The Biden Presidency

[Jaw]

Issues with Rasmussen aside, we need to get back to a place where we can disapprove of a President without wanting to impeach him.

[thethe]

Is knowing about an imminent attack while using your troops as crowd control a high crime and misdemeanor?

I can be convinced of that...

[Tapate50]

Issues with Rasmussen aside, we need to get back to a place where we can disapprove of a President without wanting to impeach him.

100%

[striker42]

Issues with Rasmussen aside, we need to get back to a place where we can disapprove of a President without wanting to impeach him.

Agreed. McConnell said it well. You show this kind of disapproval at the ballot box.

[Tapate50]

The vetting process for adopting should be definitely be thorough, but it shouldn't be so damn expensive.

100%

Most families that would love to adopt simply can't come up with the money. Its heartbreaking honestly.

[Jaw]

Is knowing about an imminent attack while using your troops as crowd control a high crime and misdemeanor?

I can be convinced of that...

Then campaign off of it in '22 and '24. Trying to use it for an impeachment that will obviously not result in Biden's removal will do nothing but hurt Pubs in at least '24. Point out that Pubs aren't the ones trying to gerrymander the Senate, kill the filibuster, stack the Court, or impeach for political games, and that those are signs of Dem extremism.

[thethe]

Then campaign off of it in '22 and '24. Trying to use it for an impeachment that will obviously not result in Biden's removal will do nothing but hurt Pubs in at least '24. Point out that Pubs aren't the ones trying to gerrymander the Senate, stack the Court, or impeach for political games, and that those are signs of Dem extremism.

I don't care about politics at this minute. If Biden is making any decisions its a disaster for the country. He is either being setup to take the fall or he is actually making decisions. Either way, every minute he is our President he degrades the United States. This man should be relaxing in a retirement home enjoying the final years of his life. This is some sort of sick joke he is the President.

He needs to be removed immediately and then let Harris be the face of the Democrat party moving forward. We will win by an even bigger margin with that disaster.

When you start getting into these types of drops in approval amongst the AMerican people then it will start being a disaster for swing state/district Democrats to not vote for Impeachment.

[Jaw]

I think I prefer a diminished and malleable Biden at the helm to any version of Harris.

[mqt]

The vetting process for adopting should be definitely be thorough, but it shouldn't be so damn expensive.

Agreed. In general, a lot of the demand for abortion would be mitigated if we actually gave people a viable alternative, both for prevention of pregnancy and the consequences of having the child. However, a combination of religious objections to contraception and sexual education, and a fear of entitlements for parents or potential adopters has led to more unwanted pregnancies than we could otherwise have and more aversion to keeping the child. The fun part is that it’s often the same group concerned with abortion that won’t consider the solutions to limiting it naturally.

[thethe]

I think I prefer a diminished and malleable Biden at the helm to any version of Harris.

Thats a fair take but what happens with another two months of degradation?

Isn't Harris effectively running the country at that point? She is so unlikeable that the Democrat party will burn in a glorious fire with her in the lead.

[Jaw]

Nah, they're doing their best to keep Harris behind doors playing with coloring books or something. This whole thing is being run by Obama's brain trust, with the added liability of Joe being able to get his way on things like Afghanistan. He was the one being told to play with coloring books when Obama was in charge.

[thethe]

Nah, they're doing their best to keep Harris behind doors playing with coloring books or something. This whole thing is being run by Obama's brain trust, with the added liability of Joe being able to get his way on things like Afghanistan. He was the one being told to play with coloring books when Obama was in charge.

This being Obama's third term would make sense considering the foreign policy blunders.

[Jaw]

Agreed. In general, a lot of the demand for abortion would be mitigated if we actually gave people a viable alternative, both for prevention of pregnancy and the consequences of having the child. However, a combination of religious objections to contraception and sexual education, and a fear of entitlements for parents or potential adopters has led to more unwanted pregnancies than we could otherwise have and more aversion to keeping the child. The fun part is that it’s often the same group concerned with abortion that won’t consider the solutions to limiting it naturally.

I run in an extremely evangelical crowd and had a conversation about some of this stuff with about 50 of them at a retreat.

I said "okay, if you could ban abortion, but the cost was free condoms available in every school, health department, doctor's office, etc, would you be interested?"

100% were cool with that. I'm sure the numbers would drop significantly with the addition of post fertilization measures like morning after and birth control pills (which I and many others still consider abortion,) but the religious opposition to birth control is largely overblown.

It should also be pointed out that no one is doing more than that crowd per Capita for kids in poverty.

[mqt]

I run in an extremely evangelical crowd and had a conversation about some of this stuff with about 50 of them at a retreat.

I said "okay, if you could ban abortion, but the cost was free condoms available in every school, health department, doctor's office, etc, would you be interested?"

100% were cool with that. I'm sure the numbers would drop significantly with the addition of post fertilization measures like morning after and birth control pills (which I and many others still consider abortion,) but the religious opposition to birth control is largely overblown.

It should also be pointed out that no one is doing more than that crowd per Capita for kids in poverty.

