I am putting this here because I think that the Abortion question is based on religion and little else, certainly not facts.


There are indications that legal abortions reduced the number of unwanted children which, in turn, reduced crime, from 1970's to 1990's approximately 20% Questions and studies of unwanted children fills volumes I offer just one possible result of abortion:
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_201975.pdf

From 2011 to 2017 Legal abortions reduced by 19%
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_201975.pdf

Banning abortions would increase the maternal death rate by 21% or more.
https://www.colorado.edu/today/2021...d-boost-maternal-mortality-double-digits

The United States rates 127th out of 185 countries
Americal has more maternal deaths than countries such as Turnkey, Russia, Uruguay, Latvia, etc.
https://www.nationmaster.com/nmx/ranking/lifetime-risk-of-maternal-death

If you like statistics www.nationmster.com is a really great place for them about just about everything. NationMaster was setup for students to use.

I have been giving abortion a bit of thought. The number of abortions has been steadily dropping since it was made legal years ago which I have always thought was interesting. I think it may be due to better education when it comes to evil sex (a personal belief based on nothing). Unwanted children is a peskey one. There is a lot about them. They have very hard times and many turn to crime. Banning abortions also means that many more maternals will die.

The simple fact is that banning abortions doesn't mean reducing abortions (apparently quite the reverse) as abortions will continue but many will cause problems, death, unwanted children, and possibly even more crime. Apparently the Republicans are all for banning abortions which I find very strange because of the costs of doing that. A lot of abortions happen because the maternal one has no money, no husband, no job, etc. When forced to bear the baby in question I suspect gov will have to pay for the birth, the taking care of, the education of, etc. of the baby in question which may get a lot more expensive for tax payers as well. When one adds it all up banning abortions becomes a really taxing experience for tab payers. Given that Republicans are, at least by supposition, don't like taxes but supporting abortion will increase taxes.

In other words the banning of abortions will make the goddites very happy as it will please the lord. The simple fact is that its not gonna stop abortions just create more problems for gov to fix and I have little faith that it gonna get fixed. The only real thing that will happen is that more die young, more unwanted, possibly criminal, children, etc.

The simple fact is that banning abortions fix nothing and make a mess of things. In other words banning abortion is a really bad idea no matter how you look at it.

Oh, in passing, I guess I should also mention that amongst those who want to ban abortion are the males. They are quite prominant when it comes to abortions. Nobody seems to notice that one which is kind of interesting all on its own.

Just a few thoughts...........

There is a recipe for abortion in the Bible! (Numbers 5:11-31) Which makes it odd that so many biblical literalists are opposed. Jesus never said a word about it, and nobody thought up ensoulment at conception until 1500 years after Jesus. Before that, it was thought the soul enters the body with the first breath. Actually, infant mortality was so high around Jesus' times infants under a year old were not even counted in the census.

So one could make the argument that opposing abortion is heresy. But that's not at all unusual. Lots of things modern "Christians" believe are heretical. Fundamental things like "Your dead Grandpa is in heaven watching over you." flys in the face of early Christian beliefs that said people take a long dirt nap until Jesus returns, and only saints go right to heaven. In general, Christian dogma has gotten a lot more comforting, and less Christian over the centuries. Now we have so-called Christians saying immigration laws are more important than "Love your neighbor as yourself." Exactly the opposite of what Jesus is quoted as saying.

RBG - fatal flaw in Roe v Wade

That last one changes like the wind on a late spring day in tornado country and for the most part, in times of encroaching authoritarianism, some of the wealthier churches always make the move to protect themselves...err (COUGH COUGH!!!...SELL OUT) to the authoritarians if they're right wing (wealth makes deals with wealth & power) and in the case of left wing authoritarians they just hibernate and go underground.

That's what the world has witnessed in the last few generation. There are exceptions, of course.
But not many.

Its a 'feelgood' thing with many of the banning folks. Babies are cute, especially the new ones. Stopping people from killing them is kindly and makes them feel a lot better. Men want to ban because they are saving the mother from feeling bad and they don't like making females feel bad. Men also know that real women love having babies and need saving from interrupting that. All babies in the womb are really cute and they have heartbeats and feel pain as well which is unfair to them. If a maternal dies its punishment by god and nothing to do with us. It just goes on, and on and on.

Screw facts, screw costs, screw pain and suffering, nobody understands this like we kindly Christian jackasses.

Funny thing, except not so funny: I've seen White Supremacists posting messages, who are upset because states banning abortion means more People of Color for America. Not here, of course, but in other forums with antisemitism and racism rampant.

First of all, babies are born; fetuses are not. Killing a baby is murder and against the law.

What's the difference between a fetus and a baby? Babies exist outside of the womb; fetuses cannot.

The unborn are not U.S. citizens and as such the Constitution grants them no rights.

Kinda like the founding fathers' view of women and black humans who were actually born.

I’m 28 pages into the Alito draft (98 pages total).

Early on he disses the 1973 court for relying on ancient history, then proceeds to cherry-pick ancient history for a framing more consistent with his bias. That seems a little weird.

But more importantly, Alito makes a case that in U.S. history antipathy to abortion was the norm, and cites some very obscure (to me) authorities on the subject. The person he cites the most (cherry-picks) is a man who wrote a book on abortion history in 2008… his name slips my mind. That guy relies heavily on “custom and culture” but does not really explain the variety of rationales that abortion laws were born of.

The one thing that stood out, though, is virtually all of the custom and culture was from a period prior to 1920, when women first gained the right to vote. Women were lesser beings, chattel whose main purpose was being a vessel for reproduction.

So I’m guessing RBG’s view that the primary issue in the right to choose dispute is/should be definitely a matter of equal rights for the sexes.

I'm guessing that RBG should have retired years ago and we might not find ourselves in this mess right now. Hubris.


That hasn't really changed much. It's baked into every major religion.

We built this patriarchy.

There are murmurs of women choosing self-sterilization so they never have to worry about future pregnancies. That's one way of denying the Right future children to groom.

I, too, have given abortion, and the abortion debate, a great deal of thought, of late. I, too, have failed to finish Justice Alito's disingenuous screed.

But, I've been involved in debates on the issue for decades, and have always been of two minds about it. On the one hand, I understand those that see abortion as akin to infanticide - even though they are biologically wrong, and morally simple. On the other hand, as a strong advocate for civil rights (and a card-carrying member of the ACLU), I fully appreciate the importance of the right at issue, and its profound effect on individuals and society.

There is a slippery slope on both sides of the debate, and ideologues like Alito prefer black-and-white answers in a living-color world. Moreover, his answer, unsurprisingly, is entirely wrong, as well as wrong-headed. Down that path madness lies.

Abortion - the deliberate cessation of a pregnancy - has been a fact of life for as long as civilizations have existed. Until very recently, it was not considered a moral issue at all, and a practical necessity for a society. Where it was "outlawed" it was usually for racist or misogynistic reasons - preventing slaves from aborting potential "dividends" or ensuring wives dutifully presented heirs for the benefit of husbands - even at the risk of their own lives. For time immemorial, abortions have been the "safer" option over carrying a pregnancy to term - which is truer today than ever (in the US it is 14 times riskier to carry to term). The motivations for making it illegal have been far from moral (such as undercutting competition).

At this juncture, however, we need to be more pragmatically attuned. It is reliably estimated that 1/4 of all women 15-45 will have an abortion in their lifetimes. Moreover, prohibition only affects the female half of the population directly. Further, the effects of anti-abortion laws fall, as they always have, disproportionately on the most disadvantaged members of society, which creates a greater burden on all of us. Additionally, pregnancy is always a period of uncertainty. At least 20% of pregnancies end in a miscarriage (loss of the fetus before the 20th week of gestation). All of these factors militate toward accepting abortion as an overall public good, which is reflected in polling as well.

I really have no idea what the Supremes will actually do. I suspect the problem will be the basis of the current Abortion thing - privacy. As far as I can tell it was a right to privacy that made abortions legal. Now, my question is going to be whether we will lose any privacy should they make Abortions illegal. I have wondered, for years, why they didn't legislate the entire thing instead of relying on the Supremes to leave it alone. Should they continue then if we think that Abortions are pesky just wait when folks are told that they no longer have any right of privacy in anything.

THEN its gonna get real interesting!

At this time two years ago, there was a Constitutional right to an abortion as set out in Roe and Casey per the SCOTUS’ answer which was clearly yes.

The proof is that courts enforced it, and people complied.

It can’t possibly be that Alito’s decision, in whatever form it is finally rendered, makes it so that there was never a Constitutional right to an abortion. That doesn't make sense.

The majority in Roe and Casey both said there is a Constitutional right to an abortion, and so it was.

That is really the problem with Alito's "reasoning".

There is a faction in the legal community, well represented on this Court, that is perfectly comfortable ignoring vast swaths of the Constitution and constitutional understandings that have existed for a century or more: the 9th Amendment simply doesn't exist; there is no substance to the 14th Amendment. I have referred to it as "Antebellum thinking", and it is.

Prior to the Civil War, especially after the Dred Scott decision, "States' rights" were paramount and the federal government had no authority to legislate things like "opposing slavery", recognizing blacks as human beings - literally - or ensuring equal protection of the laws for anyone. Lest one believe the Civil War and the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments changed that, the Court, for decades thereafter continued to flout the literal language of the Constitution to impose its will in the Civil Rights Cases and Plessy v. Ferguson.

This reasoning still obtains with Alito and his co-conspirators. Language like "privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; "due process of law" and "equal protection of the laws" are quaint notions. Given that - and there is no exaggeration here - nothing we recognize as "civil rights" are immune from reversal by this Court.

Rightwing Men:
Also Rightwing men:

Decent Americans must not remain silent in the face of Christian versions of Sharia Law from Republican states and SCOTUS, or next year's "Mother's Day" will become "Forced Motherhood Day"

Since one of the basic considerations in the abortion debate is the threshold of "viability", I have been thinking about what that means. I don't actually agree that viability (being able to exist outside the womb) is the issue - the better question is when does the fetus become a person. This has to do with what I think of as the soul (I'm not a religious person, but I do imagine that there is a resident of the body that is kind of like the driver - call it consciousness - that somehow chooses to move into the new corporeal form at some point. If this soul exists outside of physical form, then it is most likely not affected by the death of the body.

Now here I will shift to imagine what a religious person (particularly a Christian in the case of abortion, but also many other religions and philosophies espouse) should see as the correct context for birth and death. Life on Earth is a temporary condition, and not all that important in the eternal scheme of things.This concept, which is a teaching of many religions, is contrary to the obsession with preserving life at all costs. The preservation obsession arises from uncertainty and a fear of death, even for those convinced that Heaven awaits them on the other side. While this contradiction seems extremely weird, it is actually well aligned with the common human affliction of thinking our delusions are reality.

Time for the good part of yesterday's musings: let's assume that the soul has the power to choose which body it wants to enter for the ride of a life, and the body doesn't become a sentient person until the soul straps into the operator's seat. Keep in mind that the new body is in the process of being manufactured, by some magical preprogrammed process, in an older body that also possesses a soul-driver that has its own suite of desires. Isn't it the case that the new soul basically moved in the the existing person's house without getting an agreement first to be provided with full-service accommodations for decades, rent free? It's very much like the mother is being forced into slavery. You'd think the woman would get some say in the matter - an agreement or contract, with compensation.

As for the sanctity of life, death (which many folks, especially religious ones) is merely the moving on of the soul to the next place. It can, and does, happen all along the timeline of a life - so what makes abortion, the intentional rejection of slavery by a woman, an unacceptable choice? El Soul just gets to cut the line and get into Heaven sooner!

Everyone imagines there is some religious reason you shouldn't kill babies.

And that the younger the baby is the more okay it is to kill it.

It's just a moral thing, like eating meat or wearing leather. Do you go completely vegan or can you have milk and eggs?

I'm a very religious sort of man and I don't believe there is such a thing as a "soul" and that consciousness exists in all animals. I think you can safely lose your notions of "heaven" too.

Dead is dead.

Convince Reeps that every unborn baby is a future Democrat and they'll be calling for genetic proof of conservatism prior to birth.

It’s been a week since the leaked draft on abortion. For all the hell being raised about it, there has been no significant changes to the generic congressional ballot.

2 May 2020 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.5-42.5, Republican, 538 averages 45.2-42.8 Republican
9 May 2020 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.4-43.2 Republican, 538 averages 45.4-42.8 Republican

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

We haven’t seen any significant movement on President’s overall job performance since the leak either.

2 May 2020 Biden’s overall job performance, 41.7% approve, 53.0% disapprove
9 May 2020 Biden’s overall job performance, 42.3% approve, 52.9% disapprove

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html

It will take another week or two before we can gauge the full impact of the leaked draft on abortion. Early indications are the draft will have minimal effect on the upcoming midterms. But it’s still early, like the first quarter results in a football game with 3 quarters left. What I think will happen is after the second and third week you’ll see movement towards to the Democrats. After the fourth week, the numbers will begin returning to where they were prior to the leaked draft. That the way these things usually play out.

