- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Populism (and Dobbs) is the basis for "muh democracy" rants and ravings from the DEMs
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:29 am to Turbeauxdog
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:29 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Because it's only 60 percent because of a group that is never going to vote any other way
Math hard for you?
Clearly you didn't read both polls
Math doesn't work out the way you think it does. A chunk of Republican voters are in that 60%
1
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:29 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I don't want to create 50 little tyrannical states. There has to be protections for individuals from state action whether it's from DC or your state capitol.
There is no evidence of this. Several states have already allowed it’s citizens to vote on how they wanted to handle abortion, and I’m sure there will be many future votes of the people of each state voting on it in the future.
This was never a right explicitly protected in the US Constitution.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
but the fact remains that voter ID laws exclude DEM voters.
It’s excludes Democrat votes. That may or may not have a correlation to excluding voters.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again, see: Dobbs. No matter how you spin it, 60% of the country sees that decision as an attack on their rights. For the people far on the poles of the Left, that's just the first step.
Just because 60% is ok with abortion in some form doesn’t mean they see Dobbs as an attack on rights. That’s a reach. Many people understand the decision simply puts it in the hands of the states. I am not anti abortion I think it’s ok in the first trimester or at any point if the mothers health is in danger. I also don’t see Dobbs as an attack on abortion rights. There is no right to an abortion in the constitution therefore it cannot be guaranteed. It’s up to the states to decide how to regulate abortion
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:31 am to the808bass
quote:so typical.
the OP is really a whine about abortion pretending to be about something else (as your posts are demonstrating).
SFP makes a passing reference to abortion in the OP. 75% of the responses whine about abortion. He replies to those responses, and suddenly it is he who has made abortion the primary issue.
So fricking disingenuous.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I can say you only support pro-life stances because your perception is driven by other institutions.
Part of my perceptions are driven by other institutions. Checkmate.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:32 am to the808bass
quote:
Which is why someone who was trying to communicate the point you say you’re trying to communicate would have used a different example.
There isn't a better example, though.
You have the balance of a major (and old) precedent being swung by Trump appointees.
You have the biggest win in the culture war for the right since, what? At least 100 years.
You have a response to the ruling that slowed the Red Wave in the upcoming elections.
Sorry. They have to show their mettle this time and get past the A-word.
quote:
because the OP is really a whine about abortion pretending to be about something else
Not true. That's why abortion was only a small portion of OP.
quote:
Without Dobbs the GOP would be approaching like 57 Senate seats after this bloodbath next week and taking over several purple states' governorships and SOS. It would be such a bloodbath you'd have DEMs in purple states who would have to start considering breaking party allegiance or risk losing in 2024.
This is true, but not related to OP, so your point is still wrong.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:32 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again, see: Dobbs.
How is Dobbs not “democratic”? Are these people all stupid?
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:32 am to AggieHank86
quote:
So fricking disingenuous.
I’m paying attention to what he’s actually posting. You’re just an idiot parading as an intellectual.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:33 am to STEVED00
quote:
No the media is the one driving it in that it is their “right”.
OK well churches are the ones driving it's to protect life.
Your opinion is now invalid.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:33 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There isn't a better example, though.
Republican positions on voting laws would have been a much better example.
Or Republican redistricting efforts.
But they’re both just politics and it’s not why your panties are bunched today.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:34 am to Geauxgurt
quote:
Big difference between people that believe in unlimited abortion and those that are comfortable with limited abortion timeframes like 10-12 weeks. Instead, this poll conflates the two and people likely are assuming one = full restriction with maybe rape, incest, etc while the other = every other option.
This is one of the problems with full fledged democracy and why voting mechanisms for political office was strictly limited under the Constitution as written. It is utterly impossible to campaign on nuanced positions across a population as large as ours. So, instead, our political culture devolves into simplistic “A” or “B” choice that not only fails to address the needs of society but creates hostile environments.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:34 am to AggieHank86
quote:
The McCloskey’s did not own the gate. It belonged to the neighborhood association. The crowd entered the neighborhood through an open, undamaged gate. This is on video. Thus, it was damaged in one of two ways. Either the crowd went back and damaged the gate, despite having not done so much as knocking over a trashcan anywhere else in the entire neighborhood, or the McCloskey’s went back and damaged it during the night to support the lies that they had already told regarding the crowd destroying the gate to gain entry into the neighborhood. Yes, I think that the latter is more likely. Rittenhouse committed two homicides/“ (aka “murders”). He was (correctly) not CONVICTED, because he established the elements of an affirmative defense (self defense). That is the way affirmative defenses work. I am sorry that the law confuses you to such an extent.
“Misrepresented”
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:36 am to Flats
quote:
How is Dobbs not “democratic”? Are these people all stupid?
It's regressive and illiberal, which is a big deal in a democracy that's been progressing for 230+ years.
Again, this is also a thread about perception.
People perceive things that aren't true. Hell, a week ago you had people across this country really believing their children were at risk from fentanyl-laced candy
Y'all keep trying to argue about the policy points and ignoring the actual point of OP.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:37 am to the808bass
quote:
Republican positions on voting laws would have been a much better example.
How much impact have those policy proposals had on polling for the elections next week?
Compare that to Dobbs
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:37 am to Flats
quote:
How is Dobbs not “democratic”?
Constitutional protections (or the lack there of) not subject to the whims of the majority is the anthesis of democracy.
We don’t have a democracy.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:37 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
that's been progressing for 230+ years.
I’ll go with Chesterton’s view on progress.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:38 am to Antonio Moss
You raise a good point, but we face a scale dilemma.
Today, all but a handful of the least-populous states have more residents than the entirety of the United States at the time as its formation, back when we were an actual federal republic.
The sort of nuanced politics that you described would certainly not be possible in Texas or Georgia today, any more than in the nation as a whole.
Hell, even Louisiana has more people today than the entire population of the United States in 1789.
Today, all but a handful of the least-populous states have more residents than the entirety of the United States at the time as its formation, back when we were an actual federal republic.
The sort of nuanced politics that you described would certainly not be possible in Texas or Georgia today, any more than in the nation as a whole.
Hell, even Louisiana has more people today than the entire population of the United States in 1789.
This post was edited on 11/5/22 at 9:42 am
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:38 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again, this is not a popular policy nationally. It is seen as a regression of personal rights by about 60% of the country. That's scary.
SCOTUS isn’t there to be popular. They interpret the constitution as it applies to cases presented to them. If SCOTUS said “a baby’s right to live is constitutionally protected and abortion cannot exist” then that would be different.
If abortion is popular then Dobbs will be largely irrelevant as state legislatures will follow the will of the people and keep it legal. Which is why, after the initial freak out over Dobbs, nobody except the far left gives a shite anymore because nothing has really changed
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:38 am to SlowFlowPro
Are you sure your primary point isn’t about Dobbs and the election?
Page 6 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News