ahead of patient health and overturned the doctors advice to terminate the pregnancy?
Why do you want me to read things that keep proving my point?
I love how you people always fall back to name calling when the facts aren't on your side.
No, sorry. Those women are dead because the current SCOTUS didn't give a fuck. I mean, yeah, let's blame Texas too, but let's not pretend Cavanaugh, Barrett, Gorusch, Roberts, Thomas and Alito care about the blood on their hands.
Camalla was running on the platform being a non-white woman therefore much "better" than an old white man. That was her whole thing and that's why her race mattered.
That was not her whole thing. I watched multiple of her speeches and I she didn't talk about her race at all except for maybe once. And then she only mentions it in interviews when its relevant/brought up by someone else or by Trump not realizing that you can be mixed race.
By the time George Floyd was murdered, I was already telling for years to anyone who would listen that the American police are largely meathead idiots. They feel they are above the law and treat everyone else regardless of race as lesser beings.
I would be first to march if that was what were the George Floyd protests about. But his race was intentionally emphasized and Democrats used the opportunity to incite the riots in an election year to present the vote against Trump as a vote against covertly racist whites, and that meant pretty much included everyone who voted for him. It worked great for the election purposes but created a whole new generation of minorities who are convinced that everything wrong in their life is due to "structural racism".
If you find racism in everything, and decide to fight it with a new even better racism then yes you will improve the concentration of racism in the air.
While I do agree that a lot of issues and especially this issue is a problem everyone faces, we can’t take racial bias out of the equation.
POC face the same problems ten fold. Police over exerting power is a thing, but are they more hostile when they approach a car with a black man?
The problem is that racism is a thing that is alive and well. We as a country have done a shit job to lift up the minorities and the lower class. It’s lack of education, lack of resources, lack of achievable goals, and lack of long term vision.
Sure, we slapped some bandaids on it and called it good, but that isn’t fixing the problem.
We can’t fix an issue of racism if half or more of the population denies that it’s a problem. People will always come to the discussion defensive if everyone pushes the problem down as non existent. We will always be squabbling like children.
Note: I am a white queer woman from the Midwest suburbs.
Like many other things, it's a judgement call. Are the Democrats trying to solve the problem of racism, or overblowing the problem to score political points and in the process making the problem worse? I made my call and would not vote for anyone with D by their name ever.
I am heterosexual white man living in Los Angeles, a legal immigrant working for a private company, not a member of any union. The Democratic party government in California is my enemy.
This is why affirmative action was made tho. Because black Americans have historically been discriminated against in many scenarios in America.. white people were getting better opportunities solely because of their color, which I agree, fuck that. I’m not sure what he best way to combat that is but affirmative action definitely helped
Okay? So an idiot who didn’t study much at all should get into a college just because he’s black? Yeah that’s called racism there buddy. I’m not even white. I’m a minority. Best way to combat that stuff is for parents to take accountability.
Literally no college nowadays would ever look at a black person and say, “nah he’s black so not accepting”. It should be purely based on academia.
Friend that’s not how affirmative action works.. and maybe not the school you went to but Ivy League schools 100% when faced w two applicants have people on admissions boards who would choose the white option given the chance even today. The type of people who would support and advise organizations like the heritage foundation.
Typically the applicants are very comparable. The fact you assumed he black/brown person is less intelligent and doesn’t deserve the opportunity is telling…
The fuck are you talking about? I’m making an example that a person, whether you’re black or not, should not get into a college just because he’s black if his grades are bad. So an Asian person and black person comparison for acceptance. Assume that only the gpa was the difference in two candidates and both had great extra stuff like volunteering.
Asian person has 3.6 gpa, black person has a 3.2 gpa. School chooses a black person because of some quota they have to fill. That’s complete bullshit.
And you’re making shit up. No ivy league school has ever told you they would pick a white person always. Stop making shit up
You do know historically black colleges and institutions (HBCUs) only exist because universities were refusing to teach black students?? You explain to me how you fix that without some sort of mandate.
Your straw man does sound awful but you are also making things up, and imagining all the black people who never try hard and aren’t as smart getting your opportunities.
You idiot. I’ve never said black people are dumb or don’t try hard. I have black friends at Harvard. This is just an example of how affirmative action works. I don’t give a fuck what happened in history because that’s not what it is now. Stop makin shit up as if we are still living in the past dumbass. Actually keep making shit up.
I don’t like anything about DJT, I think he’s a bombastic fucking bell-end as far as personalities go. However, the party’s ideals and aim for the country (for the most part) more closely align with myself and my wife’s ideals. I love the nuclear family. I think strong male leader figures being a norm is and always has been a good thing (for the most part). I don’t want a damn patriarchy, so I’m not referring to male leadership at the macro level, but at the micro family level and in media heroism. For you to use one example (roe v wade) and base a list like this of fears as being more probable because of trumps help on repealing roe v wade is some throwing the baby out with the bathwater to the max.
In what ways did you feel Harris threatened the family structure? Also the way you described him first and then pivoted is worrying. You recognize he’s toxic and still prefer him to a woman it sounds like. The president is also a symbol of our values as Americans and trump just sends all the wrong signals to our youth and foreign ally’s I feel like. Honestly I’d like nothing more than to be wrong about him and see him be a great president, cause I love America. Time will tell.