You may see the same results, first movement towards the democrats for the public 1-6 hearings and again once the SCOTUS hands down their official ruling in June. Then the numbers reverting to pre-1-6 public hearings and the official SCOTUS ruling. That’s what history has shown that happens on these so-called game changing events.

Wow! A whole week!!

For the record, the ruling isn't out yet - so why get worked up over something that is not certain?

Trust me, if Roe is overturned, your slide rule will be working overtime.

There are actually a few "game changers", even before a SC ruling is made. So far we have protestors demonstrating outside some conservative justices houses, demonstrating they know where they live. We have the Senate passing a bill to give Supreme Court justices and their families extra protection. And we have an anti-abortion organization's offices being burned down and spray paint on the outside wall proclaiming: "If women aren't safe, YOU aren't safe."

Overturn a civil right that's been around for 49 years, and some people are going to get upset. A few people are going to get really upset. I wonder how many Supreme Court nominations Biden is going to get in the next six years?

---Zero if the Republicans win the mid-terms. Where have you been?

Two things this bright, beautiful AM. I pour over numbers everyday rick. That’s what I do. I let the numbers talk to me, listen to what they say and usually get what they are talking about. Some I like, some I don’t, most I’m irrelevant to. I whole heartily agree, the ruling isn’t out yet, no need to get riled up, yet. But it’s fun watching folks who do.

Pondering, I’ve seen a whole lot of protests, in front of elected official’s homes, bothering them when they go take their families to eat, even some riots that occur. In the long run, those haven’t affected how people vote, they may have even provoked some sympathy for those being protested against, definitely against the rioters. The civil rights protests worked because they were peaceful, they were peaceful marches and rallies. Then there were the actions taken against them like Bull Conner’s, dogs, water cannons, bully clubs, against the helpless all on TV. It was clear to everyone who was in the wrong, who was breaking the peace, who was causing the violence. It wasn’t those who favored civil rights, it was those against civil rights and equality. Violence was caused by those against, not for. Rosa Parks bus boycott worked because it was peaceful. No riots or violence involved by the boycotters.

BLM and Defund the police failed because folks seen them as rioters, seen them as the cause of violence in Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle and other places. They didn’t change anyone’s vote for them but caused some to vote against them. You had a president win by 7 plus million votes, you also had many of those who voted for Biden to get rid of Trump voting against Democrats who embraced BLM and Defund the police to a tune of the Democrats losing 13 house seats, a governor and 2 state legislatures down ballot. Most people don’t like violence regardless of the cause, they don’t like what seems in your face protests at an elected official home or harassing them in during lunch or dinner. This kind of activity hurts the cause they’re trying to promote especially among those who aren’t hard core ideologues one way or the other. The ideologue vote is already baked in. It’s those who are quasi for that isn’t. It’s the group that believe abortion should be legal in only the case of incest, rape or the mother’s life is in danger. I don’t think they’re about to leap on the abortion bandwagon or change how they’ll vote regardless of how the SCOTUS rules on Roe. These folks count as being for abortion, but by how much? They want abortion illegal in all other cases. This group make up 29% of all Americans. That’s almost a third of America.

You look at the total percentage who say they’re in favor of keeping Roe, 65% in some polls, higher in others, as high as 80% in one. My advice is to go deeper. 54% believe abortion should be banned after the first trimester. 29% abortion allowed only in the case of case of incest, rape and mother’s life in danger, banned or illegal in all other cases. Be careful here, it will be very easy to overplay one’s hand.

I read this AM where Schumer is going to pass a law to keep abortion legal. So how do you keep everyone happy? From legal only in the case of incest, rape and the danger to a mother’s life to abortions right up to the day of birth and all those in-between. Where will be the cut off? Will those who favor a total ban on abortion after such and such a time frame, will they oppose it because to them Schumer’s law is taking abortion too far. Just something to think about.

Republicans are only forecast to win the House by a narrow margin and to hold the Senate with a possible pick up of one or two seats. All of President Biden's nominees will be confirmed, should there be any.

I don't count on numbers for my predictions, Like you, I look at all the available information, headlines, news blips, celebrity divorces, and popular trends, then I build models in my head of the most likely possible outcomes. I used to look at the world through blue-tinted glasses, I used to think there was some deep untapped well of left leaners among non-affiliated.

When I eliminated that from the models my predictions began to fall more in line with reality..

What I give you, based on available number is if the election were held today. So far as to the leaked draft, all rants and raves with no movement on the numbers. That could change or maybe it won’t. We still have 4 states that haven’t completed their redistricting. So, the numbers are based on 395 districts, races, elections, etc. instead of 435. That translate today into a net gain of 12-15 seats for the GOP. Out of those 395 districts, 42 are competitive, switchable, at risk districts. Currently held by 31 Democrats and 11 Republicans. Safe seats as of 10 May 2022, 163 Democratic, 190 Republican. But New York 26, Missouri 8, Kansas 4 and New Hampshire 2, haven’t completed their redistricting yet.

I’m positive the abortion issue nor the 1-6 hearings and the official SCOTUS decision won’t affect the safe seats. They could have an affect on the competitive, at risk seats. With 20 more at risk seats than the Republicans, the democrats better hope that they do. Time will tell on that. The senate boils down to 5 pure tossup states, Democratic held Nevada, Arizona and Georgia along with 2 Republican held states, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Two other states are very close, New Hampshire where the Democrats should hold onto and North Carolina where the GOP should hold on to it. Chances are good of Nevada and Arizona staying in Democratic hands, Georgia is very iffy. The Democrats have a good shot at both Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The likely outcome as of today, The Dems lose Georgia, but pickup Wisconsin and Pennsylvania for a 51-49 adavantage. Those numbers could change tomorrow.

If Susan Collins decided to retire suddenly, the governor of Maine would appoint a Democratic senator. If the Senate remains in Democratic control, any dead or retiring conservative SC justice would be replaced by someone much less conservative. All kinds of things could happen. Some wacko could blow up the Supreme Court, and we would get 9 liberal justices! I doubt the midterms and 2024 are going to be business as usual, considering one Party favors overthrowing the government, and Putin is backed into a corner where nukes look like his only option.

If Trump had won it would have been the other party trying to overthrow the election...

For the good of the country of course.


But most of them probably won't.

It's ironic that SCOTUS and their families need "protection" from losing their privacy when they're about to take-away the privacy that women have over their own bodies.

Breaking news!

A decades long investigation has uncovered a chain of secretive restaurants catering to RWNJs who crave "baby back ribs", and other infantile delicacies. Investigators have proven a link to the anti-abortion stance of so many Conservatives, not for religious or moral reasons, but for a lip-smacking addiction to baby fat. Some say that the tiny souls, which are only found in the 'born' product class, are similar to saffron in flavor.

Liberal abortionists, on the other hand, prefer home-cooked 'unborn' products, which are not so rich in fats and bones. Fetuses are much less costly as they do not have the significant added manufacturing costs associated with carrying to term and hospital deliveries, baby showers, and thousands of boring photos. They can often be foraged from Planned Parenthood dumpsters free of charge.

These new revelations are sure to create an upheaval in the Roe v Wade debacle, shedding new light on the roots of abortion custom and culture (not to mention cuisine). Several Supreme Court Justices are going to have a rough go with conflict of interest when the details of their dining habits are revealed. Rumors are rampant that Justice Thomas owes his baby face and oily complexion to his lavish diet, and Justice Kavanaugh gorges on Barbecued Baby Wings with copious amounts of beer as standard lunch fare. RGB (RIP) is said to have enjoyed a long life primarily because of a healthy diet of Embryo Salad with an olive oil/Umami dressing.

No, what's ironic is that they decided protesting on the lawns of doctors who provided abortions was within the 1st amendment rights of the protestors.

...or they're just groomers.

Clarence Thomas is whining that Americans are upset about Roe v Wade being overturned and that the leak has changed the high court and eroded trust.

If the leaked draft proves correct, Thomas and the other fascist Conservative justices will overturn a decision that has stood for over 50 years that protects all women's rights to privacy in their health and reproductive care and that, if removed, will trigger state bans that will cost women their freedom and lives and discriminates against women making them second class citizens.

Thomas is correct that the leak has eroded trust in SCOTUS because it exposed the fact that Americans trusted the court to make decisions based on medical science, but instead, the court has become an arm of Rightwing Christian fanatical extremism. Americans do not trust the SCOTUS because the SCOTUS have proven themselves untrustworthy!

As an aside, Clarence Thomas is the biggest reason there should be no lifetime appointments in Federal government - especially on the Supreme Court. Ever since Antonin Scalia died, Thomas now has no one from which to crib, thus exposing Thomas' laughable legal "reasoning."

Clarence Thomas:Here's an idea Clarence, quit undermining the court by setting-aside precedence. You're welcome.

The Dems have decided, in their wisdom, that they are for Abortions. The problem with that is that there are Abortions and other Abortions. Who, for instance, is for an Abortion 6 months into the pregnancy because the person wanting the Abortion just no longer wants a baby. Its my understanding that they can now save a 5 month baby. In other words there are degrees in an abortion. How about one at 8 months? Then there are the anti-abortion folk. Many of them won't allow an abortion even if it would save the life of the mother, a victim of rape, etc. In other words neither side really has answers to degree of abortion - both sides have a huge degree of Abortions.

The legislation that the Dems had a recent vote on was something like 3 pages long and, basically, went further than Roe they say. It failed and the plan to expose the bad GOP was a complete and utter waste of time. BOTH sides have degrees on abortion except that, on the Dem side, there was more than just health, rape, etc. were involved and even some Dems didn't vote for it. If the Dems continue to try and own Abortion as their main thing I am not even sure that their stance on abortion might assure they will lose bigtime in November.

I think that the current abortion thing is a really lousy war to fight given that number of people who have strong feelings on a variety of abortion choices ON BOTH SIDES!

I wonder what would happen if both sides could sit down and try to craft a solution that both sides might be able to live with. Probably be a really big mistake.

Compromise isn't a popular subject around here.

How do you sit down with misogynists who want to take away a women's freedom and make her a second class citizen and order her to give birth?

What do most Americans feel about compromise. When asked the question, “Which is more important for the leaders in Washington to stick to their beliefs, principles or compromise. 54% favored compromise, 28% answered beliefs or principles with no compromise and 18% were neutral or didn’t care.

This is what most Americans want, compromise but not the hardcore ideologues of both major parties. Who’s in charge of the parties, their hardcore ideologues. Abortion, 60% of all Americans think it should be legal during the first trimester but banned after that except for the life of the mother is in danger. At least that’s what 538 polling showed.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-americans-stand-on-abortion-in-5-charts/

There’s your compromise, I could live with that. You know that those who think abortion should be illegal always and those who believe abortion should be allowed past the first trimester wouldn’t. Together they make up 40% of Americans.

So, rick, would you let 40% dictate to the 60% who would approve of this compromise and deny, prevent the compromise from happening? Think of the numbers 60% first trimester in favor of abortion, keeping it legal. But 72% of all Americans think abortion should be banned after the first trimester except for the life of the mother. I’m positive that the 13% who think all abortions should be illegal, no exceptions would join forces with the 28% who think abortion should be legal after the first trimester to prevent this compromise from happening. If a compromise did occur, it would take the abortion issue off the table as a hot button issue to be used by both parties to fire up their base. Hence it will never happen. There are problems this nation has that are way too valuable to be used as a campaign tool to fire up one’s base than to be solved. Hence no compromise.

Decent Americans also want abortion in cases of rape or incest. Republicans don't want those cases to be permitted for abortion for some reason.

You don't. They must all be killed! That's the only conclusion decent Americans can come to.

Something to think about, the latest YouGov survey shows 13% of all Americans who think abortion should be illegal in all case. 29% think abortion should be legal only in the case of incest, rape and the life of the mother in danger, but banned or illegal for all other reasons. Together, that’s 42% of all Americans who either think abortion should be illegal or legal only in three circumstances, incest, rape and life of the mother. Banned or illegal in all other cases. When one adds those who want abortion illegal or banned after 12 weeks, that comes out to 72% who want abortion illegal or banned after 12 weeks or just 28% who think it should be continued to be legal.

Abortion isn’t cut and dried issue.It isn't all or nothing issue. There's plenty of varying degrees. Folks for or against, there’s certain limits and circumstance people are for or against. Limits placed on abortion. It seems to me the 28% of those who want abortion legal after 12 weeks are the extremist along with the 13% who want abortion completely illegal. Those who fall in-between those two extremes are probably decent people.

So the 28% pro-death and the 13% pro-life add up to 41% of the population telling the other 59% what's best for them. That's probably a running average on pretty much any issue.

I'm in the 28%, but I'd certainly be able to compromise and at least for now take care of the most at risk. When the religious/political fervor of the post-Trump years dies down, the courts and the doctors will be able make a case for expanding those rights.

