Discreet Dolls

Biden signs order on abortion access, urges women to vote in November

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,229
8,202
113
You haven't asked Butler who he would run in the Red States to get the results he wants.
The reason is that he wants the Republicans to retain those States, as to him this Roe v Wade Decision by the Supreme Court is the fault of the Democrats.
Plain and 100% simple!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
Pay attention, as I did answer it. Those who are opposed to the Roe v wade overturning are the ones that need to be galvanized to get out and vote.
If Biden flipped those Red States in the 2020 Elections, then it is still possible to do the same at the midterms. Did Biden not win those States fair and square?
In speaking to people in the USA most are more concerned about the state of their pocketbooks.

And btw once you look at the numbers for support of RvW its not as clear cut as you think. The majority support Abortion but with limits. Once you get to increased access beyond rape/incest/medical support starts to wane. And as you add weeks to availability it wanes more.

Biden didn't flip that many red states, more like purple ones. And RvW is not Trump. There are lots of religious Democrats who don't agree with RvW believe it or not. Especially in Black and Hispanic communities.

As for galvanizing the other issue is how ineffectual people are percieving Biden to be now. This isn't 2020 when he ran ftom his Basement. People see his obvious old age. And just don't think he is up to the challenge. Add in a complete distrust of Congress and the Senate and voters are throwing up their hands and walking away.

They have done nothing to show they can improve things. Add more Red State reps and they can still, just like Manchin, block things. And probably will. Hell that was the excuse they used when they had 60 seats in 2009.

Realistically unless the Dems start up some sort of real party unity situation with consequences for voting against the policies of the Party there is no point as they are lame ducks to the Whims of a few Right Wingers within the party. And as they won't jettison the filibuster, they will quite simply never have the votes now.

So I'm fully prepared to say until you see a Dem court its going to get worse for the Red State women. There will not be a national law.

And that's why voting for Dems expecting change at this time with this leadership is futile.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
The reason is that he wants the Republicans to retain those States, as to him this Roe v Wade Decision by the Supreme Court is the fault of the Democrats.
Plain and 100% simple!!
No, I just think the Dems don't have what it takes to actually change things.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,229
8,202
113
No, I just think the Dems don't have what it takes to actually change things.
If you do not think that the Democrats have the ability to change the law as they do not have a clear majority, then who else can do it ........ the Republicans?
Contrary to your belief the Democrats passed several Bills including help to the Americans during the Covid-19 crisis, avoid Government shutdowns for reliefs, a bipartisan infrastructure, withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan etc. They changed things in that respect!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
37,050
75,032
113
I would get rid of the Filibuster, by demanding that only nominees who support doing that get the fundraising.
And that would win in the Red States why?
Your argument was that the Dems couldn't win in the Red States.
Do you think that "we will get rid of the filibuster" is so salient to Red Staters that anyone (Democrat or Third Party since you think the Democrats need to be destroyed) would win running on it?

Bill Clinton chased after Corporate Donors. The GOP became obstructionist.
I'll give you partial marks.
Clinton did not invent chasing after Corporate Donors. Corporate Donors for Democrats far predated him.
Clinton pushed the "triangulation"/ "Third way" ideology.

The move to parliamentary obstructionism by the GOP is usually put on Newt Gingrich at this time, so no argument there from me.

So between the two the only legislation that passes is Corporate and non progressive in nature. Tax cuts, corporate subsidies, bailouts, union busting legislation, laws that allow corruption without jail time, just fines, Corporate friendly judges, concentration of media ownership, news curation, all as a result.
And all of that dates from the 1990s and nothing has changed in any way since then?
That's the whole ball game?

The budget passes for the Military with annual increases without debate, Corporate bailouts in days, but now its a crisis to get other budgetting done where before it happened without this brinkmanship.

