This is the Democrats’ best issue. It dovetails with the pro-democracy, anti-authoritarian message, it splits the Republican coalition even in very red states, and it should keep the left flank from drifting. The Biden campaign should hammer it relentlessly.
Extreme partisan gerrymandering, voter suppression, Christian Nationalism and good old fashioned racism has given Republicans unchallengeable power in most of the red states. It doesn't matter what the majority of the people want, most of the population is clustered in cities anyway without enough representation to make a difference in the legislature. All that they care about is avoiding a primary challenge from the right. Hence, they cater to the loud far right wing anti-abortion, women hating minority. This will not change until a new Supreme Court rules that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional and reinstates the VRA. That all said, this post-Dobbs dynamic could shift statewide races in most red states. South Dakota may shift because no one like puppy killers.
Actually, exploiting Trump's doubletalk is a missed opportunity by the Democratic side. In part because of the inability or unwillingness of a majority of prochoice people to empathize with or even roleplay as a sincere pro-life person without demonizing them or attributing specific negative motives to them.
Some pro-life religious people who have stuck with Trump through thick and thin because they like his pro-life anti-abortion judicial appointments above all as priority one, were very pissed off about his attempts to clarify that it should be up to the states, a certain number of weeks is reasonable to have one, etc.
You can easily find quotes of antiabortion people frustrated saying they have run out of patience with Donald Trump and/or the Republican Party for not publicly and proudly supporting a national abortion ban and for ducking and half-measuring when they can. They're expressing disillusionment with politics, voting, giving, volunteering.
Democrats should get into their heads and amplify this! Are we credible messengers to this audience?
No. But show the receipts and quotes from real pro-lifers, and amplify it.
Toss in the themes about just how many decades Republicans harvested prolife antiabortion votes, volunteers, donations *before* the Court finally delivered on Dobbs, when it spent all its time delivering decisions saying politics was for sale (Citizens United), polluting God's Green Earth is OK, corporations and banks always matter more than people, and stood by while the country got washed over in internet porn and now addictive smartphone gambling apps.
Why not do it? Conservative media messaging grabs leftist and far leftist fringe points and dissents all the time to weaponize it against liberals and progressives and get in their heads, mess with their coalition, and "ratfuck". This is the whole design of the Russian sponsored Sputnik radio station editorial line in its shows in the DC area.
Is everything I've said inconsistent with Democratic Party substantive pro-choice consensus? Intellectually and philosophically, Yes. Is it inconsistent with the way we inform *our own people* and people with normal views about privacy and health care that Trump would keep on appointing religious right judges, and that he would do nothing to veto Congressionally passed national abortion or contraception bans or any state abortion or contraception bans? Intellectually, Yes.
But should a compulsion to consistency be tactical messaging and communication constraint? Hell no!
It is awful limiting, and it is nothing the other side obeys.
Not quite as damning with swing voters as Romney's words in 2012 because DJT shut his mouth before continuing the insults and shaved off 7% from his dismissal. And because the way DJT/Orange Man played into the steady pre-demonization of government workers, Union workers, and of course welfare recipients, digging in on the last.
Nevertheless, The Donald was doing an open eff u to what he thinks is 40%, He's found his deplorables, and he's saying eff u to welfare recipients - hey wait, does he mean disability recipients? And to Civil servants and public employees. And to the most normal and relatable of creatures, people in Union jobs. Share with those you know.
Has it ever occurred to liberal people, to move in quantity to purple, or small population red states?
We might not all get shot by Cletus.
We might not all depend on jobs requiring physical proximity to major metros.
If you're you a post-menopausal woman, or a vasectomied man, it doesn't matter for you, personally, what the local abortion laws are.
Housing and food prices may be cheap!
There's purple and red locales that still have doctors and hospitals.
Nearly all states have few college towns or small cities with some ethnic food and health food and organic food, and that at least let's you vote for their Presidential elector, Senators, and possibly single Representative, so you may not even have to be rural-rural.
Thousands of people could move just a few miles, one congressional district or one state over, keeping the same job, but making their vote geographically more effective.
In America, it's not just the people that vote, the "land" votes two. It's like soccer, baseball, football. You consistently overstack your players badly in one part of the field, you will underperform.
Remember Occupy Wall Street from the Great Recession?
How about Inhabit America for today?
Blue state secession is a pipe dream.
Calexit? Vermont-exit? Don't count it. Do you really think redder America, left behind with America's military and nuclear weapons which let those rich, noncombative targets alone in peace?