The art of the possible, y'know?

States would still have the right to be more or less lenient, and Starbucks was the last corporation to announce that they would cover travel costs for abortions or gender-affirming surgeries.

If John Fetterman survives to run in November, have you seen who his opponent is liable to be? Kathy Barnette is surging in Pennsylvania and could defeat her millionaire rivals.

She is black and she is gritty Pennsylvania to the core. She is radically pro-life and is running on it.

Her mother was raped at eleven and had Kathy when she was twelve.
From Twitter:

I’d say on most issues, you have a third line up the Democrats, a third line up with the GOP only because that is where their party stands on the issue. Then there’s the third in the middle, probably no hard feelings either way unless the issue affects them personally. It becomes a matter of degree on which side and how much they support one or the other third on the issue. You probably won’t see many of this last group out protesting or anything akin to that. They’ll stay quiet for the most part, maybe vote for a candidate that comes closest to their conviction on the issue. But they’ll not get upset like party members do or those two thirds that get all riled up and upset over the issue.

There’s been no movement outside of a few tenths of a point up or down either in the Generic congressional ballot or President Biden’s approval/disapproval which is the normal daily movement since the leaked draft. I’m surprised by that. I expected at least a couple of points rise in favor of the Democrats. Apparently, abortion isn’t a hot topic or issue with this middle third that the Democrats think it is. The middle third that could change the dynamics of an election along with deciding the winner and loser.

I agree, it’s the minority on each side telling all those in-betweeners or don’t carers what best for them that decide the issue and policy. But if this middle third doesn’t want to make waves or take a stance, isn’t their fate to be determine by others exactly what they want?

Now I wonder, if rising prices, inflation wasn’t the number one issue, inflation, rising prices gets the attention from this middle third, if not this abortion issue might have been more important to them than it is today. Say in more normal times, no inflation, no COVID, etc. I don’t know. Whatever, but it does seem the leaked draft hasn’t caught this middle third’s fancy or attention. Only the hardcore on either side of this issue.

We are talking about abortion. There are SOME Republicans that want no exceptions and some that don't. Right now the no exception Republicans seem to be in charge but that can change. Republicans, I think, determine much not on personal belief but on what can help them keep their jobs and nothing else. They support Trump, not because they love him but because he controls how the base votes. Democrats, on the other hand, seem to be more interested in sticking to their beliefs rather than winning the next election. Democrats tend to win when their beliefs appeal to the voters at large. Republicans win when they are right about what they think the voters want.

Oh, in passing. I think that compromise means giving up something for some reason. I don't think everything needs to be passed with somebody giving up anything. Sometimes, I suspect, two parties can actually agree about something. I also think that there are levels of agreement from complete dis-agreement to happy agreement. In between there are probably lots of levels.

So, when you speak about what a Republican believes I suspect one might be very wrong. When you speak about what a Democrat will do to get elected I doubt that isn't the point as far as they are concerned.

Could be wrong but ............

Nope, compromise means both sides get some of what they want.

I'm trying to get a grant to develop a biochar abortifactant.

I think the "no exceptions" stance is the hill lots of Republicans are going to die on. For decades they tempered their anti-abortion meme with reasonable exceptions. Now their "own the libs" platform is leading into an electoral dead end. I would not be surprised if the Supreme Court's cooler heads saved them from themselves by letting states set time limits but required reasonable exceptions.

There's a tremendous amount of intellectual dishonesty, aka the failure to apply high standards for truth, going on in this thread.

Again, there are people, for and against, on both sides but they have, pretty much, been dispensed with when it comes to the righteous, on both sides. Most of what we hear is the extremes, on both sides. I have no doubt that this thing is really important to many but they are not getting covered by our media in any meaningful way. All that being said I suspect that they most extreme side will loose in November.

I believe that there are more in the middle than on any specific side. I consider those who agree that there has to be rules and, as far as I can tell, that means available in first 15 weeks, available in cases of rape, incest or health of the mother. I have also noted that there is nobody claiming that they would be responsible for the not wanted children being raised and educated (up to and including college)). I used to have two friends (now gone). Both were raised in orphanages and told me they were happy campers there. They had food, people who cared for them, and a regular place to lay their heads. They also said that they also watched as their state legislators reduced the money for the orphanages and noted that the lack of money meant having people working in orphanages being less and less competent and they were lucky because, in the end they all got shut down due to staffs that were paid, basically, the minimum. (same thing pretty much happened to Insane asylums).

I'm not sure the alternative to orphanages are "better". The child welfare agencies have to lower and lower their standards for foster parents. Race to the bottom? Orphans become slaves? We already have pretty shady people taking in a bunch of foster kids to live on the government money that comes with them. In essence, those are just privatized orphanages with very poor supervision.

Apparently it's impossible to tell the difference between a woman aborting a pregnancy because of abortion pills and a woman having a spontaneous abortion. Spontaneous abortions account for about 25% of pregnancies according to collected statistics, but the actual rate may be much higher because many women don't even know they are pregnant and it happens so early they just think it was a heavy or untimely period. (These are actually a good thing, because the fetuses are generally not viable.)

So in many "no exception" states, women having spontaneous abortions are now being assumed criminals until proven otherwise. But how do you prove God induced your abortion?

Yay? More single men running around? Asking for a friend.

That was my basic point. orphanages are probably cheaper to maintain. I suspect they are also better than what they kids have to deal with right now. I'm not saying that there aren't good foster parents but there are a LOT of really bad ones as well. An orphanage, on the other hand, will have rules, regulations, investigations, and reports. What we have now is a disaster. I have often wondered if anybody has done a study of children graduating from a foster home to see what the results of being fostered really are. Then I googled: "children raised in foster homes". Here is the first one I got: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S019074091730213X

There were a lot more and the results are not all that good. I actually knew of one foster mother who was the wife of the local safeway store and she wanted the money to spend on herself.

Wishful thinking in this day and age.
If we wind up with orphanages again, they will wind up being run by something like CCA, Corrections Corp of America.
An outfit LIKE CCA will probably lobby HARD for the contract and they will use corrections people to design and run them. So in the end, that's what orphanages WILL wind up like, complete with the overcrowding, lousy conditions and lack of accountability that ALL private prisons are famous for.
And they will demand, and GET, the right to SUE states that don't KEEP the beds filled.

What's the difference between an immigrant detention center and a modern day orphanage? No illegals.

By the way, painting all Dems as being for ABSOLUTIST positions on abortion is a big FAIL.
If you're thinking that way, your thinking is woefully inaccurate, and not a good look.

The majority of libs and cons alike simply want it to remain legal but many in both sides of the spectrum are willing to admit to some regulations like twenty or twenty four week barriers unless the fetus is incompatible with life, or the health of the mother is threatened.

Here is what the majority of Americans DO NOT WANT:
Oklahoma's law saying that abortion is illegal from the moment of conception. NO EXCEPTIONS.
That's also absolutist.

That law will murder women with ectopic pregnancies. You can't fit a growing fetus inside a 1 centimeter fallopian tube, with out a lethal tube rupture. Then she bleeds out into her abdomen. The fix is simple: Remove the fallopian tube and ligate the blood vessels. But that's the end of the fetus, and according to "no exception" laws, an abortion. Of course, the mom dying kills the fetus too.

This is why I think the Supreme Court will rule that exceptions are required for the state's law to be constitutional. This law is like state legislatures passing laws that henceforth pi will have a value of 3. It ignores facts some people wish were not so. But laws will not stop them being true.

And these particular Oklahomans are so siloed and so fact averse that they're probably willing to go to war over reality being an inconvenient truth. Their GOD SAYS that pi IS really three and that decimals are the work of Satan.

Do you understand who and what we are dealing with?
I wager that you do, but I had to ask the rhetorical question anyway.

Of course I do, but you do any work in the real world and that 0.141562 is going to bite you in the ass bigtime.

I have been saying, and repeating, that BOTH sides have have any number of conditions when it comes to abortions. There is no question about that one. The problem, again, on both sides, is that each is going all out for the most extreme solution. I know, the politicians are trying. The problem is with the marchers. They march, and carry their signs and their signs are rarely in the middle but favor anything that goes as far as possible on their side.

The Republicans are actually doing a slightly better job in that they actually have a message. The Dems, on the other side, have no message. Their plan seems to be to tell everybody the Republicans are all bad including their stance on Abortion whilst they are in favor of Abortion.

When it comes to what the sides are peddling its pretty clear. The right - NO! The left - YES! I have said it before. Abortion is pesky and no matter where the parties stand you can bet that its unlikely that any stand is one that wins!
My own thought is that the Democratic stance should actually be; "We are all waiting until the Supremes actually rule on abortion. After that we will support the right for Abortion if Abortion ends up in the hands of the states. (then just let it be while trying to calm down the marching signs).

I am probably wrong. I would also love to see the Dems actually sit down, determine what all their members can support and then SUPPORT THAT! Right now not even the Dems themselves know what they actually are for or against in any degree and that too costs them votes.

Nobody is really in favor of abortion, except maybe some ultra-libertarian nutjobs who would require abortion unless the parents posted a $200,000 bond to prevent taxpayers from footing the bill. A few Democrats favor abortion on demand right up until birth, but that is a very tiny percentage. The vast majority favor abortion when medically necessary, plus maternal choice with reasonable time limits. (In other words: Roe v Wade) So claiming Democrats are all over the place on it, while Republicans all want no exception no abortion, is just wrong. Most Republicans actually DO want reasonable exceptions.

This is why the potential for backlash is so high. These laws being passed in some states will kill a lot of pregnant women if Roe goes away. That's a very hard legislative record to hide from.

And they can just blame Democrats. None of it makes sense because it's not SUPPOSED to make sense, just "Those horrible subhumans did this....KILLLLLL THEM!"

It’s been three weeks since the leaked draft on abortion. Finally, a bit of movement toward the democrats. But only on RCP and it was but a single point, 538 doesn’t show any movement at all. Impossible to tell if this slight movement in RCP’s numbers was caused by the abortion issue or is just the normal ups and downs of polling. Probably more the latter. Remember, this is dynamic and changes all the time. The fact we’ve had so little movement over this time period reinforces my theory of the abortion issue being baked in. Inflation is still the elephant in the room. At least when it comes to voting in the midterms.

2 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.5-42.5, Republican, 538 averages 45.2-42.8 Republican
9 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.4-43.2 Republican, 538 averages 45.4-42.8 Republican
16 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.8-43.3 Republican, 538 averages 45.5-43.0 Republican
23 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 45.5-43.4 Republican, 538 averages 45.0-42.7 Republican

21-day difference, RCP Republicans -1.0, Democrats +0.9. 538 Republicans -0.2, Democrats -0.1.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

We haven’t seen any significant movement on President’s overall job performance since the leak either. I doubt you will. Whatever issue becomes hot for a while probably won’t make a difference. Rising prices tops the list of most important issues, everything else is secondary including the abortion issue.

2 May 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 41.7% approve, 53.0% disapprove
9 May 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 42.3% approve, 52.9% disapprove
16 May 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 41.6% approve, 53.4% disapprove
23 May 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 41.0% approve, 54.3% disapprove

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html

21-day difference, approval -0.7, disapproval +1.4

Perhaps the best way to look at this is the number of competitive, switchable, at risk house seats between 1 May to 23 May. But keep in mind, Kansas, Missouri and Florida completed their redistricting during this time period.
1 May - 29 Democratic seats, 10 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category
23 - May 36 Democratic seats, 12 Republican seats. An increase of 7 seats for the Democrats over these past 3 weeks and an increase of 2 for the Republicans. If the Democrats hadn’t won the gerrymandering war, creating 10 more democratic leaning districts than the GOP was able to create Republican leaning districts. You might be looking at a red wave election instead of losses of 15-18 seats.

Conclusion, the leaked draft had no detrimental effect on the Republican Party’s chances of a good midterm election. That the abortion issue is baked in regardless of which side you’re on or how hot an issue it was or becomes. Inflation, rising prices, empty shelves in stores remains the number one, hottest issue in determining how one will vote this midterm. I don’t think any other issue will replace it unless we get into a hot war with Russia.

The only problem I have with these numbers, Perot, is that they are national. The bulk of the elections are based upon local demographics at the District and State level, and the majority of those numbers are locked in amber by demographics and gerrymandering. That leaves, as you have noted elsewhere, only a few swing possibilities. Now THOSE figures I would find very interesting.

It's also true that while it has been encouraged, most Democrats aren't explicitly addressing the abortion issue in speeches and rallies. They may attack the Court and its radical rulings, but not specifically the abortion issue itself, so it is hard to say what impact it will ultimately have.

I did find the turnout in early voting in Georgia interesting, though. Not sure of its impact, either, but I've seen plenty of too-early opinions floating around. My personal take is that a lot of people who would have voted by mail have switched to early voting - a trend across the country.

