589
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
589 points (88.9% liked)
politics
19198 readers
2468 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Well, there's the whole "Republicans are going to overturn Roe v Wade, vote for us so we'll protect your rights" bit they've been coasting on for 30 years that they did fuck all about the entire time. That's the crying wolf. They had chances to do so, and chose not to.
That's... Not what crying wolf is. That would be warning people that electing Trump would affect abortion rights and get them more SCOTUS seats and then that NOT happening. Except it's exactly what happened. We cried wolf and there was a wolf...
I think you're delusional if you think even Dems had the majority required to make that into law in the past 30 years.
You're being rather obtuse here, the Democrats have been crying wolf over Republican attempts to overturn Roe v Wade for decades and did nothing to prevent it, this isn't an issue that only popped up for Hilary's campaign in 2016. What a surprise that it actually gets through and done when people have already been desensitized to Dems saying "Watch out, they'll take away your right to an abortion, but if you vote for us, we'll protect it!" and nobody actually believes they'll do anything about it beyond say "Watch, the Republicans are coming for your right to abortion!" They could literally win every seat in the House and Senate, and they'd probably still sit on their hands so they could campaign on it again in a few years rather than settle the matter.
I gave you two examples within the last 30 years where they had the numbers to remove the filibuster and enact legislation. Those are just times when they had a sizeable enough margin, they could have passed the legislation in spite of idiots like Manchin and Lieberman.
Your continued misuse of the parable notwithstanding, I think you believe more Dems would have supported it than actually would have. Those chances go down the further back you go.
Dems are not a monolith.