I’m not here to attack your religious beliefs, but can you see how that might be an incomplete solution to the underlying problem? Having contraception be readily available is a good start, but there are some immediately obvious gaps, the largest being in the case of sexual assaults. I’m guessing the rapist isn’t going to stop to consider that free condom left out in the schools.

I truly appreciate that even some that take a hard line on these issues have some wiggle room, but I just don’t see there being a significant change in the demand for abortion without considering all the options on the table. Along those same lines, I appreciate the charity and generosity of those who serve their community, but I find myself constantly frustrated by such a large subset of that group going along for the ride with the worst instincts of the Republican Party. I think often of the amount of good that could be done in this country if we focused less on corporate interests and more on how those with good intentions on both sides could help those in need.

[sturg33]

I love how "not destroying a baby in the womb" is considered the worst instincts of the republican party

[mqt]

I love how "not destroying a baby in the womb" is considered the worst instincts of the republican party

Cute, but that’s not remotely what I meant. To me, the worst instincts of the Republican Party are using American Exceptionalism and FREEDOM to justify spending billions upon billions on “defense” to bomb people overseas and then balk at essentially any and all aspects of the social safety net. It’s the idea that welfare for those in need is secondary to unimpeded profits for corporations. I don’t like to discuss the morality of abortion, because it is a fruitless discussion. If one believes that abortion is murder, there is no amount of arguing to be done. It’s a fundamental disagreement that I understand and accept.

[thethe]

Democrats are in a massive bind on the abortion issue. They need to defend their base but they also need Hispanics and African AMericans to continue to vote for them at historical margins. Those two demographics are not as fervent on abortion as the base. We already saw the MAGA movement pick off parts of those demographics, especially Hispanics.

This is going to play out real well politically for the right with the added benefit of it being the morally right thing to do.

[striker42]

How many adopted kids do you have?

This is a great example of the problem with the abortion debate. First, people tend to argue that you have to have some kind of qualification to have an opinion on the issue. That you either have to be a woman or have to have adopted kids. That kind of stuff. But it doesn't require those things to have an opinion on whether a fetus a human life with the same rights as any other or whether it has no rights separate from the mother.

People also argue practical issues in the abortion debate. Like what would happen to all the children and whether it would be a drain on the system. But that's all irrelevant. If a fetus has rights that are the same as any other person then those rights cannot be violated for mere convenience. If you have a child and you're struggling to afford to care for that child, you're not allowed to euthanize your child because of the economics of it. The reason is because your child has a right to exist that is separate and distinct from you. If a fetus has those same rights then practical considerations cannot be taken into account.

On the flip side, if a fetus has no rights apart from the mother then anti-abortion laws are horrific infringements on a woman's rights to autonomy over her body.

The problem is that no one wants to argue the philosophical question of when rights attach and personhood begins because there's no objective answer. It's far easier to assume your answer to that question is correct and then argue murder or invasion of rights to control your body.

[Jaw]

I’m not here to attack your religious beliefs, but can you see how that might be an incomplete solution to the underlying problem? Having contraception be readily available is a good start, but there are some immediately obvious gaps, the largest being in the case of sexual assaults. I’m guessing the rapist isn’t going to stop to consider that free condom left out in the schools.

I truly appreciate that even some that take a hard line on these issues have some wiggle room, but I just don’t see there being a significant change in the demand for abortion without considering all the options on the table. Along those same lines, I appreciate the charity and generosity of those who serve their community, but I find myself constantly frustrated by such a large subset of that group going along for the ride with the worst instincts of the Republican Party. I think often of the amount of good that could be done in this country if we focused less on corporate interests and more on how those with good intentions on both sides could help those in need.

The sexual assault condition is one of those rare cases used to justify the majority, and it's one where the traditional GOP types have always been willing to give ground. The old "I'm opposed to abortion except in cases of incest and rape" line. I don't understand it. If you're opposed to abortion because you believe it's ending the life of an innocent child (that's me) or because you believe it's God's will, where is the room for qualifiers?

So I personally don't believe in exemptions. Sexual assault is a tragedy. My belief is that aborting a pregnancy that results from sexual assault is a second tragedy. More pragmatically, we've seen from Kermit Gosnell and his ilk what a slippery slope those exemptions can be. How many false sexual assault allegations would result from a sexual assault exemption?

[mqt]

The sexual assault condition is one of those rare cases used to justify the majority, and it's one where the traditional GOP types have always been willing to give ground. The old "I'm opposed to abortion except in cases of incest and rape" line. I don't understand it. If you're opposed to abortion because you believe it's ending the life of an innocent child (that's me) or because you believe it's God's will, where is the room for qualifiers?

So I personally don't believe in exemptions. Sexual assault is a tragedy. My belief is that aborting a pregnancy that results from sexual assault is a second tragedy. More pragmatically, we've seen from Kermit Gosnell and his ilk what a slippery slope those exemptions can be. How many false sexual assault allegations would result from a sexual assault exemption?

Sorry, I should have clarified. When it comes to the ability to take preventative measures such as birth control, would not the risk of sexual assault be compelling in any way? I mean this really from a purely hypothetical world where we iron out some massive agreement to ban abortions in exchange for ensuring we are doing anything we can to provide options to either avoid pregnancy or not have burdens placed on either the mother or the child.