American Politics 16: After The Ballooning

[New-Minneapolis]

However, those who agree to the 15 week thing may not see Lake as an improvement.

True, but ghe point is that differences in policy don't disqualify mutual support. Especially when we're talking intraparty variance vs interparty variance.

If the pro-choice folks said "Okay, we can have a 15 week limit for elective abortion", then "pro-life" folks would move the goal posts and say "Nope, we want a complete ban instead."

[American Legionaries]

True, but ghe point is that differences in policy don't disqualify mutual support. Especially when we're talking intraparty variance vs interparty variance.

If the pro-choice folks said "Okay, we can have a 15 week limit for elective abortion", then "pro-life" folks would move the goal posts and say "Nope, we want a complete ban instead."

How is that moving the goalposts?

[New-Minneapolis]

If the pro-choice folks said "Okay, we can have a 15 week limit for elective abortion", then "pro-life" folks would move the goal posts and say "Nope, we want a complete ban instead."

How is that moving the goalposts?

Because most pro-choice folks support having a week limit, although it varies. I admit that anything less than 14 weeks would hard to gain support. The "pro-lfe", or anti-abortion side would not agree to this. They would advocate a complete ban, some would even ban it when the mother's life is at risk, because the logic goes "killing another person to save another is immoral" or "They will be together in heaven". The rape/incest exception that most pro-life/anti-abortion folks used to support is no longer the case.

[San Lumen]

Where is the proof? Why was this evidence not presented in court? To pull off such a scheme someone would have come forward. The cases were dismissed because they had no proof.

It’s simply not possible to rig an election on the scale you allege. No election worker could get away with it.

Trump supporters like GMS think it's the court's responsibility to find and prove the fraud, not the accuser's responsibility

Nah its more like the judges were in on the conspiracy and don't want to hear the evidence and they forget lying under oath is a crime.

[American Legionaries]

How is that moving the goalposts?

Because most pro-choice folks support having a week limit, although it varies. I admit that anything less than 14 weeks would hard to gain support. The "pro-lfe", or anti-abortion side would not agree to this. They would advocate a complete ban, some would even ban it when the mother's life is at risk, because the logic goes "killing another person to save another is immoral" or "They will be together in heaven".

So people with consistently advocate for their desired policies? That seems like nothing about goalposts.

[New-Minneapolis]

Because most pro-choice folks support having a week limit, although it varies. I admit that anything less than 14 weeks would hard to gain support. The "pro-lfe", or anti-abortion side would not agree to this. They would advocate a complete ban, some would even ban it when the mother's life is at risk, because the logic goes "killing another person to save another is immoral" or "They will be together in heaven".

So people with consistently advocate for their desired policies? That seems like nothing about goalposts.

I'm saying that the anti-abortion folks activating a 8-14 week ban would change their position

[American Legionaries]

So people with consistently advocate for their desired policies? That seems like nothing about goalposts.

I'm saying that the anti-abortion folks activating a 8-14 week ban would change their position

Why would they do that?

[Yerachmeal]

True, but ghe point is that differences in policy don't disqualify mutual support. Especially when we're talking intraparty variance vs interparty variance.

If the pro-choice folks said "Okay, we can have a 15 week limit for elective abortion", then "pro-life" folks would move the goal posts and say "Nope, we want a complete ban instead."

This is why I never know how to respond when I'm asked if I am prolife or pro choice. I thinkit should be allowed without question for the 1st trimester only.

[Yerachmeal]

I'm saying that the anti-abortion folks activating a 8-14 week ban would change their position

Why would they do that?

They wouldn't, because they'd think that the prochoicers with that view should call themselves prolife. This is why labels and stereotypes are stupid to go off of. And yes, that includes parties when there's only 2 real options, which was my point this whole time in saying how silly it is to be "pro" Reagen, Trump, Desantis, and Lake all at once. It's like being pro Biden, Warren, Klobuchar, and AOC all at once.

[American Legionaries]

Why would they do that?

They wouldn't, because they'd think that the prochoicers with that view should call themselves prolife. This is why labels and stereotypes are stupid to go off of. And yes, that includes parties when there's only 2 real options, which was my point this whole time in saying how silly it is to be "pro" Reagen, Trump, Desantis, and Lake all at once. It's like being pro Biden, Warren, Klobuchar, and AOC all at once.

Yes, that's called being a Democrat...

[Yerachmeal]

They wouldn't, because they'd think that the prochoicers with that view should call themselves prolife. This is why labels and stereotypes are stupid to go off of. And yes, that includes parties when there's only 2 real options, which was my point this whole time in saying how silly it is to be "pro" Reagen, Trump, Desantis, and Lake all at once. It's like being pro Biden, Warren, Klobuchar, and AOC all at once.

Yes, that's called being a Democrat...

No, most democrats are not pro AOC, any more than most republicans are pro Kari Lake.

[The Jamesian Republic]

Yes, that's called being a Democrat...

No, most democrats are not pro AOC, any more than most republicans are pro Kari Lake.

The Progressive Caucus parts of the Democrats would like AOC.

[Eahland]

They wouldn't, because they'd think that the prochoicers with that view should call themselves prolife. This is why labels and stereotypes are stupid to go off of. And yes, that includes parties when there's only 2 real options, which was my point this whole time in saying how silly it is to be "pro" Reagen, Trump, Desantis, and Lake all at once. It's like being pro Biden, Warren, Klobuchar, and AOC all at once.

Yes, that's called being a Democrat...

