|
Yeah I know what you're thinking but they're right, plenty of women either dgaf or vote against reproductive rights for whatever reason just like people of color vote republican
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:Actually it's way more unforgivable to throw women's rights back five decades. We need to go to the streets and make the George Floyd protests look tame by comparison. Force the democrats to prove that they actually believe what they say when they want women's votes. The way democrats dealt with the protests is a great example of how they operate. Massive nationwide protests against police brutality, and to defund police. Democrats set up voter registration tables and told protesters to go home, stop causing a ruckus, and vote. After winning elections, the national democrat policy was to increase funding for police.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:11
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:In this case, with the way these things were written, even as a draft, I am extremely comfortable being right and saying women will be galvanized to vote. Maybe not phrased as succinctly as i wanted it to be. Some women will be motivated by this, others might not care. I am not sure how huge a surge the Democrats will get for this.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:11
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:Mindboggling to see the mental gymnastics here that republicans will benefit from this or not be hurt by this. I don't get it. Women are the reason republicans lose elections. I don’t think this moves the needle. It is like the Trump access Hollywood tape, you might get people more motivated to respond to pollsters for a week, but it ultimately doesn’t change anything since everyone’s mind is already made up. Also, Americans don’t really value their rights other than the second amendment. They will gladly trade away everything for a tax cut.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
RoboChrist 9000 posted:I'm not expecting anything. I'm just saying I don't see how this is some huge victory or 'burning down the house.' There is a relevant and not 0% chance Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito die before 2024. Hope is but a wish upon a dream, and maybe that's enough to get people motivated. TyrantWD posted:I don’t think this moves the needle. We'll see, but I would happily bet against that and feel utterly confident in doing so.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:And they would have continued to fail had she not been so selfish. She knew what was at stake, and didn’t care, because her she was a self-centered prick who cared more about being an icon for women, than doing everything in her power to protect women’s rights. A law could have been written and passed to make it unambiguous, and they didn't. They all can share blame with her, because their motivations for failure were also about legacies and decorum. Mooseontheloose posted:Maybe not phrased as succinctly as i wanted it to be. Some women will be motivated by this, others might not care. I am not sure how huge a surge the Democrats will get for this. "it's just more healthcare I'd never afford anyway, don't assume you're drafting me for this fight" is all the clarity anyone's gonna need to validate it anyway. FAUXTON fucked around with this message at 03:15 on May 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:this assumes that abortion is a driving motivator for women to vote.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:15
|
|
|
RoboChrist 9000 posted:And what is the meaningful consequence of that? What changes? I'd like a concrete answer about how things are in any way different for the average American. If the SCOTUS behaves identically while being more grumpy and unhappy, I don't really think that's a meaningful accomplishment. Anything that might make the centrist elite realize that the patronage network they've set up and spent all their time and energy protecting is on the verge of collapse might motivate them to do a thing, ever. It's always possible.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:17
|
|
|
RoboChrist 9000 posted:I don't see how this is some huge victory or 'burning down the house.' "burning down the house" != "huge victory" If you don't understand how clerks and appellate courts deliberate internally or how seriously courts and lawyers take confidentiality, then no, you wouldn't realize how this is "burning down the house." There's literally never been a leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion before now. Whoever leaked it probably violated not just Court rules, but actual laws around attorney confidentiality. Because it happened in such a highly politicized case, this tells the Republicans on the Court that they can't trust their own clerks, they can't trust the legal mechanisms they've sheltered behind their entire careers. It tells them there are likely to be political consequences for their actions and they aren't going to be able to just shelter behind their fancy robes. It's not a "victory" at all and I don't think anyone is claiming it is. It's just a destruction of norms and standards around the Court, which means less shelter for Republican politicization and greater general public realization that the Court is a political sham and not the extra-political neutral arbiter of justice it pretends to be. Those are good things but they're just a start. A necessary start on the road to passing the laws that would actually reform the Court, but just a start. You start a war by throwing bombs and this is just the first toss.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:20
|
|
|
JordanKai posted:I can't imagine anyone who lives outside of the DC bureaucracy/journalism bubble caring about SCOTUS opinions leaking. What's the worst thing that could come out of it? Public outrage forcing the justices to change their stance and reverse the decision? They evidently don't care enough about public opinion to have it sway their own stances. I think people within the legal profession everywhere would give a poo poo. The SC being a counter-majoritarian institution that sits on a high apolitical stoop and helps keep our government moored to higher principles of rule of law is one of the big pieces of propaganda every law student is forced to swallow. I'd think it'd be super corrosive to the civility of American politics, although I think a lot of people here would welcome that.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:20
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:There is a relevant and not 0% chance Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito die before 2024. Hope is but a wish upon a dream, and maybe that's enough to get people motivated. Judging by the last 20 years of politics I'm not convinced that 1. This will lead to more people voting for dems, or 2. If it does lead to more votes for dems that will result in any meaningful federal abortion legislation.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:21
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's not a "victory" at all and I don't think anyone is claiming it is. It's just a destruction of norms and standards around the Court, which means less shelter for Republican politicization and greater general public realization that the Court is a political sham and not the extra-political neutral arbiter of justice it pretends to be. I'll claim some measure of victory if it does lead to a less legitimate court in the eyes of the populace.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:27
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:I'll claim some measure of victory if it does lead to a less legitimate court in the eyes of the populace. Yeah at the end of the day it's a just fancy building with a lovely book club.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:29
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:I'll claim some measure of victory if it does lead to a less legitimate court in the eyes of the populace.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:33
|
|
|
It’s not less legitimate until we tell them to gently caress off
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:37
