Mad_Machine76
Mad_Machine76's JournalMitch McConnell would issue a vague "concerned" statement
after a few days......but then Chuck Grassley would move on with scheduling confirmation hearings arguing that the President's nominee deserves a hearing and then Republicans would move forward with an up-or-down vote on her, confirming her- with tie-breaking vote by Pence if necessary!
What would it take for Trump to win re-election in 2020
Assuming, of course, he's still in office? If he's not, what would it take for Pence to win (re-)election?
In case anybody is wondering, I'm not asking because I want him to win, but it may be helpful for us to think about this, so we can be better prepared for what we might get thrown at us so we can plan a response. I mean, after all, George W. Bush seemed like a pretty guaranteed loser by 2004 (though he wasn't as "far out" as Trump is) but yet he managed to scrape by in the end.
Amazon is hardly the worst of the lot IMHO
when it comes to corporations whom have outsized influence and receive special perks from the government.
Media has plenty of time to post s**t like this. Why?
Why do the crazies get all of this coverage? I mean, stuff like this used to be easily dismissed as "crank" territory. Why give them ANY national/widespread exposure?
I'm really nervous
that, because of Hillary's failure to win the WH in 2016 and all of the angst over the "economic anxieties" of the WWC, Democrats will be averse to nominating any African-Americans and/or women (or African-American women like Kamala) in 2020. I mean, I'll vote for whoever the nominee is (a pet rock with a "D" behind it would be acceptable at this point) but I really want to see the Democratic Party continue to be the banner for diversity and inclusiveness and not retreat back to "playing it safe" by nominating old tired white guys. Diversity and inclusiveness among our state, local, and national candidates should be our future IMHO.
My guess: They are trying to "prove" that abortions are harmful
presumably to build up a case for eventually totally banning them. Of course, anti-choicers have pushed the same junk science for years (decades?) about "abortion regret" and other medical conditions supposedly caused by abortions. I predict that they will find little evidence to support their contention that abortion, performed correctly and under safe conditions, is harmful to women undergoing procedure. And, while I'm sure that some women may regret their decision, I don't believe that the vast majority do.
Slightly OT but this is the same legislature that saved us from the "scourge" of eyeball tatooing and gave us the ability to buy alcohol on Sundays but need an expensive "special session" to finish up all the other work that they neglected.
Amen
Learning about guns? WTF does that even mean? What more does one need to know about guns other than that they are instruments of death and destruction and that their SOLE purpose is to maim and kill?
I don't know for sure. It seems like a good argument
and it's not the first time anybody has ever mentioned it. If I had to guess, maybe the pro-choice movement is concerned that there could be a political backlash from minority groups (or the anti-choicers) due to possible accusations of "trivializing" past African-American slavery (for which this amendment was written and passed to address) and/or trying to compare abortion to African-American slavery. There are some minority groups that feel that LGBTs have co-opted their civil rights legacy and (wrongfully) assumed their mantle. Clearly, that would not be the intent of the pro-choice movement and forcing women into essentially becoming "forced incubators" for fetuses seems like a kind of slavery to me, but I could see where pushing this argument could potentially backfire on us.
+1000
This "Pelosi must stand down/step aside" nonsense needs to be shut down hard. To me, somebody is using this to try to stir things up among the Democratic Party in advance of the 2018 midterms. Of course, if the House Democratic Caucus wants to have a discussion about it when they vote for a new (hopefully, majority) leader in the next Congress and want to put up a new candidate for leadership to challenge her, that's their prerogative but, under no circumstances, should anybody BUT Nancy Pelosi make the decision for her to voluntarily step down/stand aside as leader and certainly NOT for some of the bogus reasons we've been hearing recently.
Profile Information
Name: Mara Alis ButlerGender: Female
Hometown: Indianapolis, Indiana
Home country: USA
Current location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Member since: Sat Feb 28, 2004, 01:13 AM
Number of posts: 24,402
