CenterBHSFan

posted by geeblock

Similarly scotus appointees said they had no plans to go after roe vs wade during confirmation correct?  Every bill or law starts as an idea. You don’t necessarily disagree with these ideas so of course you don’t care. I’m sure if project 2025 said free health care or some idea the dems had that you disagreed with you would similarly post negatively about it. 

SCOTUS didn't "go after" Roe v Wade. The case made its way to them. And rather than legislate from the bench, they sent it back to the states. I don't have an argument against that. 

Present to me and argument where they should not have kicked it to the states.

Present to me and argument as to why SCOTUS should legislate from the bench.

Congress makes laws. And as I've told you before, the Dems wasted decades of majorities and super majorities because campaign promises gather donations whereas laws do not.

As for Med4All, the Dems won't even hold a simple floor vote. They wouldn't even do it when they had leverage. 

posted by jmog

If it had said "do you believe it is overall beneficial for families and society for women to raise their children full time" my answer would have been agree as actual studies show this to be true. But calling it a "duty" sounds too "Stepford Wives" to me.

Thought the exact same thing.

Seems like we've forgotten how to even talk about these issues.  It shouldn't be an LSAT-level parsing of words to figure out the answer.

And that's an otherwise loaded question.  Sure, it's beneficial to societies for women to raise their children.  That should be unobjectionable, but it's been turned into a sexist view. Because, hey, I also believe it's beneficial for society for MEN to raise their children. BOTH parents.  In fact, YES it's a duty for parents to raise their children.  

They've turned something completely unobjectionable into a right-wing sexist position.

Not a good test if you can tell exactly which answers land you where.  Makes you ask "where does their funding come from", because if there's value in that test I'm not seeing it.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

What for posting the primary source for Project 2025 and explaining how people rotate in and out of think tanks? 

I do find it funny no one has actually commented on the details of the project...

I do think some on here would be big fans of portions of it. I even like some portions of it. 

I have only read parts of it myself. With what I have read, I've got to say, I'm  mostly indifferent. 

Who all partook in cobbling it together doesn't fill me with fear or dread. It doesn't make me like them or dislike them. I've seen better Christmas wish lists.

That very well has the ability to change my viewpoint if your predictions come true. But as long as it isn't happening *right now", I'm not concerned.

I'm more afraid of spiders, who should all die in a fire. They are currently an existential threat to my well-being in real life.

I didn’t ever say I was competent

posted by justincredible

Reps for my fellow bottom righters.

You obviously meant to say "far right MAGA"

posted by CenterBHSFan

20,000 black men 

Diversity?

Well, Van Jones has declared that 20,000 black men will protect Kamala Harris. I guess from Trump's mean words. 

I say that if Hillary Clinton can take it, so can Kamala. Women who have reached that point of power have every ability to weather mean names or heavy criticism. 

Several years ago this test was much better worded with more thoughtful questions imo. Not sure why the creators changed it so much.

Here's mine:

I think Wisconsin will be safely Dem, almost no matter what. 

But the Dems really should rethink their openly public strategy of ditching the working class altogether. Otherwise they will eventually only be left with California and New York. 

posted by Trueblue23

Meh.  Irrelevant at this point.

This is the Republicans playing the tit for tat game. Unwise, to be sure. But the Dems can't act surprised after all the bastardy they've committed.

I hate DC!

Also, Kamala hit with articles of impeachment for the border crises and covering up Biden's condition.

posted by Trueblue23

This.

My opinion of the most likely outcomes, in order (as of right now, things change quickly).

-Harris selects Josh Shapiro as VP, wins Pennsylvania by default (still a huge task) and focuses the rest of her efforts in Michigan/Wisconsin.  The probability of Trump doing dumb things before November, and Harris' window staying open long enough for her to win the margins in Mi/Ws, is higher than I like.  Obviously a moot point if Donald wins Pennsylvania.  270-268, Harris.

There is some validity in this. The Dem strategy is, paraphrasing, this: 

"For every blue collar democrat we lose we will pick up two white collar Republicans". 

Easily done in a place like Pa.

Edit to add;

posted by jmog

There is part of me that believes the Dems knew how bad Biden was at this point and that’s why they pushed for the earliest debate in history. Get him off the ticket after a debacle before the conventions so they had time.  

This is mostly what I think. The wall they ran into was that they didn't have a stable of people with high name recognition with good (doesn't have to be great) accomplishments. They have focused all of their energy in orange man bad! for 8yrs that they didn't put any energy into grooming anybody to be at the ready. So now they have painted themselves into a corner and only have Kamala. 

Ok, so what they should be doing is have their stenographers pointing out all of her strong points and focusing on how to play up her good points, in whatever way they can to give their voters something to vote for.

But they aren't. They are focusing on P2025. And to be fair, it's working. Ptown is carrying it as we've already seen. The problem that lies beneath is that it's really early to be doing that. It will be a spent dick come the end of September.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I actually agree with this. I do think it also matters how much the Project 2025 agenda sticks with voters. 

Again, those people that wrote it will be in the next Trump administration.

If P2025 was truly the dems' boogeyman then they are humping it much too early. They should have waited til around late September early October to get the best effect. Clutching pearls about it now is a pleasure thrill, to be sure, but that feeling will be mostly desensitized by then.

Vance doesn't make me want to vote for Trump.

Tulsi would have had me vote for Trump. Because he's old, my vote would have really been for the VP.

lol.

From 2021:

Tulsi weighs in:

posted by geeblock

He gives a pass to the guy who has rambled the same speech for two years about sharks and electric batteries and how he knows more about nuclear energy, taxes, the environment, banks, you name it I know more than anyone in history lol but he’s the most moderate 

Somebody here said he was the most moderate?

Who was that??

posted by jmog

The video didn't work above for me, can someone link said video?

Oh, I took a screenie while watching the footage during today's hearing. It's not the vid itself. I will see if I can find a shortened version (instead of a vid of the whole hearing).

Edit to add:

So I didn't see a specific clip, but this is the full vid. Skip to 1hr53min

https://www.youtube.com/live/PtxiEU_Q27c?si=I3GlPFkDHiIDHXyR

posted by Heretic

Means she's even more stupid than I would have previously thought.

With the latest "most important election EVAR!" coming up in a few months, there's no way the Ds can sit back and let the Rs turn them into punching bags over their presidential candidate nearly getting got because of shitty protection during the term of a D president. The only thing they could really do was bury her and portray it as departmental incompetence.

Well, too late now! The footage shown today during the Pa. state police Colonel blew that all to hell. It's just too damming. Occam's Razor can't be the go-to by any rational person.