Here’s the numbers as of yesterday, 48 competitive, switchable, at risk districts. Currently held by 36 Democrats and 12 Republicans. Safe seats as of 20 May 2022, 164 Democratic, 195 Republican. Which simply means in 359 of the 407 districts drawn so far, the winner is already determined. It doesn’t matter whether they hold an election in those 359 districts or not. New York hasn’t completed their redistricting yet. But I would imagine NY will add 20 safe Democratic seats and 4 safe Republican seats. That would make it 383 safe districts or districts where the result of either a Republican or Democrat is elected is already known. I have just received word that New York has passed their new map, I’ll have an update on that later.

The huge turnout in Georgia didn’t surprise me. While some restrictions were placed on absentee voting, Georgia expanded early voting. Early voting began on the 2nd of May and end on 20 May. Counties are required to have at least early voting on two Saturdays Counties can also have early voting on Sunday’s if that is what they want to do. But not required nor prohibited. Georgia expanded early voting from 15 days in 2020 to a minimum of 17 for 2022 with the possibility of 19 if the county includes Sundays. Here’s the whole skinny. This voter suppression mantra was hyped beyond belief in my opinion. You can make up your own mind.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/georgia-voting-law-9-facts/

Absentee voting only became a thing during covid. It's not as though millions upon millions have been relying on it for decades. Although having said that, I'm one of the millions who have used it since the last redistricting because my voting precinct was 17 miles in the wrong direction...

Whatever rule changes come about, if you want to vote, you probably can. I'll still vote absentee, I'm a senior and I'm disabled. But if DeSantis changes the rules, my precinct is now 4 blocks away and I'll happily wheel down to the polls come November.

I'm entirely in favor of a vote-by-mail system but not everyone agrees and not every state makes it available to everyone.

Partisans turn every little thing into a mantra and hype it to death.

every. little. thing.

I think you are right. Abortions, for the most part, is something that needs doing, especially insofar as the mother in question is concerned which is exactly why they want the right. My problem with the Democratic party is that most of the time the loudest get all the attention and, unfortunately the Dems loudest is flat out for. I am not saying that's their intention but, in the end, its what's happening. I keep hammering the same old thing - the Dems REALLY need a message instead of a bunch of personal thoughts on all sides. In the end everybody knows they are for Abortions. I am not even sure Abortion is something to even be fore but I do know that there are circumstances when it really needs to be done. The three main reasons seems about right (rape, incest and life of mother) but I am equally sure that there are a lot of others as well. In the case of abortion the Republicans are actually no better off. They are busily working for the abortion extremes and are determined to punish anybody even vaguely connected. Eventually they will be passing legislation to hang anybody for an abortion no matter reasonable they are.

I can remember some very strange things about abortions. One is when a rapist sued the victim of his rape to save the results of his rape whilst also demanding complete control of the resulting child. Now THAT'S offensive!

2020 was the first time I voted by mail, absentee since I retired from active duty back in 1986. Being over 65, I didn’t even have to request a ballot. Georgia sent ballots out to everyone over 65. Now that might have been just a county thing, I don’t know. Georgia’s new law also changed my polling or voting place. Instead of 3 miles away, it’s now 1. Halfway between home and Home Depot.

I thought nothing about absentee voting while in the military. But I’m still skeptical of it. I have a close cousin who lives in Oregon, mail in state, she’s always calling me up to ask me how she should vote. In a way, it’s like I’m officially voting in Georgia and unofficially in Oregon. Another quirk, I don’t like ranked voting, but I love runoffs when no candidate receives 50% plus 1. I’m a huge fan of the jungle primary also. Place all candidates on a single ballot without the party identification with the top two advancing to the general election, runoff if you will in November if no one received 50% plus 1 vote. At least this way, the voter will have to know the candidates name they want to win or vote for instead of just going down the line checking the R and or the D. Not caring who the candidates are or what their names are.

I'm for switching everything over to mail-in voting and putting the post office in charge of it.

Re-district everything by zip code.

New poll: 54% of Americans disapprove of Supreme Court following Roe draft opinion leak

I agree with the above majority.

Having stated the above, I do hope the SCOTUS follows exactly the leaked draft so that states will be free to restrict abortions in order that women and those who care about freedom over one's body punishes conservatives/GOP'ers in November 2022...severely ...in those six to nine "toss up" states.

Rick, I think that a dream. There’s been no significant movement in the generic congressional ballot since the leaked abortion draft on 1 May other than the normal ups and downs of polling. I have concluded that abortion is already baked into the equation. Those who make abortion a hot issue, those who will decide how they will vote based on abortion have already moved into either the Republican or the Democratic ranks since ROE was decided some 50 years ago. Inflation, rising prices remains the number one, the most important issue in deciding how one will vote this November.

2 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.5-42.5, Republican, 538 averages 45.2-42.8 Republican
26 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.3-44.1 Republican, 538 averages 45.1-42.7 Republican

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

As for the 5 tossup states in the senate, they were tossups on 1 May and are still tossups on 26 May. 3 belong to the Democrats, Arizona, Nevada and Georgia. 2 to the Republicans Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. D held New Hampshire is still lean Democratic while the R held North Carolina has changed from lean to likely Republican since the candidates where chosen in their respective primaries. R Budd has a 7.5-point lead over D Beasley in NC. All other states are considered safe or solid for the party that now holds them.

I’ll add this, the leaked draft wasn’t official. The official ruling once released may have a greater impact or not since everyone knows which way the SCOTUS is leaning. If the SCOTUS limits its ruling to the Mississippi lawsuit as it should, then all this ruckus, rants and raves will be much ado about nothing. If the SCOTUS does overturn ROE, that impact will be much less than it would have had without the leak. Many are expecting the overturning of ROE. The bottom line in my estimation is the overturning of ROE if it happens, won’t prevent the loss of the house. I’m not sure if it would have any effect on the tossup states in the senate. But it wouldn’t have to have a large effect, a minor one could make the difference as those tossup states are as close as close can be.

I disagree. If the SCOTUS does overturn ROE, forcing women to be birthing vessels will severely impact the November 2022 election. It's common sense. You don't need a poll for that.

We'll see Rick. I got plenty of time and can wait until November. But today, I personally think abortion is baked into the equation as all the avid pro-choicer’s are now democrats and the avid pro-lifers Republicans. They've had 50 years to move into their respective parties that agree on their abortion stances. Today, 20% of all Americans list the economy, inflation as the their number one issue on determining their vote this November. 6% list the abortion issue as their number one issue on determining their vote come the midterms. That's over 3 times as many people that will base their vote on inflation than abortion. Although we don't know how many of the 6% list abortion as their number one issue are pro-life and how many are pro-choice. What we do know is

But that can be broken down via party, Inflation as the number one issue in determining one’s vote, 10% Democratic, 24% Republican, 22% independent. Abortion as the number one issue in determining one’s vote for the midterms, 11% Democratic, 7% Republican, 6% independent. Since Gallup list party affiliation as being even as of April, no new party affiliation figures for May yet. The most important numbers here are independents, 22% voting on the economy, inflation vs. 6% voting on abortion. 43% of independents stating they’ll vote for the Republican congressional candidate vs. 34% for the Democratic congressional candidates. Which lines up to inflation being the number one, most important issue facing this country today.

These number as usual are dynamic and change constantly. You know I’ll be keeping a very close eye on all of this. Especially if the SCOTUS does overturn ROE. If the SCOTUS doesn’t, all of this is for nothing.

All the overturning of ROE does is leave abortion to the states. It doesn't ban abortion nationwide. Although some states may ban abortion within their state. The results remain to be seen.

Do you actually think that women are just going to be ok being told they have to give birth and have no say in the matter? What does common sense say?

You’re missing the point Rick. Those women who rank abortion at the top of their list of reasons to vote are already Democrats. They’re not Republicans. These women plan on voting Democratic already. They’re already included in the generic congressional ballot as voting Democratic. Women, regardless of party, 44% plan on voting Democratic, 41% Republican, the rest not sure or undecided.

The question then comes from those undecided women voters, which issue is more important to them in deciding how’ll they vote? Is it inflation or is it abortion? As of 24 may, women answer 18% inflation 11% abortion. The remaining 71% of women have other issues more important than either inflation or abortion. Again, polls are only good as far as they go. No one asked which side of the abortion issue those 11% of women who rank abortion as their most important are. You can be sure it’s not all 11% that are pro-choice, some of them are pro-life. The break down, your guess is as good as mine.

The difference between us is I think the abortion issue is already baked into the equation for the midterms. You think abortion will be a game changer. The answer lies in the future which one of us is correct. Abortion would have to be one huge game changer to overcome this:

The Democrats currently have 39 Democratic held seats in the at risk, competitive switchable column vs. 13 Republican held seats as of 26 May. Out of those 39 currently held Democratic seats, 6 are likely to switch to the GOP, then there are the 23 Democratic held seats in the pure tossup category with the remaining 10 in the lean Democratic column which they should retain although those 10 are competitive seats. Of the 13 held Republican seats, 1 seat is likely to switch to the democrats, 9 are in the pure tossup column and the remaining 3 seats in the lean Republican column which they should retain. Just counting the likely to switch seats, 6 democratic minus 1 republican equal 5. The number of net gain seats the GOP needs to take control of the house. If you split the pure tossup seats, 12 of the 23 Democratic goes to the GOP and 4 of the GOP tossups go to the Democrats, that adds another 8 seats to the 5 for a net gain of 13. This isn’t taking the generic congressional ballot into consideration which the Republicans lead, chances are the GOP will gain more than just 13, I’d make a gain of 18-20 using my matrix.

The senate is different considering only 5 states could switch hands. One Pennsylvania looks like a switch from GOP to the Democrats. The remaining 4 are pure tossups, 3 democratic held and 1 GOP held. If the Republicans can win one of the Democrats remaining 3 pure tossups and retain GOP held Wisconsin, you’re looking at another 50-50 tie.

You might be surprised how many women are pro-life, Rick.

Pretty much all the Republican women are. Common sense told us women would never vote for the p*ssy grabbing Trump...yet here we are.

Common sense said they'd elect Clinton. They didn't.

Democratic women will vote for Democrats because they are pro-choice. A few independent women who might not have voted will get off their couches because of this and vote for Democrats. But about half of independent women are also pro-life so there isn't liable to be a massive surge of them.

This is the sort of thing buffering Democrats from a red wave. This is a much-needed safety valve but it isn't going to blow the economy out of the water as the most critical issue to voters.
.

Abortion is a lousy political thing for either party. They both have members for, against, kinda, almost, maybe, and perhaps. Both sides a loud but, in the end ..............

It's a political football. Like gun control, healthcare and other political footballs that are always getting kicked around.

I know Republican women who rallied for abortion rights. But they will still vote Republican because it isn't a deal-breaker for them. They didn't like Trump, but he wasn't a deal-breaker for them until perhaps, they tired of him and voted for Biden but Republican down the ballot...

By the same token, I imagine there are pro-life Democrats(like Catholics) who would rather Dems were more pro-life but it isn't a deal-breaker for them either.

Both parties take absolutist stances, most people are somewhere in between.

Perhaps women will need to adapt to the current political situation just as women(and men) have adapted to survive under all sorts of harsh conditions in the past...

Greger, you’re much like me. You take the reality of the situation and go from there without letting emotion take over. I totally agree with what you said in your last two posts. You said the same thing I was trying, but in a lot less words.

I don’t think the Democrats like pro-life democrats. At least elected, incumbent, democratic house representatives that are pro-life. The Democrats defeated 3 of them in 2020 in their democratic primaries only to lose all 3 seats that if those pro-life incumbent democrats had run would have won. What that has done to the overall picture of this year’s midterms is that the GOP needs a net gain of 5 instead of 8. I’d say the democrats shot themselves in the foot with their pro-choice litmus test. That’s just my opinion

I’m more of an election strategist, a pragmatist, even a compromiser if that is what it takes to get me at least some of what I want. I’m no stand on my principle with the all or none options which none usually is the results. It’s not that I prefer the real world to my fantasy one, but I’m smart enough to realize which one I must live in and make the best of it.

I can make up any number of possible futures in my head. I can imagine myself going to the market, buying a lottery ticket and becoming a millionaire.

But when you analyze the chances of that actually happening it's best perhaps to revise those fantasies to suit what is more likely to happen...

There's a far better chance I get hit by a truck on the way.

But that doesn't mean I'm gonna get hit by a truck either.

The likeliest scenario is that I'll buy the lottery ticket, scratch it off, and throw it away. A dollar poorer but entertained for a moment and there was always the chance that I might have become a millionaire.

Votes are a lot like that. If you get your hopes up for big changes, you're liable to be disappointed.

No matter who wins the elections the Union will survive, life will go on, and commerce will continue.

I don't think the consequences of Roe going away are baked in yet, since Roe has not gone away yet. Even if it does go away, it won't sink in for many women until some friend, relative, daughter, etc. dies because everybody was afraid to treat her ectopic pregnancy or miscarriage. 10 to 15% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, so this is NOT going to be a rare event. When it starts killing lots of women, THEN they will figure out it was a stupid idea. Or when a lot of newly married women decide any pregnancy is too dangerous, and refuse to do anything that could get them pregnant.