Both parties are to blame. One for selling out, thevother for taking advantage of the sellout. Cimbined controlled opposition for the same donor class.
And your answer to that is to make the donor class more powerful?
If all parties are controlled opposition, then you want violence in the streets, correct?
There is no other alternative according to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
And that would win in the Red States why?
Your argument was that the Dems couldn't win in the Red States.
Do you think that "we will get rid of the filibuster" is so salient to Red Staters that anyone (Democrat or Third Party since you think the Democrats need to be destroyed) would win running on it?



I'll give you partial marks.
Clinton did not invent chasing after Corporate Donors. Corporate Donors for Democrats far predated him.
Clinton pushed the "triangulation"/ "Third way" ideology.

The move to parliamentary obstructionism by the GOP is usually put on Newt Gingrich at this time, so no argument there from me.



And all of that dates from the 1990s and nothing has changed in any way since then?
That's the whole ball game?



And your answer to that is to make the donor class more powerful?
If all parties are controlled opposition, then you want violence in the streets, correct?
There is no other alternative according to you.
Nope, a third party.

And you aren't smart enough to be claiming the privilege of marking others.

The nation is so divided right now I only see a third Party candidate for President as being able to unite it. That or crises so bad that someone actually rises.

I firmly believe the world is about to get worse for awhile. We are going to see lots of economic failure in nations. And it will cascade. I think China is on the way to a major implosion. And the USA is going to see militancy similar to the riots of the 60's if not worse.

The leaderships are too corrupted to do anything. So yes, as things get worse in the streets(the homeless issues alone are a pile of tinder. Add in more economic failure and it will go up) violence is inevitable. How much is up for debate. But that can bring an FDR.

We have a Carter.
 
Last edited:

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,229
8,202
113
In speaking to people in the USA most are more concerned about the state of their pocketbooks.

And btw once you look at the numbers for support of RvW its not as clear cut as you think. The majority support Abortion but with limits. Once you get to increased access beyond rape/incest/medical support starts to wane. And as you add weeks to availability it wanes more.

Biden didn't flip that many red states, more like purple ones. And RvW is not Trump. There are lots of religious Democrats who don't agree with RvW believe it or not. Especially in Black and Hispanic communities.

As for galvanizing the other issue is how ineffectual people are percieving Biden to be now. This isn't 2020 when he ran ftom his Basement. People see his obvious old age. And just don't think he is up to the challenge. Add in a complete distrust of Congress and the Senate and voters are throwing up their hands and walking away.

They have done nothing to show they can improve things. Add more Red State reps and they can still, just like Manchin, block things. And probably will. Hell that was the excuse they used when they had 60 seats in 2009.

Realistically unless the Dems start up some sort of real party unity situation with consequences for voting against the policies of the Party there is no point as they are lame ducks to the Whims of a few Right Wingers within the party. And as they won't jettison the filibuster, they will quite simply never have the votes now.

So I'm fully prepared to say until you see a Dem court its going to get worse for the Red State women. There will not be a national law.

And that's why voting for Dems expecting change at this time with this leadership is futile.
Of course everyone all over the Globe are worried about their pocketbooks including Conservative Government run nations like the UK that has been hit far harder in every respect as compared to both the USA and Canada. The blame always falls at the hands of the Government except to you if it is a right wing Government in power!!

Biden did flip the States that mattered for him to win an overwhelming majority. That is what really matters in giving the Democrats some power. There is some positiveness that maybe taking root:


Again a lot of assumption from you as to what "types" of Democrats may flip those seats, if they take those States. Does not automatically mean that they will be Manchin or Sinema clones arising from those captures!!

Eventually at least the Democrats managed to pass the most revolutionary bill, such as the Affordable Healthcare Act. Something that the Republicans attacked from the word go and threw several roadblocks during the passage of it.

Anyway, how can the Democrats now nominate any more Supreme Court Judges if none of them are either quitting or dying?

Once again did the Republicans not have the likes of McCain, Murkowski and Collins to do with the likes of the ACA plus several other Bills, that Manchin and Sinema are currently doing to prevent the new Roe v Wade Legislation!! Why do you only aim your criticisms at one party only?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
Of course everyone all over the Globe are worried about their pocketbooks including Conservative Government run nations like the UK that has been hit far harder in every respect as compared to both the USA and Canada. The blame always falls at the hands of the Government except to you if it is a right wing Government in power!!