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:What does a "less legitimate" court mean? Why would SCOTUS care? That doesn't impact their power one bit. The less popular support there is for the Court's "legitimacy," the less deferentially it is treated by the press, the public, legislators, and the legal profession, the more room there is for things like court packing, the imposition of mandatory retirement ages for justices, etc. It's all overton window shifting and not immediately consquential but there's no magic bullet here that's going to instantly solve this problem, all the potential solutions to this problem were either years in the past or are years in the future. The groundwork has to be laid and delegitimizing the current Court is part of that groundwork.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
We are seeing the realization of 70+ years of sustained momentum to take over federal institutions, it's not going to pivot against conservatives on a dime unless a whole lotta people suddenly start behaving a whole lot differently basically immediately.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:44
|
|
|
Would this be the first time that SCOTUS has specifically removed a right that they'd previously granted?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/valeriocnn/status/1521316796103487489?s=21
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:50
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:"burning down the house" != "huge victory" Whoever leaked the draft is a goddamn hero and the more rules they violated to do so, the braver they were to put their personal well-being at risk to highlight this shameless depravity. If this erodes trust in SCOTUS, all the better. That trust is misplaced.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:52
|
|
|
Who cares? He doesn't control the court anymore and they have an anti-Roe majority without him.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:53
|
|
|
When you realize that you’re also trapped in the same house filled with zombies after you open the front door and let the zombies in to kill your enemies.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:54
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:Would this be the first time that SCOTUS has specifically removed a right that they'd previously granted? Dred Scott comes to mind.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:54
|
|
|
ah good, thats a relief
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:54
|
|
|
I love the siren for something that is completely irrelevant
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:57
|
|
|
none of this matters, we're still on track for corporate sovereignty and a harder theocratic police state y'all talking about laws while the right wing is buying guns and electing Big Lie politicians you don't appreciate the nature of the threat if you're still talking about SCOTUS in terms of status quo legalism
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:57
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The less popular support there is for the Court's "legitimacy," the less deferentially it is treated by the press, the public, legislators, and the legal profession, the more room there is for things like court packing, the imposition of mandatory retirement ages for justices, etc. It's all overton window shifting and not immediately consquential but there's no magic bullet here that's going to instantly solve this problem, all the potential solutions to this problem were either years in the past or are years in the future. Roe lasted 50 years partially because red states did believe in the court *despite* Roe. You really think destroying that legitimacy is going to work out well for... Anybody? The courts are literally the meditator between left and right. Do you think anyone is better off when the sides turn to violence to solve their disputes because the courts have lost that respect?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:57
|
|
|
Roberts quickly leaking that he only supports salami slicing away women's rights instead of throwing them off a cliff, to try and salvage his own reputation, because he is a coward.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:57
|
|
|
Sounds like he agrees that Roe should be overruled but is too much of a loving coward to sign off on doing it all at once. vyelkin posted:Roberts quickly leaking that he only supports salami slicing away women's rights instead of throwing them off a cliff, to try and salvage his own reputation, because he is a coward. Yeah you beat me too it
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 03:59
|
|
|
it's all loving optics how willing are you to shamelessly thump your issue on the pulpit nonstop the right wing thumped this issue to anyone who would listen for a full human lifespan, and won we don't really have media apparatuses that do the same from the left, or even the center that's why the Overton window ratchets so hard rightward here
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:00
|
|
|
it shouldn't be overturned, but alito is not wrong to say that roe v. wade is a weak and poorly argued decision
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:I'm curious what your endgame is in this scenario? You destroy the legitimacy of the court, because you think it's blatantly political... Which lets you make it even more blatantly political? The court is not currently legitimate. The six republican justices use bankrupt, motivated reasoning to justify political goals, repeatedly and consistently. It's a partisan hack political outfit cosplaying in robes. In order to rebuild it we need a national consensus that the current incarnation of the court is not legitimate and must be reformed. You can't cure cancer without diagnosing it first; you must clear the rubble before you can build anew. If we ever want to have a Court that is universally respected, we first need a Court worthy of respect. This one isn't, and we need a national consensus behind that first, so that we can then have a national consensus behind necessary reforms. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 04:07 on May 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:03
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Sounds like he agrees that Roe should be overruled but is too much of a loving coward to sign off on doing it all at once. Roberts wanted a decision that said "States can restrict abortion to the fifth Friday in February during a leap year" but didn't explicitly overturn Roe, but the other four conservatives don't understand the concept of "the quiet part", so they're going full theocracy as fast as possible.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:04
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:The courts are literally the meditator between left and right. Do you think anyone is better off when the sides turn to violence to solve their disputes because the courts have lost that respect? As opposed to now, which is nonviolent?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:07
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:Given how everything is going, this is the Christmas Goose come early. True. Imagine if the Republicans held power right now, they'd be doing things like overturning Roe V. Wade and threatening gay marriage
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:08
|
|
|
I don’t think we live in an era of political nonviolence. Whatever they call the next period of American history will be understood to have started a while ago now.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:09
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:Roberts wanted a decision that said "States can restrict abortion to the fifth Friday in February during a leap year" but didn't explicitly overturn Roe, but the other four conservatives don't understand the concept of "the quiet part", so they're going full theocracy as fast as possible. If I shared their ideological views I would support it. Power left unexercised is wasted. The only people who still believe in restraint have a (D) next to their name and are well paid by their corporate sponsors for their decades of extremely decorous inaction.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:10
|
|
|
Minera posted:True. Imagine if the Republicans held power right now, they'd be doing things like overturning Roe V. Wade and threatening gay marriage Impossible. Unthinkable.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:11
|
|
|
please respectfully and nonviolently deny my right to exist - coming to blows over this won't solve anything
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
Lol this is like an answer to the question of "is there anything conservatives could do to hypothetically prevent the midterms from being a guaranteed victory for them? Anything lovely and brazen enough that it puts things back in play?" The timing is superbly arrogant
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 04:12
|
|