If ROE is overturned, that just throws abortion back to the states. 21 states and D.C. have state laws protecting abortion. Nothing would change in those states as to abortion access. As suspected, most are blue states controlled by democrats. Population wise, it relatively even between the number of folks who live in protected states and non-protected states. So if ROE is overturned, it won't effect half of the population.

https://kdvr.com/news/data/which-states-legally-protect-abortion/

13 states have so called trigger laws that would go into effect if ROE is overturned. There are another 5 states or so that would extremely limit abortions. Detail below.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/us/state-abortion-trigger-laws-roe-v-wade-overturned/index.html

Overturning ROE if that does happen, the SCOTUS said they would have their official ruling on the Mississippi case either late June or early July. I don’t see it influencing this year’s midterms. The 13 states with trigger laws on the books are solid red states. I do see a good chance of a bunch of protests and even some riots over the SCOTUS ruling if they do overturn ROE. But those will probably mostly take place in the blue states with laws protecting abortion. It’s blue state Democrats mostly riled up about the possibility of ROE being overturned which won’t affect them.

I hesitate to make any long-term predictions on the effect of overturning ROE in the rest of the states. Outside of that we’ll probably see women who want an abortion travel to a state where abortion is legal. I think what most pro-abortion or pro-ROE democrats don’t realize is most Republican women are pro-life. That Democrats automatically assume all women are pro-choice which is totally wrong. For 2024 I’d keep an eye on the 8 or so swing states. I think who the candidates are, who is nominated by both major parties will have a greater impact on the presidential election than the abortion issue. 2024 will be decided by independents, not pro-choice democrats or pro-life republicans. Time will tell.

first, the second amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I watched a previous Supreme note that the current understanding of the 2nd amendment is a con job and absolutely wrong! Second, the concept of "a well regulated Militia" has absolutely nothing to do with how its viewed today by gun folk. All the rest follows the first two which, as far as I am concerned, is dead flat out wrong! That is particularly true of the first part about 'regulated'. That is being completely ignored! Basically its one of the worst decisions the Supremes has ever done and should be reversed (wishful thinking). I am not against guns, I don't have any but I'm not against them. Given the current lack of safety, however, I just might get myself one.

Now, its pretty clear how to fix the gun problem and we have lots of other nations that have done that. First makes sure that anybody who gets a gun should have a gun. The second thing is mental health. The United States actually doesn't have much of anything on mental health. Instead we let crazies go free until they hurt themselves or others and then we send them to prison, they get a little room with one meal a day for the rest of their lives. There are, however, exceptions. There is, for instance, one group that is putting together groups that can help folks who are in trouble and need a reset. This is particularly important for kids who seem to be doing much of the shooting these days. These groups actually exist and do really good work and every school should have access to that,. Then there are the guns themselves. Any guns designed to kill people should be blamed including cannons, fully automatic weapons, bazookas, etc. (as an aside. There used to be the "The Canoneers of America". They used to go out and blow up things like old barns.) There are also countries who have had a problem with mass shootings and they all, except for us, have put a stop to it. Amongst those are Canada, the UK, and Australia.

Right now I still think that the Dems should be saying, every chance they get; "If you vote Democratic your children won't be killed". I am not saying this because I love Dems but because its aabout the only way to stop the other side who are determined to get more kids killed. Oh, the school that was just attacked was one of the ones that the State of Texas made "safe". The problem was that nobody in the school seemed to follow any of the rules. Doors left open (all were supposed to be locked) was one of the main problems but there was more. If anybody has watched TV they already know about all of this.

Have you researched mass school shootings? Since we’re talking mass, say 3 or more deaths would qualify as a mass school shooting. For the record, the first mass school shooting, 3 or more deaths took place in Austin Texas in 1968, known as the UT Tower shooting where there were 18 dead and 31 injured. I’m using a mass school shooting as 3 or more deaths. I don’t think 1 or 2 qualify as a mass. 1960’s 1, there were 2 in the 1970’s, 2 in the 1980’s, 10 in the 1990’s, 7 in the 2000’s, 13 in the 2010’s and 2 so far counting Texas for the 2020’s.

A reminder, the above figures quantify a mass school shooting as 3 or more dead, I’m also counting colleges as in my mind a college is a school. Not just K-12.

Isn’t it interesting that no mass school shooting occurred prior to 1968? Mass school shootings is a recent development as is all mass shootings period. 28 total 1900-1970 with 17 of them in the Al Capone gangster era, we’ve surpassed 200 since 1970. Again, using definition of a mass shooting 3 or more deaths. Now these figures should tell everyone something. That something for me is that there was a big change in our society around 1970 and it hasn’t been for the good. Not if that change has led to mass school shootings along with mass shootings in general. I don’t have the faintest idea of what that change was, but if one were to find what it was, there’s a good chance one could correct the problem.

But first one must want to correct the problem. There’re times I don’t think anyone does.

Of course my anti-anti-abortion predictions are not for blue states. Believe it or not, I'm not a moron, and I assume neither is anybody here. What I'm predicting is that red states that have already passed those no exception laws in case Roe is overturned are going to be so hostile to women of child bearing age, they are going to change their voting patterns, move to a blue state, refuse to do anything that could get them pregnant, etc. eventually. Won't happen right away. Women have to start dying in large numbers for them to see their state is trying to kill them. Once they do figure that out, they will do something about that. Probably not by November, but perhaps by 2024.

I think historical analyses are not as useful when a million of us die, one Party attempts a coup, and then goes to war against young women and school children.

I find it interesting that it seems that the majority of mass killings have been done by teen-agers with ar-15 semi-automatic rifles. At one point these rifles are banned and the shooting seemed to go down. There are also, apparently, ways to deal with the teen-agers with problems and its being used in several places it it works! The problem is that it costs money. Texas had been building up dealing with Teens, and others, but their governor, in his infinite wisdom cut that program by millions of dollars.

One can only wonder................

Indeed. America's breadbasket will lose it's breeding stock and will be forced to allow Catholic Hispanic women, who are all pro-life, to work on the red state farms and mate with their corn fed boys since the ungrateful girl children have moved to New York City to be hookers or work the produce markets along the waterfront...or to LA to be actresses and porn stars and become lifelong Democrats.

The half-breed children will be treated like chatel and occasionally slaughtered if their numbers and feed costs get out of hand.

I love when folks make outlandish predictions. I look at them and think...what would happen if...?

If Roe falls, not much is gonna change. Medical and moral exceptions will likely be hammered out over time and abortion by mail will become a thing. Women are already pretty good at avoiding pregnancy. All of us know what causes it.

It won't be the first time women have been treated badly by politicians and won't be the last.

And for what it's worth a lot of those red-state women are already pro-life and are celebrating the upcoming SCOTUS decision. Those corn-fed girls are ready and willing to breed as needed and to run the farm. And raise lots more pro-life red-state kids!

There is a parallel between anti-abortion legislation and Second Amendment enthusiasm. Of the millions of opportunities for misadventure, only a relative few actually result in death - but when they do, the results are devastating. And like those policies, the overall result will be "thoughts and prayers" and a hell of a lot of inaction.

I think in this you are completely wrong. The protests will be in the Red States (less so in the Blue), and it is simple logic - those are the States where trigger laws will occur. Your assumption is that "Red States" are homogenous. They are not. There are bastions of Blue in virtually every State of the Union. Any State with a city over 100,000 population is more likely than not one of those bastions. Moreover, none of the States is devoid of Democratic voters. One can look at the protests that occurred over George Floyd's murder and have a pretty clear picture of the scope of what will be occurring. They won't be violent, because they will be led by women. The counterprotesters will be violent. They always are.

I'm going to make my own outlandish prediction: if you thought 2018 was a pink wave, you ain't seen nothin' yet. I predict more women will run for office up and down the ballot than ever in US history. State houses are going to be flooded with women, even in the reddest States. Liz Cheney might even be reelected.

There’s nothing logical when it comes to the abortion issue. George Floyd, the riots took place in Minneapolis, Portland and Seattle. This is what the general public remember. All blue states. What’s ironic about all those protests is that they were against the police. Meanwhile, the mayor and city council who is responsible for the police, who recruit and hire, who oversee the training program, who make the rules, regulations and laws the police must follow, who oversee the police, who appoints the police chief and other high ranking police officials, who funds the police and more, they all got reelected in landslides. They succeeded in placing 100% of the blame on the police. Perhaps if the mayor and city council had done their job, George Floyd may have never happened.

This is another reason I think former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Bottoms would have been a much better choice for VP than Harris. After things cooled down, she had a major review of the Atlanta police to include hiring practices, training, all rules and regulations, funding and appointment plus a few more things. She and the city council were in the active mode. Minneapolis mayor and city council were in the passive mode trying to ensure no blame fell on them. My two cents.

I spent the formative years of my youth in that very neighborhood in South Minneapolis where Floyd was killed.
I've been following events and developments in my second home town since I left, through the news and through friends who still live there.
Sorry, you're misinformed. The mayor and city council have been up against what may be ONE of the most corrupt police unions in the country, especially in the last twenty-five years.

I give you Exhibit A, Lt. Bob Kroll, who is the tip of the spear in racially unbalanced and pointedly brutal policing.
Kroll was, until VERY recently, the head of the police union in Minneapolis.



At one point Kroll even threatened the Governor of Minnesota.

Successive mayors, city councils and police chiefs in Minneapolis have been at loggerheads with Kroll ever since he became head of the union.
There's much more to this, but I wanted to keep it brief, at least for starters.

It's not for lack of trying, trust me...the mayor, city council, police chief after police chief and the Governor have all had enormous difficulty dealing with this guy. And if you have any further questions I would be delighted to answer them.

Have you considered changing your name to "Cheerful Gregor"? Oh, I also suspect that you are wrong about Hispanic women all against abortion. I am married to one and she used to be that way but, no more. She is also one of them supporters of female rights which, I suspect, changed her mind in the end. So, again, Abortion is a lousy choice in just about every situation I can think of and that changes absolutely NOTHING! Its just one of them sh*t happens things.

Last one on the leaked draft. Abortion issue, baked in or not? It’s been 28 days, 4 weeks since the leaked draft on abortion. You’ve a bit of a movement on RCP, none on 538 which leads me to believe the movement on RCP was due more to the normal ups and downs of polling, not the leaked draft on overturning ROE or the abortion issue. The fact we’ve had so little movement over this time period reinforces my theory of the abortion issue being baked in. Inflation is still the elephant in the room.

2 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.5-42.5, Republican, 538 averages 45.2-42.8 Republican
31 May 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 46.0-44.1 Republican, 538 averages 45.0-42.8 Republican

28-day difference, RCP Republicans -0.5, Democrats +1.6. 538 Republicans -0.2, Democrats no change.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

On the President’s overall job performance, Biden continues to sink slowly since the leak draft on overturning ROE. Whatever issue becomes hot for a while probably won’t make much of a difference. Rising prices tops the list of most important issues, everything else is secondary including the abortion issue.

2 May 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 41.7% approve, 53.0% disapprove
31 May 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 40.4% approve, 54.8% disapprove

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html

28-day difference, approval -1.3, disapproval +1.8

Perhaps the best way to look at this is the number of competitive, switchable, at risk house seats between 1 May to 31 May.
1 May - 29 Democratic seats, 10 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category
31 - May 39 Democratic seats, 13 Republican seats. An increase of 10 seats for the Democrats over these past 4 weeks and an increase of 3 for the Republicans. If the Democrats hadn’t won the gerrymandering war, creating 10 more democratic leaning districts than the GOP was able to create Republican leaning districts. You might be looking at a red wave election instead of losses of 15-18 seats.

Conclusion, the leaked draft had no detrimental effect on the Republican Party’s chances of a good midterm election. That the abortion issue is baked in regardless of which side you’re on or how hot an issue it was or becomes. Inflation, rising prices, empty shelves in stores remains the number one, hottest issue in determining how one will vote this midterm. The Midterms are always a referendum on the job the White House and the party in control, in power are doing.

That's what I said.

I think that's a fairly realistic and cheerful assessment of the situation. The predictions that call for riots and mass migration of red-state women into more liberal blue states seem a bit less likely and quite frankly, not cheerful at all.

As far as pink waves go...from the numbers it looks like it's kind of slow to form up. Women are working so hard to try to make ends meet in this economy they haven't got time to worry much about abortion.

There will certainly be protests when the SCOTUS announces its decision. But violent counter-protestors...? Not likely. Riots...? Nope. Will they storm the Supreme Court building hoping to turn over the court's decision through violence? Nope.

There is nothing the President or his wobbly Congress can do about a Supreme Court decision. But a Supreme Court that legislates major, controversial, partisan law from the bench is going to lose its credibility. And without credibility and the respect of all the American people it becomes just another arbitrary ruling body that the people have no control over.

