Being pro-life is a core value of the Republican base but it is clearly not the same in terms of the general electorate.
Any future Republican presidential or senate candidate will have to have a nuanced stance on this issue. It is fine to be pro-life but it is clear that they cannot openly support any full ban on abortion.
Complete abortion bans with no exceptions for rape, incest or health of the mother are just not going to happen in almost any part of the country even if those complete bans are what we want.
The results of the Montana referendum actually make me want to throw up.
The majority of the people of fucking red Montana actually voted against saving babies born during a botched abortion.
The voting population is becoming more and more completely morally bankrupt.
This is one of the worst blackpills for me in this election.
Full abortion bans were known to be unpopular so it's mostly not surprising. Abortion is one of those Finkelthink issues that is used to divide the electorate. There is increasingly little moderation on it anymore. It's all just "have the Down syndrome incest rape baby" vs. "legalize infanticide."
There's a point you have to find the sort of compromise that'll protect you the most. In this case- don't outlaw the practice, outlaw the use of federal and state funding for anything that does practice it (allow for "the agreed exceptions" to be performed in actual hospitals with proper evidence and documentation). If they can't run their operations without it, they're a money laundering scam.
This is one of the worst blackpills for me in this election.
I don’t think this should blackpill you. Roe v wade was in place for 50 years. In that time, abortion on demand became the norm and everybody now expects it. It wasn’t surprising to me that there was backlash, even in red states.
People have a way of rationalizing the status quo no matter how ridiculous it is. It’s like in Oregon where people aren’t allowed to pump their own gas. Whenever somebody proposes an end to that, Oregoners give such ridiculous reasons for why they can’t possibly be expected to do something that everybody in every other state takes for granted.
I think you are correct that we will probably need to go with a more incremental approach instead of outright bans right off the bat.
I saw 2020 and mail in ballot bullshit where they stop counting and come back with bags of mail in ballots.
That shit happened in the swing states.
It looks like late night dumps of mail in ballots are what they use to "fortify" their elections.
Mike Lindell, Lin Wood and Sidney Powell spread the theory that votes are switched using software. If they focused on mail in ballots they might have won some election fraud court cases.
To add onto this, all the shitty crackpot theories are used to divert attention and effort from where the steal actually happened. If you have one or two methods by which 95% of the fraud occurred, but you get the vast majority of the people outraged about the steal only talking about unfounded bullshit 90% of the time, any effort to fight all the fraud is going to fall flat. That's what happened in 2020 (that and judges being deferential to the system, but that is hard to change).
Being pro-life is a core value of the Republican base but it is clearly not the same in terms of the general electorate.
Any future Republican presidential or senate candidate will have to have a nuanced stance on this issue. It is fine to be pro-life but it is clear that they cannot openly support any full ban on abortion.
Complete abortion bans with no exceptions for rape, incest or health of the mother are just not going to happen in almost any part of the country even if those complete bans are what we want.
The results of the Montana referendum actually make me want to throw up.
The majority of the people of fucking red Montana actually voted against saving babies born during a botched abortion.
The voting population is becoming more and more completely morally bankrupt.
This is one of the worst blackpills for me in this election.
Full abortion bans were known to be unpopular so it's mostly not surprising. Abortion is one of those Finkelthink issues that is used to divide the electorate. There is increasingly little moderation on it anymore. It's all just "have the Down syndrome incest rape baby" vs. "legalize infanticide."
There's a point you have to find the sort of compromise that'll protect you the most. In this case- don't outlaw the practice, outlaw the use of federal and state funding for anything that does practice it (allow for "the agreed exceptions" to be performed in actual hospitals with proper evidence and documentation). If they can't run their operations without it, they're a money laundering scam.
I don’t think this should blackpill you. Roe v wade was in place for 50 years. In that time, abortion on demand became the norm and everybody now expects it. It wasn’t surprising to me that there was backlash, even in red states.
People have a way of rationalizing the status quo no matter how ridiculous it is. It’s like in Oregon where people aren’t allowed to pump their own gas. Whenever somebody proposes an end to that, Oregoners give such ridiculous reasons for why they can’t possibly be expected to do something that everybody in every other state takes for granted.
I think you are correct that we will probably need to go with a more incremental approach instead of outright bans right off the bat.
Hey man do you believe biden didnt cheat?
Now you are just twisting what I said.
I saw 2020 and mail in ballot bullshit where they stop counting and come back with bags of mail in ballots.
That shit happened in the swing states.
It looks like late night dumps of mail in ballots are what they use to "fortify" their elections.
Mike Lindell, Lin Wood and Sidney Powell spread the theory that votes are switched using software. If they focused on mail in ballots they might have won some election fraud court cases.
The software theory doesn't have much evidence.
The mail in ballot theory does have evidence.
To add onto this, all the shitty crackpot theories are used to divert attention and effort from where the steal actually happened. If you have one or two methods by which 95% of the fraud occurred, but you get the vast majority of the people outraged about the steal only talking about unfounded bullshit 90% of the time, any effort to fight all the fraud is going to fall flat. That's what happened in 2020 (that and judges being deferential to the system, but that is hard to change).
Lindell strikes me as a low agency guy being taken for a ride and dragging others down with him. These other two are just grifters at this point.