Michael Albert had a long piece featured here on CD in which he talked about how under Trump, people would be scrambling like mad to just keep what they'd already won. It was an article that took the lesser of two evils approach to voting.
The commenters here, of course, ripped him to shreds, ignoring everything he's done in his career. Nope, he was a "Hillbot," or whatever silly term they were using that week.
I don't know if Albert is above saying "I told you so." I'm not.
Albert saying "I told you so" will have no more value than progressives reminding the world that polls during the primary showed Sanders beating Trump AND all the other 16 GOP primary contenders by double digit margins more than Clinton would.
Let's get used to daily strumpism insanity, (as if we are not already?)
strump the master copulator,
when will he pull out?
I watched 60 minutes. He justifies jailing and killing people here and around the world then he launches into a "pro life" statement. Does anyone else see irony here?
His state's rights thing won't stand well with his most extreme right wing abortion fanatics. They want it to be outlawed. period. I still wait with anticipation for the right wing volcano eruption when he decides to not indict HRC.
Somehow, this reminds me of Hitler's Reich, when a woman's primary duty was to produce blond, Aryan, sons to supply recruits and strengthen the Wehrmacht.
* Some even got medals for their fecundity.
* The mind boggles at where the
US Fourth Reich is going.
* I hope We the People can turn this country around, but it is going to be a long, hard, fight.
Clinton got more votes. Of course many of them were not White vote so I quess we all could have ignored them. But Bernie supported Clinton in the election while many here turned on Bernie, Warren, Ellison, and everyone who refused to become a thumbsucker.
Irony is really not the word.
Don't you see the difference between the death or jailing of the guilty adult and the death of the innocent fetus? I call Trump's stance his perspective, not irony. Your type of argument can always be flipped against you. Isn't it ironic that Jill Stein or even arguably Hillary Clinton wants to protect the terrorists but is willing to allow innocent babies to be killed?
In a nutshell: Trump believes in waiting until after people are born to kill them!
I think you are wrong. Judges could do it and any Republicans in pro-choice districts could feign opposition. If this election has taught us anything, it is that politics are unpredictable.
I tend to agree. Trump could well be the death knell for the GOP. They drastically need to win over the hearts of hispanics and he seems likely to do the exact opposite of this. Overturning Roe would, as you say, do the same thing.
Current Trump protests broadly addressing racism and sexism run the risk of backfiring, as DrewHunkins pointed out.
Although Trump's racism and sexism are deplorable, pushback was weighted far too heavy on them when you consider that the election was a referendum on economics. Economics will be a more effective current protest focus and each new appointee announcement provides another target for protesters. Even Jamie Dimon showed up on one of Trump's short lists today.
Always ironic and confused, Trump related that he "Won't seek to overturn the
legislation of same-sex marriage." Trump said: "It's law. It was settled in the Supreme Court.
I mean it's done. And I'm fine with that," he added.
What does Trump think that Roe vs Wade is? It is also law. It was also settled in the SC.
It's done. It's been law since 1973 -- 43 years!!
Obviously, Trump has knowledge of his own and can be easily led by those he listens to.
Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood and Naral backed HRC instead of
fighting with the left for true overturning of the right wing which has been
permitted to take control of government by decades of voting for the "lesser of evil."
Had Bernie Sanders not been betrayed by the party and the primaries rigged,
he would have won overwhelmingly against Trump.
Now -- we need to be discussing how to stand against Trump -- and what to do
with this cancerous Dem Party which will seek to re-establish itself by new fakery.
In truth -- we have but ONE party -- and it's controlled by Elites/wealthy.
I voted for Jill Stein/Green Party, but I'm sure that many voters dropped out again --
Anyone heard what the turnout was?
All this is based on the assumption that the Courts would grant certiorari. SCOTUS doesn't re-examine all of its past decisions just because some foaming-at-the mouth politician pit bull wants it to--even if the majority is conservative. There's more to it than that.
According to 538 turnout was about 57%, above most of the 70's-90's but a bit below recent elections.
You're right. Federal overturning of Roe would require (note subjunctive, indicating unlikely to happen), first, a majority of activist ideologues on SCOTUS, and 2nd, a case brought to them on which to rule. However little DJT knows about actually governing, he clearly understands abortion will not be banned; he said "I guess they'd have to go to another state." As long as he envisions states where abortions are available, he's not talking about a federal ban, only for women without the means to go to another state. But he actually knows darned well it's settled law and therefore a safe place for him to make ideological noise for certain ears to hear.
Where we need to press our attention is on not repeating a Hyde amendment on each federal budget, which serves to make abortion unavailable to those on Medicaid and, btw, serving in any federal capacity, including the military.
No Presidential election is ever a "referendum" on anything, even when someone's running for reelection. The job and the campaigns on which it's won are simply too broad to draw any such conclusions. Stop.