Priests in robes making decisions based on holy scribblings rather than the Constitution.

I just wish that Biden wouldn't mention ANYTHING that has not already happened! Instead he just can't help himself and simply has to mention what, may or may not happen and, in the end, fails. He just doesn't seem to get it. He has done a lot of stuff that he should be crowing about but, I guess, those are secrets.

I’ve been satisfied with the Biden presidency. However, that doesn’t stop me from pointing out what he’s done wrong to lose the independent voter support. I don’t hold Biden responsible for inflation, that’s the luck of the draw when it comes to the economy. But independents as a whole do. 30% of independents approve Biden’s handling of inflation, 59% disapprove which is lower than how they rate Biden’s overall job performance. With the midterms approaching, with inflation, rising prices being the most important issue, problem for independents, with other issues are secondary, they think Republicans in congress are the party better suited to handle inflation by a 46-35 margin over the democrats in congress.

Even if Biden and the Democrats in congress would crow about their successes, I doubt it would do any good. Most independents aren’t worried or don’t care about them. It’s rising prices, inflation. Biden and company have lost independents and I don’t think they can regain them back in time for the midterms. Inflation has to be tamed first; prices must recede. Plenty of time between now and 2024 though.

Keep in mind Obama had a lousy 2010 midterm, lost 63 house seats, but won reelection 2 years later. Bill Clinton also had a bad 1994 midterm, lost 54 house seats. He trounced Bob Dole in 1996. Reagan had a bad midterm in 1982, he lost 26 house seats, but won by a landslide in 1984. There’s no reason Biden and the Democrats can’t have a complete recovery by 2024.

Just in from Gallup,

'Pro-Choice' Identification Rises to Near Record High in U.S.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/393104...nt=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication

The skinning, Americans who classify themselves as pro-choice has risen from 49% to 55% from May 2021 to May 2022 with most of the rise taking place after the leaked draft. Whereas Republicans and independents have remained at approximately the same percentage being pro-choice in this time frame, Democrats have shot up immensely from 70% to 88% accounting for most of the rise nationwide for pro-choice.

Note that the pro-choice and pro-life labels have no official definition. Pro-choice could range from legal only for rape, incest and the life of the mother to all the way to the moment of birth. The rise in the percentage of Americans nationwide being pro-choice occurred mostly among democrats which also explains why the leaked draft on overturning ROE had no effect or changed any planned vote for the midterms. Republicans will still vote Republican, Democrats for Democrats and independents remain leaning toward voting Republican for congress. It was baked in.

Another Gallup article/poll if you’re interested.

Steady 58% of Americans Do Not Want Roe v. Wade Overturned

https://news.gallup.com/poll/393275...nt=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication

I think the problem is the Democratic party itself. It messages are are not good, nor consistent. They just can't seem to be in sync and, I think, that throws everything off. Biden hasn't been a bad president and I will vote for him again, especially given the other side. People, I think, like consistency and that isn't what the Dems have. I just don't think that Abortion is a good cause to hammer with, for either side.

The Democratic Party's main problem is actually poor turnout. If ROE being overturned can get a lot of Democrats and D-leaners to vote, that can change things dramatically. I doubt an overturn would really drive Republicans to vote, except maybe Republic pro-choicers voting for Democrats.

Two things JGW, I agree, Biden hasn’t been a bad president. He just drew into bad economic times. The economy has been the top issue in almost every election I can remember. Good economy equals folks voting for the party in power, bad economy, folks vote for the party out of power.

Two, the democrats considering their numbers in congress has tried to overdo what is possible. Thus, making them look inept. The in-fighting among congressional factions within the Democratic Party didn’t help matters. That left an impression that the congressional democrats didn’t know what the heck they were doing. There’s much more to it, but that would take a book to list it all.

Pondering you’re not going to get Republicans to vote Democratic. If you looked at the increase in pro-choicers, almost all came from democrats who are already going to vote democratic. Yes, enthusiasm may be up among democrats. It may drive some to vote where they wouldn’t have before. Voter turnout is always hard to predict and most who predict it, fail. This from a poll dated 31 May 2022.

Question 85 - Compared to voting in previous Congressional election years, are you more or less enthusiastic about voting in this year’s election?

Democrats 30% more enthusiastic, 20% less enthusiastic, 41% about the same
Republicans 44% more enthusiastic, 13% less enthusiastic, 35% about the same
Independents 29% more enthusiastic, 19% less enthusiastic, 39% about the same

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/o91vu7bpkr/econTabReport.pdf

Ask yourself the question, would the abortion issue or inflation be the driving force or make you more enthusiastic to get you to the polls? Depends on the party and whether you’re an independent or not. My guess, abortion makes the Democrats more enthusiastic, inflation and being the party out of power makes the Republicans more enthusiastic, with independents, no doubt inflation.

Being the party out of power has always driven that party to vote in a higher percentage than those of the party in power. Maybe the abortion issue will change that, I doubt it though.

Abortion and gun violence are still behind economics issues for the midterms. Democrats place abortion and guns above the economy and inflation, Republicans and independents go with the economy, inflation and rising prices. Good info in the link.

From the article/poll below conducted by ABC - A separate question asking what the single most important issue will be in their vote for Congress showed a similar ranking of issue priorities. The top issues were inflation (21%), the economy (19%), gun violence (17%) and abortion (12%).

Economic issues top the public's agenda: POLL

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/economic-issues-top-public-agenda-130018227.html

I’d bet the farm, give it 2 or 3 weeks with no mass shootings, gun violence returns to single digits. History has shown a steep rise for gun control after a mass shooting, then shortly after it done and over with, back to 4 or 5%. I see no reason why history won’t repeat itself here. Not surprising as a lot of issues are driven by knee jerk reaction when they happen, then as time goes by, the old steady issues that has always been there returns to their prominent place a top of issues that decide how one votes.

Let it be noted most polls include inflation in the economic issue category and usually don’t break it down. Under that, the economy would be at 40% in how voters will decide who to vote for in November.

That might be asking a lot. There was another shooting in Philadelphia today...

Here’s an interesting article Greger, it stacks everything up and breaks things down via party and no party.

CBS News poll: Can mass shootings be prevented, and if so, how?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cbs-news-poll-mass-shootings-143004706.html

The Buffalo mass school shooting took place on 14 May, Texas 25 May, plus who knows how many more shootings that wasn’t school related elsewhere that hasn’t received the media’s attention. Philadelphia, Chicago, perhaps some more. None of them have moved the needle when it comes to who folks plan on voting for come November. How important are these issues to folks if they don’t change how they’ll will vote? It may simply mean there’s other issues out there more important to them. Mass shootings are sensational news. Then they die down and fade. It’s always been this way. Maybe keeping them on the front page for awhile might change that. Then again, it may become an, oh hum, another mass shooting, I wonder if my Braves won last night. I think you’d be surprised at how many folks are paying attention to the NBA finals or if their team won or watching their favorite reality TV show and the like than paying any attention to the news. This especially goes for politics.

Personally, I don’t believe any gun control law, no matter how strict will stop these mass killings. Gun control, banning of semi-automatics may limit the damage done per incidence. But won’t stop them, I believe the number incidences will continue to increase. Even banning all guns, that these killings will continue, only by other means. Why? Because the reason and cause is imbedded deep within our society. I’d say red flag laws could go a long way if enforced. Upping the age to 25 as someone suggested earlier to be able to purchase a semi-automatic would help also. But none of these would prevent or eliminate mass shootings/killings. The problem is too complex and too partisan today to solve.

Perhaps all we can hope for is limiting the damage and living with mass shootings and then mass killings by other means. Congress loves to investigate, why not investigate why no mass school shooting pre-1968 when the UT Texas tower shooting took place and why we have so many after that date? The same goes for mass shootings in general. Why were mass shootings so rare pre-1970 and so common place after?

As much as we might like to go back to 1968 or any other "simpler time" which wasn't riddled with today's problems we can't.

A detailed study would show you only that it was a different time, with different problems which also weren't solved satisfactorily by the government of the day.

There were a lot fewer people. There was a lot less pressure. There were no cell phones and no internet. Russia had the largest prison population in the world and the War in Vietnam was raging. The AR15-style weapon with a high-capacity magazine was not available. Blacks were second-class citizens, gays stayed in the closet.

Which one of those would you bring back to prevent mass shootings? Or perhaps you can think of others...

Point being...you can never go back. You can't make today like yesterday. But you can make tomorrow better than today.

Here's a couple of things that weren't problems...I kinda like to think they were big deals back then because they sure as Hell are big deals now.

1. I was a part time dishwasher at a greasy spoon and a full time starving college student in Minneapolis...in 1978, ten years AFTER 1968.
I was able to afford rent on a 120 - MAYBE 150 SF bachelor apartment, w/kitchenette and my own bathroom.
It was $110 a month. I was also able to afford gas for my jalopy, a 1967 Chevy six cylinder pickup, and food.
I suspect that same apartment was probably 50 bucks a month in 1968.

2. And my college tuition was couch change.

A different time with different problems, yes...but the BIG things like getting a decent education so you could have upward mobility, and a roof over your head, were not big problems.

And furthermore, in 1968 it was still illegal for corporations to profit off healthcare.

Guess what Perotista keeps harping about day in and day out...the cost of living.
Only he's fond of soothing and comforting the folks who think it's all Biden's fault.

We know that's bullcrap.
And so is just dismissing everything out of hand by saying "It was a different time".

Perotista keeps telling you why and how people vote according to the numbers. I don't see him soothing and comforting anyone but outraged democrats here who feel the economy is a nonissue and only the culture wars matter.

You seem to find it impossible to believe that the economy might sway their vote.

Rick is also completely aghast that people would vote according to their pocketbooks.

Has the economy ever been among the top issues of voters in years gone by?

Have voters ever been swayed by their own personal economic situation?

Probably not and I'm sure you can find the charts to prove it.

And I ask you the same question I asked Rick. If Trump were still president and inflation was out of hand, would you be shouting desperately from the rooftops that it wasn't his fault and he shouldn't be blamed for it?

No, because it is the pandemic, the associated economic slowdowns followed by rapid uptick in demand as the pandemic got dealt with, and the ongoing war. That said, there are things both Biden and Trump could try to do, with the help of Congress, to MITIGATE...if Congress was willing to help, that is, which they didn't and don't seem to be interested in.

But pandemics and the after effects at their core would not have been either one's fault.
To date, several attempts HAVE BEEN mounted to mitigate inflation.
Let's take a look!
We can start with gasoline prices.



And in the Senate?



Lather, rinse, repeat.

And you know this, so does Perotista.

And I responded, writing:

Many understand that the pandemic allowed people to work offsite and work from home. This lead to a lot of folks leaving cities and moving to suburban and rural areas where housing was less expensive. Another area that demand exceeded supply was the home remodeling industry. Because people were home and not at work, people began making changes to their homes adding new rooms, changing the interiors of their homes all while installers had to safely social distance while working in the homes.

The home remodeling industry is still crazy busy because people had to wait 6, 9, 12 months before the contractor could even begin to work on their project.

Yes I do, and so does he.

But that doesn't change the dynamics of the way people vote.

There seems to be some feeling that conservatives are too stupid to make their own decisions. That voters in general are ill-informed and uninterested.

I think that's BS

Everyone has a phone in their face 24/7. They get a ding every time anything happens in the world.

SCOTUS decisions, storm warnings, amber alerts, facebook notifications, twitter, insta, truth social, mass shootings, celebrity trials and divorces, sports scores, you fecking name it.

Everybody knows what's going on. Everywhere, all the time.

They look at the same evidence as you, but they come to different conclusions. Based on their own beliefs and ideology.

If everybody agreed, there would be no need for democracy. If you force everybody to agree, it isn't democracy.

That's where Fox News steps in and tells Conservatives how to think and what to do.

My evidence: Most Conservatives think that J6 was a tourist site-seeing event and not the insurrection that it was.

No, most of them know exactly what it was.

It was the biggest public display of political stupidity in the history of our nation.

It was painful and it was embarrassing. It's easier for them to just pretend it didn't happen. In a few years, it will all blow over...

This should get interesting:


South Dakota Governor Claims She'll Ban Abortion Pills Without Punishing Women

Of course, South Dakota authorities are going to have an impossible task to intercept all mail (violation of federal law), and then prosecute prescribing doctors who are not in South Dakota. Or maybe not even in the US! Most states will refuse to extradite citizens who do things that are not crimes in that state.

As for the very small number of women who need medical care after a pill-induced abortion, It's impossible to tell one from a natural miscarriage, and about 20% of pregnancies end in a natural miscarriage.

Citation please.


History books won't let what Righwingers did on J6 "blow over."

Kristi Noem freely admits to wanting to run a Fascist state. Quelle surprise. Kristi is Rwing after all.

Nobody much reads the history books, nor cares about the dusty past. They're too busy trying to pay the bills that are due tomorrow.

J6 will go down in history as the single, most stupid bit of partisan f*ckery to ever occur. The 1605 Gunpowder Plot(Guy Fawkes) being possibly more ill-fated and stupid.

I just don't feel like they'll be burning effigies of Donald Trump 400 years from now.

The people involved will get locked up or not. In a few election cycles, nobody will much be talking about it so yes...

Like it or not it will blow over and new shiny things will catch your attention.

This is interesting, from a left leaning web site, the Daily Beast.

Will Raging Liberals Cause an Anti-Democrat Backlash?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/raging-liberals-cause-anti-democrat-080102953.html

In other words, the Democrats could blow the advantage given them for these midterms by the SCOTUS overturning ROE. Will they? Time will tell.

I also have two polls from Democratic leaning polling firms since the overturning of ROE. One is the NPR/PBS/Marist polls which shows the Democrats leading in the generic congressional ballot by 7 points. But this same polling firm in a pre-SCOTUS overturning of ROE had the Democrats ahead by 5. The other was the Morning Consult/Politico poll, they have the Democrats up by 3, but in their pre-ROE poll, Morning Consult/Political had it even.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

The thing to keep in mind is the average of all polls had the Republicans up by 2.3 points on 23 June, pre-Roe overturning, which you can see in the link above. There’s not enough data to draw any conclusions on this at this early time. But I would say, signs are that there is a slight movement toward the Democrats. Will it last? Again, only time will provide the answer.

The big question in all of this, will abortion or the overturning of ROE supersede inflation, rising prices in the minds of independents as the top issue they will decide who to vote for in November? We’ll have to wait and see. Pre-ROE overturning, independents ranked inflation as their top issue in determining their vote this November at 23%, abortion was at 4% among independents. This gives you numbers to watch.

I don't think we'll see the same violence as we do around racial issues, so no. While there might be some isolated incidents among militant democrats, I don't think we'll see the same level of sustained violence and civil disobedience we saw around the Floyd killing.

I think there was some small backlash around that, but it's ancient history and I'm not gonna Google it.

The backlash occurred down ballot in November 2020 to the Floyd riots and Defund the Police slogan. It was unfathomable to think a candidate could win the presidency by 7 plus million votes and yet, have his party lose 13 house seats, a governorship and 2 state legislatures. I’d say folks wanted Trump gone, but didn’t trust the Democrats to have full control and they voted that way.

2020 was only the second time in our entire history that a candidate won the popular vote via the presidency and lost house seats. The only other time was in 1884 when Grover Cleveland won the popular vote by a mere 58,000 and his party lost 8 house seats. 58,000 is a long way from 7 million plus.

The full results of the 2020 election, both the presidency and down ballot leads me to believe that election was the total rejection of Trump. But it wasn’t a rejection or endorsement of either major party’s agenda, ideology or philosophy. The Democrats completely misread the 2020 election, that’s why they’re in trouble today. Perhaps the overturning of ROE can mitigate some of that trouble, maybe not. We’ll see.

The landslide in the popular vote was what led millions of Republican voters to believe that something was wrong with the results.

They were arrogant and overconfident, just like their leader, and they believed they couldn't lose.

They are still arrogant and over-confident and they think a mighty red wave is going to sweep them into power this fall.

Perhaps progressives overreach at times with slogans like "defund the police" and "raise the minimum wage"! But this decision is nothing more than partisan judicial legislation.

The Supreme Court decision comes at a rather inopportune time since Dems are in control and this is a direct slap in the face to them.

But Biden really never has been much of a fan of Roe because he's a pawn of the Catholic church first and foremost....

Apparently, Trump supporters weren’t looking at any of the polls. All of them had Biden winning, I mean all of them. Some poll by more, some by less, but all had Biden winning.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_biden-6247.html

The exit polls confirmed the results, they came as close to matching the actual results as possible.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results


For Trump supporters to believe the election was stolen, means none of them paid any attention to what was happening in the general election campaign or to the polls. They must have gone into a cocoon and blocked the real world completely out. The writing was on the wall for everyone to see, if they could read that is.

Blocking the real world of politics out, going into a cocoon isn’t just done by Trump supporters. I don’t think Trump nor his supporters ever realized how much Trump was disliked outside of Republican circles or should I say the Republican cocoon. That also was written on the wall for all to see from the first day Trump’s presidency to his last to even to today.

Oh, they paid attention alright. And they refused to believe any of it.

We've discussed here before that the Republican voting base seems to operate in a different reality.

We were in the throes of the pandemic, there was no normal campaign, tension was running high, QAnon conspiracies flying, Donald Trump lying...it was an ugly time.

Then Biden won in a popular vote landslide. And they simply refused to believe it.

It had to be rigged...

Turns out it wasn't rigged.

Not exactly what I expected to see a week after Roe had been overturned. Very little movement in the generic congressional ballot outside of the Democrats adding a couple of tenths of a single point. Biden’s overall job approval continued to drop. But in the at risk, switchable, competitive house seats, the Republicans added one while the Democrats remained the same. With all the outrage the pro-choice group has demonstrated, I expected more of a shift toward the democrats. Perhaps the polls haven’t caught up with that outrage yet. I’ll run this for another 3 weeks in case the polls haven’t caught up yet to public opinion which is possible. Another possibility, abortion over the last 50 years has been baked into the equation with avid pro-choicers becoming Democrats, avid pro-lifers becoming Republicans with independents pretty much indifferent to the abortion issue.

23 June 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 44.3-41.5, Republican, 538 averages 44.8-42.5 Republican

29 June 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 44.8-42.3, Republican, 538 averages 44.8-42.7 Republican


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

The President’s overall job performance numbers.

23 June 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 39.6% approve, 55.8% disapprove

29 June 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 38.0% approve, 57.5% disapprove

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html

Most important to the midterms is the number of competitive, switchable, at risk house seats and the senate’s pure tossup states beginning 23 June 2022 to see the effect of the overturning of ROE.

23 June – House 40 Democratic seats, 13 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category. A probable gain of 18-20 seats for the Republicans. Senate – 4 pure tossups, 3 democratic held seats, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, 1 Republican held seats, Wisconsin. 2 lean Democratic seats, Democratic held New Hampshire and Republican held Pennsylvania, 1 lean Republican seat, Republican held North Carolina. Probable net gain of 1 seat for the Democrats, Pennsylvania.

29 June – House 40 Democratic seats, 14 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category. A probable gain of 18-20 seats for the Republicans. Senate – 4 pure tossups, 3 democratic held seats, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, 1 Republican held seats, Wisconsin. 2 lean Democratic seats, Democratic held New Hampshire and Republican held Pennsylvania, 1 lean Republican seat, Republican held North Carolina. Probable net gain of 1 seat for the Democrats, Pennsylvania.

Weekly change Republican at risk house seats up one from 13 to 14. Bottom line, no red wave and no chance of the Democrats retaining the house. But the senate looks like a very real retention possibility.

No, you didn't. You've said it was baked in from the first and you're right. So even though it doesn't show up in the polls a few more Dems will show up to vote. A few independents will vote for human rights over the economy, maybe a few Republican women will switch their vote in protest.

No matter who votes how though, the Supreme Court decision will stand and the Supreme Court will remain solidly conservative. Pro-life factions will need to build their case from the bottom up again.

Very true for the leaked draft. I didn’t expect the SCOTUS to overturn ROE, I expected them to rule on the Mississippi case which should have been their limit. The official ruling caught me by surprise. Maybe it shouldn’t have, but it did. I did expect some movement towards the Democrats after the official ruling though, then in a couple of months for the polls to revert to where they were pre-SCOTUS ruling. Am I wrong in classifying the leaked draft and my deductions on that to having a bit of a different view on the official ruling? But baked in, yes. I should have clarified myself a bit more. But you’re correct, baked in it is or so it seems up to this point.

It's interesting I find 55-60% of all Americans opposing the SCOTUS ruling but who’ll they’ll vote for remaining basically the same. I call this soft support on opposing the SCOTUS ruling. The hard-core opposition comes from Democrats which are going to vote Democratic anyway. The hard core in favor of the ruling comes from Republicans who are going to vote Republican no matter what.

Independents are divided as usual, according to YouGov, 37% strongly oppose the ruling, 31% strongly in favor. The rest are in the somewhat for or against or not sure, don’t care, no opinion. The wishy washy categories.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/uhxw71f4tf/econTabReport.pdf

Since independents are leaning toward voting Republican this midterm, I think a lot of their opposition to the ruling is soft support. In other words, they’re saying I’d rather abortion be legal, but it doesn’t make my list of top 5 issues in which I weigh to determine my vote. Make sense? Inflation, the economy in general is still the most important issue for independents in deciding who’ll they vote for.

A long-winded reply in which I’m stating you’re correct. But I looked at the draft and actual ruling as two separate events. A caveat probably irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

I'll give you credit on the leak vs the decision...I didn't differentiate between them and lumped them into the same ball of wax.

I originally questioned whether they'd follow through, but as time went on and there was no clarification of the leaked draft or denial that the decision was coming, I figured it was a done deal.

No riots. No violence. No changes in the polls. Just stoic acceptance mostly.

If women are withholding sex to protest, birthrates will show that in about nine months. But even that won't sway the court to reconsider.

However you look at it though, this will work to the advantage of Democrats just as will the J6 affair. Some tight race somewhere might be decided on the basis of these things. That's all that I think we can statistically hope for in the near term.

Bigger picture though...younger voters are once again nudged toward the liberal side of life. These things might not change existing voting patterns much but they will influence future voting patterns which are already leaning more liberal and more independent.

I agree the young are more liberal, once they age and take voting seriously, that will show up at sometime in the future. Both major parties also adjust. They must do so to stay competitive. In our two-party system, one party always must be an alternative to the other. Get mad at the party in power, your only option is the party out of power.

I think Trump is stopping the Republicans from having their red wave with probably a bit of a push from the J6 hearings. Going by the very low approval numbers of Biden and the Democrats in congress, the Republicans should be wiping the floor with Democratic fodder. Even with Biden’s approval rating at 39%, the democrats are looking at a 18-20 house seat lost and amazingly the real possibility of gaining a senate seat. The average house loss for a president whose approval is around 40% is 48 seats with 6 seats lost in the senate.

If Trump is the reason for limiting the damage of a president below 40% overall approval with the Democratic congress approval at a low 32%, I’d want to keep him around for 2024. The economy is bound to improve by then which may be enough, but to be safe, keep Trump around. He’s the best thing the Democrats have going for them, at least today. Many independents are hesitant in voting for a Trump backed candidate or a party’s candidate lead by Trump although they’re very dissatisfied and unhappy with Biden and the Democrats in congress. A prime example of the Trump factor is here in Georgia where Kemp is tied with Abrams at 48-48. Kemp being on Trump's s*** list. But Warnock leads Walker 54-44, Walker being Trump endorsed, a Trumper.

It is the day when Americans VOTE in elections and elections get overturned (successfully) because one party simply does not like the results, and they get away with it.

The interesting thing now, is the lawsuits that will surge in states with "no exception" abortion laws. Republicans in those states have overreached. When a lawsuit reaches a state Supreme Court, dollars to donuts they say there must be exceptions. There is also a federal civil rights aspect to forcing a woman to continue a pregnancy that will kill her. Rape, incest, and life of the mother have been the standards for many decades.

That’s an interesting point. Overreach is something both parties are good at attempting. But on this, I don’t think the overturning of ROE will affect this year’s midterms much. It may in a couple of senate races, helping the Democrats maintain control there. But it won’t prevent the loss of the House. We have inflation, rising prices which many people, especially independents place ahead of abortion, Trump, everything else, all other issues this year. But give it two additional years, give it time to sink in, to live with the results of the SCOTUS decision along with what you stated, abortion will be big in 2024 especially if inflation eases and we have a more normal economy. 2024 could have the makings of a big Democratic year, if they don’t screw it up.

2 weeks has passed, as I expected, there’s been a slight change in both generic congressional ballots since the SCOTUS overturned ROE. RCP averages saw the GOP lead of 2.5 points cut to 1.3 points. 538 saw the GOP lead of 2.3 points cut to 1.6 points. Keep in mind, both generic congressional ballots are nationwide, not district by district. Regardless, this must be good news for the Democrats.

23 June 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 44.3-41.5, Republican, 538 averages 44.8-42.5 Republican

7 July 2022 Generic congressional ballot, RCP averages 45.1-43.8, Republican, 538 averages 44.8-43.2 Republican


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

The President’s overall job performance numbers. This is bad news for the Democrats. Biden’s approval falls, his disapproval rises.

23 June 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 39.6% approve, 55.8% disapprove

7 July 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 38.4% approve, 56.8% disapprove

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html

Most important to the midterms is the number of competitive, switchable, at risk house seats and the senate’s pure tossup states beginning 23 June 2022 to see the overall affect district by district and state by state of the overturning of ROE.