Biden did flip the States that mattered for him to win an overwhelming majority. That is what really matters in giving the Democrats some power. There is some positiveness that maybe taking root:


Again a lot os assumption from you as to what "types" of Democrats may flip those seats, if they take those States. Does not automatically mean that they will be Manchin or Sinema clones arising from those captures!!

Eventually at least the Democrats managed to pass the most revolutionary bill, such as the Affordable Healthcare Act. Something that the Republicans attacked from the word go and threw several roadblocks during the passage of it.

Anyway, how can the Democrats now nominate any more Supreme Court Judges if none of them are either quitting or dying?

Once again did the Republicans not have the likes of McCain, Murkowski and Collins to do with the likes of the ACA plus several other Bills, that Manchin and Sinema are currently doing to prevent the new Roe v Wade Legislation!! Why do you only aim your criticisms at one party only?
Read the title. Which says dont read anything into the poll numbers.

And no they can't change the court. But look what FDR did. That's the playbook. Too bad we have Carter in.

It's going to get worse.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
37,050
75,032
113
Realistically unless the Dems start up some sort of real party unity situation with consequences for voting against the policies of the Party there is no point as they are lame ducks to the Whims of a few Right Wingers within the party. And as they won't jettison the filibuster, they will quite simply never have the votes now.
OK then.
As usual, your authoritarian streak comes out.
But fine - you wan the Dems to act more like a parliamentary party.
If the Dems become more ideologically rigorous, they will not lose any elections.
In other words, if they kick Manchin out in WVa, then they won't lose that seat because... red state people who vote for Joe Manchin will decide to move left.

So I'm fully prepared to say until you see a Dem court its going to get worse for the Red State women.
So you want Democrats to win now because the only way for Democrats to have a Democratic court is to be in control of the Presidency and the Senate.

And that's why voting for Dems expecting change at this time with this leadership is futile.
OK.
So you think the only way for the situation to get better is for there to be a Dem Court, which requires the Dems to have the Presidency and the Senate and that is why no one should vote for Democrats?

If you do not think that the Democrats have the ability to change the law as they do not have a clear majority, then who else can do it ........ the Republicans?
No.
He wants a third party that doesn't exist and has no infrastructure and no public support to fix everything with the crushing majorities they will win over both the Democrats and the Republicans in the US system with all its Duverger's Law incentives.

Or, being more generous, he feels that if you destroy the Democratic party then everyone who doesn't want to vote Republican will vote for the new party.
Just like everyone who doesn't want to vote Republican votes for the Democratic party now.

Contrary to your belief the Democrats passed several Bills including help to the Americans during the Covid-19 crisis, avoid Government shutdowns for reliefs, a bipartisan infrastructure, withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan etc. They changed things in that respect!!
You've seen the graph - none of it counts.
The new Third Party will pass things that will count because they aren't Democrats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,229
8,202
113
Read the title. Which says dont read anything into the poll numbers.

And no they can't change the court. But look what FDR did. That's the playbook. Too bad we have Carter in.

It's going to get worse.
Again the fact is that the Republicans were at one time having a far higher polling numbers. Again, you cannot comprehend that it is some positiveness if they closed the gap. Now that may not necessarily translate into those vital seats that are up for grabs. That is why I mentioned "if"!!

The only thing I agree is that it will get worse if the Republicans win more seats and even elect a Right wing POTUS.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
OK then.
As usual, your authoritarian streak comes out.
But fine - you wan the Dems to act more like a parliamentary party.
If the Dems become more ideologically rigorous, they will not lose any elections.
In other words, if they kick Manchin out in WVa, then they won't lose that seat because... red state people who vote for Joe Manchin will decide to move left.



So you want Democrats to win now because the only way for Democrats to have a Democratic court is to be in control of the Presidency and the Senate.