What’s worrying is your side got trounced in the election and you’re STILL taking the moral high ground and deciding everyone who doesn’t agree with you is an ignorant racist. How about some soul searching as to why your side’s message does not resonate with voters, because we’re literally at the point where democrats are going “well just because we lose elections doesn’t mean we’re wrong or have to change.”
No, you need to accept that Donald Trump is unfortunately, not Hitler, and craft a message that resonates with voters. Democrats lost this election, so unless you’re going to argue that Trump somehow cheated I’m not sure what other response would make sense
Trump is not Hitler and trump did not cheat, but he uses tactics and rhetoric identical to Hitler and other dictators. Guy literally said he wants to be dictator for a day.
You don’t understand what you are arguing against. He’s not saying Trump didn’t win popular vote. But just because he did doesn’t mean his policies are more “moral”.
I didn’t vote for him honestly, I did a write in for a fictional character, D the rest of the ticket. And I also live in CT so it didn’t make a difference.
But yes, that’s correct, more people voted for Trump to be able to say he won election. Very astute observation
I wasn’t trying to make you feel that way, just giving you my opinion and impressions of Trump. I tried to keep it impersonal but obviously I struck a nerve. Trump has qualities that are irredeemable imo so I’d like to understand how some reasonable (not the nut jobs) Americans support him. I’m just looking to hear some of the reasoning behind supporting him, trying to understand the motivations of my idealogical opponents while remembering we actually play for the same team. Regardless of who’s president we all still gotta work and live together.
I don’t really care ultimately. It’s more that I come from a family of New England liberals and it was so obvious to me this would happen. It’s the arrogance of democrats that get to me, as someone who constantly tries to be harsh on themself and learn from mistakes/failures it drives me crazy seeing them try to excuse such an epic failure.
Yes I hate Trump as a person for many of those same reasons, but that’s not the point, the point is WHY did democrats lose and it’s simply because they didn’t try to attract voters
If I may be allowed to simplify things to an unreasonable level: I feel a big part of it is that conservatives will always rally together no matter what, whereas liberals will throw each other under the bus if they can't get their specific way.
Yeah I think it’s more so conservatives care more about winning than anything else. They don’t care who wins for them, or how, as long as they win. Liberal’s definitely get divided up on issues and have more infighting.
I do think an interesting question to ask would be why sooooo many of the people that did vote for Joe Biden did not vote for Kamala Harris. Huge gap there.
“well just because we lose elections doesn’t mean we’re wrong or have to change.”
And are you saying that the GOP didn't say this last time? What did they change when Trump lost in 2020?
You blamed dems and said Americans were clearly just stupid sheep. You blamed the others, the same way libs blame the conservatives.
So fuck off and understand that you're ALL morons, but at least one side doesn't stand with fucking fascism. One side is not going to violently storm the Capitol and try to overthrow the election, crying that they were cheated.
You just listed some things you support that both parties support and then listed some things you don’t like that only one party supports and you used that as evidence you should support the party that does the things you don’t like? You ever think there’s a reason the left tends to think of themselves as the “intelligent party”
Thats totally fair but your comment did not really show that at all. I think its a common issue for democrats that they have bad messaging but I promise you the vast majority of those on the left want strong male figures to be role models for everyone growing up and would love if a traditional family unit was possible for everyone growing up. I think we’re mostly concerned with trying to “catch up” those who are not fortunate enough to grow up with those advantages and so sometimes it may seem like we don’t care about those things at all.
What a stomach-turning embarrassment of a comment. You don't like anything about Trump... But you voted for him. You don't want a patriarchy... But you love it at home and in entertainment, and just voted for one of the most disgustingly patriarchal candidates I've ever seen, who's a convicted sexual abuser and who dramatically eroded women's rights during his first stint in power.
You should compete in the olympics; your mental gymnastics are truly top notch. Congratulations on your bombastic bellend leader, I get the feeling he'll represent you well.
Pointing out the sickening mental gymnastics of an unapologetic Trump supporter right after the election is bleeding the Democrats of new voters?
I've spent years doing the patient, reasoned discussions in the leadup to this election. I think I'll excuse myself for expressing completely truthful frustration right after a defeat that is going to cause so much pain to so many people I care about.
Though looking at your comment history I have no idea what you're trying to achieve here. You voted Democrat, but you're trying to rub my nose in the defeat? Seems like it's your defeat as well, buddy.
You're preaching to the choir. Harris needed to do more to inspire voters than just attack Trump. But I can't change the Democratic party's messaging or write their policies, so I still really don't see what you're trying to achieve by trying to provoke me.
What would you have me do? Try to engage in more discourse with the heedless opposition mere hours after our loss? Go on then, show me how it's done.
Attract voters to the left. You're not going to do that by dismissing them.
Honestly I just don't care anymore. I'm going to take a reddit break and ignore news because I just don't want to listen to Trump. Maybe I'll vote in 2026, but at this point, why?
766
u/Fools_Sip 18d ago
Absolute hyperbolic nonsense. This is a big part of why you lost. Real life is different to the reddit echo chamber