23 June – House 40 Democratic seats, 13 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category. A probable gain of 18-20 seats for the Republicans. Senate – 4 pure tossups, 3 democratic held seats, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, 1 Republican held seats, Wisconsin. 2 lean Democratic seats, Democratic held New Hampshire and Republican held Pennsylvania, 1 lean Republican seat, Republican held North Carolina. Probable net gain of 1 seat for the Democrats, Pennsylvania.

7 July – House 40 Democratic seats, 14 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category. A probable gain of 18-20 seats for the Republicans is unchanged. Senate – 3 pure tossups, 2 democratic held seats, Nevada, Arizona, 1 Republican held seats, Wisconsin. 3 lean Democratic seats, Democratic held New Hampshire and Georgia along with Republican held Pennsylvania, 1 lean Republican seat, Republican held North Carolina. Probable net gain of 1 seat for the Democrats, Pennsylvania.

Change Republican at risk house seats up one from 13 to 14, although this doesn’t change the projected Republican gain of 18-20 house seats. Good news senate wise for the Democrats in Georgia as Democrat Warnock seat is no longer in the tossup column but moved into the lean Democratic column. Bottom line, no red wave and still no chance of the Democrats retaining the house. But the senate looks like the Democrats may retain control of it. Keep in mind that lean means these are considered competitive/switchable/at risk seats, but one party has the advantage over the other party.

Since the overturning of ROE by the SCOTUS, the Democrats have knocked off close to a point on the national generic congressional ballot. The Republican still lead 3 weeks after the overturning. But the GOP has recovered some of their lost ground from a week ago, 7 July, but not all.

RCP’s Generic congressional ballot - 23 June 2022 44.3-41.5 Republicans +2.8. 7 July 2022 45.1-43.8 Republicans +1.3. 14 July 2022 46.0-44.1 Republicans +1.9

538 Generic congressional ballot – 23 June 2022 44.8-42,5 Republican +2.3. 7 July 2022 44.8-43.2 Republican +1.6. 14 July 2022 44.7-42.8 Republican +1.9

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/

The President’s overall job performance numbers. No significant ups or downs since the overturning of ROE.

23 June 2022 Biden’s overall job performance, 39.6% approve, 55.8% disapprove. 7 July 2022 38.4% approve, 56.8% disapprove. 14 July 2022 38.5% approve, 56.0% Disapprove

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html

Most important to the midterms is the number of competitive, switchable, at risk house seats and the senate’s pure tossup states beginning 23 June 2022 to see the overall affect district by district and state by state of the overturning of ROE.

23 June – House 40 Democratic seats, 13 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category. A probable gain of 18-20 seats for the Republicans. Senate – 4 pure tossups, 3 democratic held seats, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, 1 Republican held seats, Wisconsin. 2 lean Democratic seats, Democratic held New Hampshire and Republican held Pennsylvania, 1 lean Republican seat, Republican held North Carolina. Probable net gain of 1 seat for the Democrats, Pennsylvania.

14 July – House 40 Democratic seats, 14 Republican seats fell into the at-risk category. A probable gain of 18-20 seats for the Republicans is unchanged. Senate – 3 pure tossups, 2 democratic held seats, Nevada, Arizona, 1 Republican held seats, Wisconsin. 3 lean Democratic seats, Democratic held New Hampshire and Georgia along with Republican held Pennsylvania, 1 lean Republican seat, Republican held North Carolina. Probable net gain of 1 seat for the Democrats, Pennsylvania.

Again, no significant change from 23 June.

via Kansas City Star

Kansas voters have spoke loudly Tuesday by voting “No” on a ballot measure that would have removed language in the state constitution protecting abortion rights.

In Tuesday’s elections, Kansans went to the polls to decide whether to protect the state’s existing constitutional right to an abortion.

Guess abortion and protecting a woman's right to have a say over her own body really is on the minds of Americans - contrary to what we're being told.

Well, the polls all say about 70% of Americans want abortion to remain accessible. I think this is going to happen in state after state: Any time abortion access comes up to a vote, it's going to win. Instead of ending abortion nationwide, as some want, the Republican agenda will be thwarted. It's kind of sad for them. They destroyed their Party just so they can capture the judiciary, thinking that would be a long term win. But the Supreme Court can't overcome the ballot box.

Of course it will take a while, and have some setbacks along the way. But in the long run, they will lose. Alienating so many non-White, non-male, non-straight groups is a losing strategy. That "Big Tent" is getting smaller every day. And it doesn't help that half the people dying in the US from Covid are unvaccinated now, and the anti-vax position has been strongly taken up by political conservatives.

If anti-choice can't win in Kansas...

There is only so long any political party can buck public sentiment, but I don't think it will impact midterms as much as Dems would like and the GOP fears. Senate races, yes, but Districts and local elections are defined by more prosaic concerns and gerrymandering will out.

Pro-choice sentiments prevail in general and large populations, but there are pockets of zealots all around the country, and many of them are Congressional Districts.

I hate to disagree as I agree with the argument.

Republican state legislatures will not allow referendums on abortion to be conducted. They know it is a losing proposition. As long as THEY HAVE THE POWER (and it is all about power and control) abortions will be banned in those states.

I've mentioned the guy in my vanpool from Kansas before. He was surprised that the measure didn't pass - he said there are a lot Catholics in Kansas.

My wife tells me that the Catholics spent a million dollars on that one (and lost). its strange, when I grew up I went to Catholic schools and they said that abortion was ok for rape, incest and danger to the mother. I guess that's out the window. The Catholics are a bit like a political party unable to win. they have run out of priests. In Europe many of their huge churches have been taken over by cities due to lack of enough religious to maintain them and they continue to not allow female or married priests (unless they turn Catholic and have a family). Oh, I also understand that they have allowed priests that played bad with children back into the fold because they are out of priests and need them. We also have a supreme court in which the majority are Catholic.

Praise be!

The Catholic Church has also supplied their nuns with birth control pills when they are in dangerous countries because of the threat of rape. Apparently, birth control is sinful, but pregnant nuns are a disaster.

I agree. My point is that eventually they will lose that power. It may take a generation. But, in many of those self-same States they created the ability for popular initiatives to gain that power. Most are by State Constitutional Amendments, so they can't block them. Foot shooting is a popular pastime in them thar parts.

I understand that the Supreme Court is now going to open the term with communion.

They should automatically lose their tax status.

A group of faith leaders in Florida and other states have launched lawsuits about religious freedom after anti-abortion laws were passed in the states that declare life to begin at conception or at any point prior to viability.

Under Judaism, for example, life begins at the first breath and prior to that it is known as a life "under construction," writes Rabbi Golide Milgram

The Catholic SCOTUS majority really screwed the Christian Liberty pooch on this one.

Like I've pointed out before, any time you involve religion in the law, it's an absolute mess. That's because laws are all about equity, and religions all have their own ideas about what is right and proper. It says right in our constitution that the government can't favor any religion over another. So the only legal thing to do is for the government to ignore them all (since it's impossible to make the law agree with them all). But this Supreme Court seems intent on breaking as much as possible.

That "First Breath" meme was Catholic dogma for many centuries, as their theologians believed the soul entered the body at the first breath. Personally, I like the belief of some Jewish groups these days that abortion should be permitted until the fetus graduates from medical or law school.

Legal? LEGAL??? What's that?
Legal is now whatever the strongman from Mar-A-Lago or the other two strongmen from Moscow or Budapest say it is, as it is uttered out of their mouths.

Therefore Christ belongs in the Constitution because strongmen A, B and C all agree he wrote it.

The 59-41 vote in Tuesday's referendum on abortion in reliably red state Kansas has shell shocked conservoworld.

Republicans made the vote confusing on purpose with their trickery of how the amendments were worded. To a casual observer, a "no" vote might seem to mean you were against abortion rights, and "yes" vote that you were for abortion rights, when in fact it was the other way around. So that is one thing.

Usually Dems don't bother in Kansas, and Independents can't vote because only those with party affiliation can, but signed up for a party so they could vote. An analysis shows the turnout among Democrats was high, as it was among independents, all of them apparently driven to the polls by the abortion referendum on the ballot.

The analysis showed that a lot of Republicans crossed over and voted no. The analysis also showed that every county in Kansas voted to keep abortion legal.

As I have stated on other threads, some Republican women will tell their patriarchal conservative husbands how they'll vote, then vote differently in the booth. That suggestion was resoundingly rejected here at Reader Rant.

I now have the receipts.

I think Independents actually could vote, because there was something on the ballot besides partisan primary candidates they could vote on. But they usually don't vote in primaries because they don't get to vote for partisan candidates.

Ok...that makes sense. Thanks PIA

I would expect the same group of women that did the deed in Kansas also understand that the Republicans are responsible for hugely offensive stop abortion extremists. I also suspect that they will wait for them to come up for re-election at which time they will take them all out. These women are not screwing around! The female race seems to be in another period of giving a damn about the female condition. Hope they can get it done before they go back to sleep.

The religious thing is also pretty interesting. The Catholics are not the only ones in trouble over missing sheep. Same with the non-Catholics as well. In my small town there are at least 5 abandoned non-catholic churches either for sale or sold for other purposes. The Catholic church has been blessed with a priest from Africa but he will go away and they will be back to no priest time. Same thing in Europe where the big basilicas are now owned by the town, for turisting, because there are not enough faithful to support them. What we seem to have left, in America, are seriously extremist white Christians.

Interesting times.............

Great post jgw!

via Kansas City Star


Far-right activists spent roughly $120,000 confirming the abortion ban lost in a landslide which only contributed to the leeriness that Rwing voters already have with election results thanks to the lies of the GOP.

Those right-wing voters should just refuse to participate in future elections, since they believe they are rigged against them.

Works for me.

That was sarcasm, but there is a lot of truth behind it: They can't win elections on the issues, so now they need tricks to cling to power. But their tricks are going to fail more and more because of democracy and changing demographics. So I guess a lot of them have decided to give up on democracy, and opt for a different system in which they can continue running things for their advantage.

In the 1970's Leon Russell bought an old Methodist church on the corner of 3rd and Trenton in Tulsa which had been in operation since it was first built in 1915. He sold it in the 1990's to Steve Ripley of "The Tractors" and Steve ran it till his untimely death in 2012.
A local entrepreneur bought it four years ago and reopened it again as Leon Russell's Church Studio this year only fully modernized and yet still faithful to Leon's memories. Today she announced that she had bought THE OTHER TWO churches on each corner around from Leon's studio.
So now she owns THREE former churches all in a two block area and she said two more a few blocks away are empty.

And this is in TULSA OKIE-HOMA...yeah...Oklahoma in the Deep South, where there's more churches than Carter's Liver Pills.
I'd say that's a rather shocking development especially in "the buckle of the Bible Belt", wouldn't you?

Church Studio restoration page gallery

Between "Putin Love Fest", stolen election lies, January 6th coup attempt, Roe, and stealing top secret docs, I think the GOP has figured out how to lose the mid-terms. Kansas and Alaska elections are strong indicators.

Kari Lake: Give pregnant women 'true choices' by forcing them to have a baby
via CBS News.com

Kari Lake's statement is a prime example of Fascist gaslighting.

When it's put to a vote, and Americans get to vote directly on the issue, it appears that in each and every case, Americans tell Republicans to pound sand.

It's almost like Americans like controlling their bodies and don't want to have to beg Republicans for permission.

I suspect Oz's statement that abortion decisions should be between a woman, her doctor, and local officials, helped bury him. Also that faux pas about the non-existent Steelers game!

Oz's other faux pas:

• PA has an Atlantic coast line
• Crudités
• Not knowing the name of the PA city he supposedly lives in

I'm sure the Oprah endorsement of Fetterman didn't help.

Judge Blocks Indiana abortion ban

Indiana Superior Court Judge Heather Welch issued a preliminary injunction against the Republican-backed law, which prohibits abortions with limited exceptions for rape, incest, lethal fetal abnormalities or a serious health risk to the mother. The plaintiffs have argued that the measure infringes on religious freedom protected by another state law.

I wrote the following here at Reader Rant on September 14, 2022:

Christians who insist on having their "religious freedoms" conveniently ignore the fact that other religions then too get to have their own religious freedoms. How arrogant of the American Evangelical Right to think otherwise and force their religion onto everyone else.

Imagine we're talking about Dred Scott right now INSTEAD of Roe and people are on Fox News telling each other that black people and their friends in the other racial communities that America will normalize Dred seven months from now. Do you really think people would forget?
That's what Republican "strategists" are saying right now, the American people will "forget all about the attack on Roe" by November and that Republicans will sail on to easy victory in the White House, House and Senate.

Trump is two-faced. He says abortion should be left up to the states, then condemns the AZ Supreme Court for being too pro-life.

AZ made a choice, and dishonest Donnie doesn't like it. Too bad. Trump and his political expediency is beyond the pale.

Women are not about to forget that they could possibly go to jail for exercising control over their own body, depending on their state.