OK.
So you think the only way for the situation to get better is for there to be a Dem Court, which requires the Dems to have the Presidency and the Senate and that is why no one should vote for Democrats?



No.
He wants a third party that doesn't exist and has no infrastructure and no public support to fix everything with the crushing majorities they will win over both the Democrats and the Republicans in the US system with all its Duverger's Law incentives.

Or, being more generous, he feels that if you destroy the Democratic party then everyone who doesn't want to vote Republican will vote for the new party.
Just like everyone who doesn't want to vote Republican votes for the Democratic party now.



You've seen the graph - none of it counts.
The new Third Party will pass things that will count because they aren't Democrats.
Which changes nothing. Keep Manchin, right wing politics continues. Right?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Valcazar

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
Again the fact is that the Republicans were at one time having a far higher polling numbers. Again, you cannot comprehend that it is some positiveness if they closed the gap. Now that may not necessarily translate into those vital seats that are up for grabs. That is why I mentioned "if"!!

The only thing I agree is that it will get worse if the Republicans win more seats and even elect a Right wing POTUS.
Its a bump. And national polling means shit. Its race by race. The only real flip I see so far is Fetterman in Penn State.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
You want Biden to threaten to pack the court, fail, and then lose 81 house seats and 8 senate seats in the midterms?
In the end he got Social Security, which led to Medicare. Tons of union legislation. And tbey were so threatened by him they added term limits.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,229
8,202
113
Its a bump. And national polling means shit. Its race by race. The only real flip I see so far is Fetterman in Penn State.
Why should it mean "shit" if it favours just the Democrats, and after the overturning of Roe v Wade? There are still a few months to go, a lot can occur between now and then.
Well if the voters do not turn out in droves to help the Democrats, then they will have to put up with further violations of rights such as same sex marriage, and even Federal Laws outlawing abortions. Of course then the "Democrats are to Blame"!!
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
101,862
28,774
113
OK then.
As usual, your authoritarian streak comes out.
Butler has been an accelerationist for years, hoping that backing someone like rump would lead to the system being destroyed and some kind of socialist utopia rising in its ashes.

I was listening to this american life today and they were talking about corporations being legally accepted as people with rights. So Biden should just say as legal entities they are allowed to only donate as much as any other single person. Add in PACs. I know the SC would overturn it and it would never happen but still....
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
32,414
6,217
113
Why should it mean "shit" if it favours just the Democrats, and after the overturning of Roe v Wade? There are still a few months to go, a lot can occur between now and then.
Well if the voters do not turn out in droves to help the Democrats, then they will have to put up with further violations of rights such as same sex marriage, and even Federal Laws outlawing abortions. Of course then the "Democrats are to Blame"!!
As they already failed on Build Back Better, A public Option for Healthcare, a 15 dollar minimum wage, why should progressive voters believe they can stop things from happening? If the SCOTUS drops more bombs, what can they do to stop it?

Im sure they will be really good at shaking their fists and asking for donations. So far thats all they seem capable of.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
101,862
28,774
113
As they already failed on Build Back Better, A public Option for Healthcare, a 15 dollar minimum wage, why should progressive voters believe they can stop things from happening? If the SCOTUS drops more bombs, what can they do to stop it?

Im sure they will be really good at shaking their fists and asking for donations. So far thats all they seem capable of.
Its a stupid claim, if the dems had 2 more senate votes most of those items would be done by now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
37,050
75,032
113
In the end he got Social Security, which led to Medicare. Tons of union legislation. And tbey were so threatened by him they added term limits.
(All of which you would have opposed at the time as half-loaf sellout legislation that was too compromised by the right wing and not bold and progressive enough.)

But hey, what did he have that Biden doesn't when he did those things?
Large majorities in both chambers.

YearHouse DemocratsHouse RepublicansSenate DemocratsSenate Republicans
19323131175837
19343221036925
1936334887517
19382621696923
19402671626628
1942 2222095738
19442441895738

Funny. It is almost like having more seats makes you more likely to accomplish something big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts