Republicans will lose on abortion

Money is paramount to liberals as well. You don't proposed spending trillions upon trillions of dollars and then say money isn't important. It's important to all of us.

We as political partisans often like to ascribe these almost God like qualities to our political party's to justify our support for them. In reality they exist simply to garner the most number of votes to win elections. Thus they love wedge issues and abortion is definitely a wedge issue. As long as Republicans tell their supporters they are working to over turn it it garners them support. As long as Democrats can tell voters they are protecting abortion rights from Republicans it garners them support. They both love it.

I think you are correct.

I recall Nina Burleigh. This "feminist" said "I would be happy to give him a blowjob just to thank him for keeping abortion legal".

BTW, in January 2019 the Daily Telegraph was forced to apologize and pay "substantial damages" for publishing an article written by Burleigh titled “The Mystery of Melania” that the Telegraph admitted contained numerous falsehoods.
 
How cynical but probably true. Just imagine if the (R)s DID manage to ban abortion 100% across the entire nation. What would they use then to whip up the base? That's why the wall will never succeed, terrorism will never be defeated, and abortion will still be legal. Without those, they have bupkes.

I noticed that the FowlWoman seems to have "forgotten" that the DEMOCRATS also have "wedge" issues they use to gin up support.

If liberals didn't have double standards, would they have any standards at all?
 
How cynical but probably true. Just imagine if the (R)s DID manage to ban abortion 100% across the entire nation. What would they use then to whip up the base?

That's why the wall will never succeed, terrorism will never be defeated, and abortion will still be legal. Without those, they have bupkes.

Admittedly its cynical and its not generally how I view the world however it is with politics. I actually thought the other way, how many more (women) voters could Republicans gain from people who tend to agree with them but are pro-choice? Your question is the opposite way, how many could they lose, but same concept.
 
He either didn't notice it, ignored it, or went with the 'because I said so' mindset Walt has.

Option 1 can be ruled out.


Maybe. I've noticed that partisan hacks often exhibit a tendency that blinds them to inconvenient occurrences.

Since Nott the Hoople continues to "unsee" Salty Walty's unsubstantiated assertion, I suspect this sums his lack of reaction:

tUJ5FJj.gif
 
Maybe. I've noticed that partisan hacks often exhibit a tendency that blinds them to inconvenient occurrences.

Since Nott the Hoople continues to "unsee" Salty Walty's unsubstantiated assertion, I suspect this sums his lack of reaction:

tUJ5FJj.gif

Wouldn't that mean his ignored it?
 
I feel I must agree.......lib'ruls will push to grant their dogs and cats constitutional rights afforded humans before they will give the same to their unborn children......

Indeed, but I see that as a positive. Imagine the hellish life of a child in a liberal home.

You only need to consider Greta Thunberg's example.
 
Hello Kush,

The problem for Republicans on abortion is that if they really get their way, it destroys their party.

If they manage to overturn Roe it doesn't make abortion illegal. It leaves it up to the States.

The logical result of that is: Red States would outlaw abortion, and Blue States would still allow it.

That would lead to a situation where abortion becomes something which is available to the rich, but not the poor. Because the rich can afford to travel to get an abortion, but the poor cannot.

Then the demographics of the Blue States would remain the same, but the Red States would have increasing numbers of poor people, while the rich can travel to end unwanted pregnancies.

Since poor people tend to vote Democratic, this would undermine Republican majorities in Red States.

If Republicans get their way, it kills the Republican party.

Republican abortion policy is self-destructive party policy.
 
Could be. I suspect that he saw it and decided to pretend that he didn't see it.

As was said before, option 1 of not seeing it can be taken off the table. That leaves ignoring it or considering agreement with the one making the claim the same as it being sourced.
 
As was said before, option 1 of not seeing it can be taken off the table. That leaves ignoring it or considering agreement with the one making the claim the same as it being sourced.

I suspect that you are correct.

Has Salty Walty backed up his assertion yet?
 
Because the rich can afford to travel to get an abortion, but the poor cannot.

Plenty of people who don't appear to be wealthy somehow manage to regularly travel to adjoining states for cheaper booze, gas, and cigarettes, don't they?
 
that's just me, baby.

I have a dramatic writing flair, as I am a modern day sage.

The premise of my post is in the title, and it's not sarcasm.

Indeed. It's been said that Grind is one of the internets most beloved and influential political thinkers and deep-level theorists in the modern era. He rose to prominence in early 2015 when he alleged, contrary to the dominant theory of "Christiefanism" of the time, that Bill Clinton's wife was indeed running for president and wasn't considering settling down to be a grandmother. In 2016, Grind was one of the key figures in proposing the new revolutionary theory of "30% is not a rare occurrence" which shook up the JPP political landscape like no other theory ever had before. His academic prowess, deep-level analysis and remarkable insight into human nature and psychology will undoubtedly result in further complexities being untangled and laid bare. He currently resides in Boston. His hobbies include #rekking libs, vaping, and patriotism.
 
Fighting against abortion is a losing battle. This was resolved 50 years ago. The country isn't going back to banning abortions, whether you want it that way or not.

It was never resolved which is why there is so much fighting over it today. You don't resolve an issue like this with an unconstitutional Supreme Court ruling.

This isn't about "banning" abortions. This is about leaving such issues for the States to decide and not having an activist Supreme Court. Abortion was NEVER a Federal or Constitutional concern; it was a States rights issue.
 
trump had the women he paid for sex sign an agreement that if they did not get an abortion, they would lose the money he paid them, and would even have to pay him money. Not exactly "easing" the financial burden there.

LINK to this Bull Shit Walt. I'm going to add Disney to your name because you live in a fantasy world of your own making with the help of MSNBC. ;)
 
Many of us aren’t looking for the Supreme Court to ban it. We are looking to making it a states rights issue.

As far as being altruistic and putting others before yourself, have kids and you will see what it is like putting your needs behind someone else’s.

I know you like to be a hard ass and for the most part you are about many things. But deep down you care. You are right about the reason most women are pro abortion. They have been taught to see pregnancy as a burden instead of the awesome power and responsibility it is. I think they resent having that kind of responsibility. They bring life into the world. It doesn’t get more awesome than that

There is hope for you Grind. Hell, you were anti Trump now look at you. You probably have a MAGA hat in your house now

:thumbsup:
 
That is something that many liberals seem unable to do. They talk about caring and compassion, and very few seem to act caring or compassionate,

For the record, I love abortion. It allows the unborn to escape the misery that leftists have inflicted upon the world and keeps the numbers of potential DEMOCRAT voters down.

:thumbsup:
 
Back
Top