You have clearly not been paying any attention whatsoever to how the left-hand side of the political spectrum approaches "unity".

[Neutraligon]

If the pro-choice folks said "Okay, we can have a 15 week limit for elective abortion", then "pro-life" folks would move the goal posts and say "Nope, we want a complete ban instead."

This is why I never know how to respond when I'm asked if I am prolife or pro choice. I thinkit should be allowed without question for the 1st trimester only.

Pro-choice seems right. There is quite the debate in that camp about when free access to abortion should end, if it should, on the pro-choice side. Many on the pro-choice side place it later than you do, at 24 weeks, ie when the fetus has about a 50% chance of surviving outside the womb, although that is only with massive medical intervention.

[Yerachmeal]

No, most democrats are not pro AOC, any more than most republicans are pro Kari Lake.

The Progressive Caucus parts of the Democrats would like AOC.

Even that is too vague. Would Warrem supporters like her? Not likely. And the progressives as a whole are a minority of the party anyways, so the minority of a minority group liking her (which even then is assuming they don't see her as antisemetic) does not show much popularity within her party.

[The Jamesian Republic]

The Progressive Caucus parts of the Democrats would like AOC.

Even that is too vague. Would Warrem supporters like her? Not likely. And the progressives as a whole are a minority of the party anyways, so the minority of a minority group liking her (which even then is assuming they don't see her as antisemetic) does not show much popularity within her party.

True.

[Yerachmeal]

This is why I never know how to respond when I'm asked if I am prolife or pro choice. I thinkit should be allowed without question for the 1st trimester only.

Pro-choice seems right. There is quite the debate in that camp about when free access to abortion should end, if it should, on the pro-choice side. Many on the pro-choice side place it later than you do, at 24 weeks, ie when the fetus has about a 50% chance of surviving outside the womb, although that is only with massive medical intervention.

I do usually say pro choice, but like you said most pro choicers say later, so I always specify what I mean.

[American Legionaries]

The Progressive Caucus parts of the Democrats would like AOC.

Even that is too vague. Would Warrem supporters like her? Not likely. And the progressives as a whole are a minority of the party anyways, so the minority of a minority group liking her (which even then is assuming they don't see her as antisemetic) does not show much popularity within her party.

It's not necessary to like someone to support them politically. And political support is a highly contextual thing.

[Yerachmeal]

Even that is too vague. Would Warrem supporters like her? Not likely. And the progressives as a whole are a minority of the party anyways, so the minority of a minority group liking her (which even then is assuming they don't see her as antisemetic) does not show much popularity within her party.

It's not necessary to like someone to support them politically. And political support is a highly contextual thing.

Would you call yourself a Trump supporter? You voted for him.

[American Legionaries]

It's not necessary to like someone to support them politically. And political support is a highly contextual thing.

Would you call yourself a Trump supporter? You voted for him.

Yes. However, I wouldn't call myself a Trump liker.

[Nora Xent]

Today is the day that will make or break Kevin McCarthy's speakership.

[The Black Forrest]

Are we seriously still perpetuating the fantasy that college-level subjects like Critical Race Theory are being taught in grade school?

The main point is CRT Critical Race Theory, should not be taught in any schools, colleges and universities of any kind, you know my reasons and our reasons for it, you know my Facts and our Facts for it. But of course you guys strongly disagree with them, so no matter what I and us say, post and link too, you guys will dismiss it all, as I expect. Proving My Point and Points.

First off; CRT really isn’t defined. There were no plans to introduce it to grade school. That is a republican lie. If you don’t like being called a liar, don’t continue the lies.

From what little I have read; I have no problems with CRT. People will only advance if they learn the bad along with the good.

I do understand the conservatives views. Who want s to learn the shitty things their parents or grand parents, great-grand, etc., etc. did?

I know your opinions. They are wrong. You really haven’t presented an argument why we shouldn’t other then it makes our “heros” look bad.

Proving? *sighs* I am still waiting for you to prove something substantial….,

[The Black Forrest]

Their feelings do not care about your facts.

and our Facts don't care about their Facts, this is a Fact, lol.

It’s called opinions.

You claim facts and never back them up with evidence other the conspiracy talk.

[Shrillland]

It's not necessary to like someone to support them politically. And political support is a highly contextual thing.

Would you call yourself a Trump supporter? You voted for him.

He did, but not because he likes the man so much as he hates and fears Dems far more. Our negative hate-based politics leads to such things, alas.

[The Black Forrest]

No should proved absolutely nothing. The judge dismissed her case as she had no proof and there is zero evidence whatsoever of any disenfranchisement.

Are elections only fair to you if a Republican wins? Were any other elections rigged last year?

Yes there was election vote fraud against President Trump in 2020 and Kary Lake in 2022. All the courts and the US Supreme Court should have listened to the cases instead of dismissing them on Technical grounds, it would have satisfied Trump, and that would have been the end of it, one way or the other. Just like the US Supreme Court listened to Al Gore's election vote fraud charges. I finally answered your questions on Arizona and other elections.

What fraud was that? The only fraud I read about was extremely small in scale and it usually involved a republican.

There was no mass voter fraud. Don’t lie.

The Courts have the right to toss bullshit cases as not to waste the courts time. Over 80 lawsuits were tossed for lacking any real merit. Trump did win 3 cases and those involved procedure violations….not the mass voter fraud lie.

Also don’t lie. The only outcome Trump would have been satisfied is if the lawful election was tossed and he remained President.