We need to change the subject on campus, and everywhere from Israel-Palestine, not engage deeper in it, get "good trouble" about other things, women's rights, freedoms, health:
Background: We haven’t yet seen the kind of coordinated, deliberately staged acts of civil disobedience that can sometimes transform politics, on the abortion issue. But this topic is well suited to this kind of aggressive strategy. People hate the rules Republicans are making Republicans themselves are embarrassed to talk about enforcing them, and the biggest substantive risk to abortion rights isn’t that people don’t agree with the cause, it’s that many people may just not be thinking about it enough. Anything that forces more attention to the issue and prevents it from fading from view is constructive, and dramatic events that make real-word news are much more impactful than paid television ads. The fact is, we *are* seeing deliberately staged acts of civil disobedience to try to transform politics on the Israel-Palestine issue, that will not succeed in doing so, in the intended manner at least (ie, it would help elect Trump who would just tell Netanyahu to do what he wants in the region, and tell the religious wrong to do what it wants in America). And Republican politicians and the Republican message machine sense the opportunity in playing it up in fissuring the Democratic coalition so much they play up coverage, and, like Mike Johnson at Columbia, bodily throw themselves into the controversy. And non-conservative media can’t strategically control its substantive fascination with the issue. Democrats or anyone interested in the prospering of center-left politics desperately need to change the subject, and abortion rights would fit the bill perfectly to be the new story to change it to.
Question: What types of acts of civil disobedience have “the groups” and citizens that care about reproductive freedom, women’s rights and health been forgetting to do in the half dozen or so prosecutorial or regulatory nightmare stories going on at any given time downstream of Dobbs that make Republicans at state, federal, local, judicial or activist levels look terrible, keep the story alive in national media, and "unignorable"? What events and stories could Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and other politicians and candidates throw their whole bodies into, to reinforce and direct news media eyeballs, whether inclined or not, onto Republican responsibility for the anti-abortion and anti-woman prosecutions and decisions?
Every election is voting for your daughter or granddaughter's Supreme Court justices.
As a man in my fifties, we still live with a SCOTUS judge (Thomas) installed by a POTUS and Senate elected before I could vote. Every election counts for this reason. Big hole to climb out of, not to dig deeper into.
The FedSoc fuckers by the way decided government was for sale along the way. (Citizens United) and generally for over a decade before Dobbs have consistently decided the minority rights they like are the moneyed minority, and that's about it.
Their decisions re: guns also fail to be life-affirming when affirming that life does not *also* interfere with a woman's sexual and reproductive choices and privacy. Out of the womb, on your own.
This is the Democrats’ best issue. It dovetails with the pro-democracy, anti-authoritarian message, it splits the Republican coalition even in very red states, and it should keep the left flank from drifting. The Biden campaign should hammer it relentlessly.
Not just the Biden campaign but every Democrat in every race.
Extreme partisan gerrymandering, voter suppression, Christian Nationalism and good old fashioned racism has given Republicans unchallengeable power in most of the red states. It doesn't matter what the majority of the people want, most of the population is clustered in cities anyway without enough representation to make a difference in the legislature. All that they care about is avoiding a primary challenge from the right. Hence, they cater to the loud far right wing anti-abortion, women hating minority. This will not change until a new Supreme Court rules that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional and reinstates the VRA. That all said, this post-Dobbs dynamic could shift statewide races in most red states. South Dakota may shift because no one like puppy killers.
Actually, exploiting Trump's doubletalk is a missed opportunity by the Democratic side. In part because of the inability or unwillingness of a majority of prochoice people to empathize with or even roleplay as a sincere pro-life person without demonizing them or attributing specific negative motives to them.
Some pro-life religious people who have stuck with Trump through thick and thin because they like his pro-life anti-abortion judicial appointments above all as priority one, were very pissed off about his attempts to clarify that it should be up to the states, a certain number of weeks is reasonable to have one, etc.
You can easily find quotes of antiabortion people frustrated saying they have run out of patience with Donald Trump and/or the Republican Party for not publicly and proudly supporting a national abortion ban and for ducking and half-measuring when they can. They're expressing disillusionment with politics, voting, giving, volunteering.
Democrats should get into their heads and amplify this! Are we credible messengers to this audience?
No. But show the receipts and quotes from real pro-lifers, and amplify it.
Toss in the themes about just how many decades Republicans harvested prolife antiabortion votes, volunteers, donations *before* the Court finally delivered on Dobbs, when it spent all its time delivering decisions saying politics was for sale (Citizens United), polluting God's Green Earth is OK, corporations and banks always matter more than people, and stood by while the country got washed over in internet porn and now addictive smartphone gambling apps.
Why not do it? Conservative media messaging grabs leftist and far leftist fringe points and dissents all the time to weaponize it against liberals and progressives and get in their heads, mess with their coalition, and "ratfuck". This is the whole design of the Russian sponsored Sputnik radio station editorial line in its shows in the DC area.
Is everything I've said inconsistent with Democratic Party substantive pro-choice consensus? Intellectually and philosophically, Yes. Is it inconsistent with the way we inform *our own people* and people with normal views about privacy and health care that Trump would keep on appointing religious right judges, and that he would do nothing to veto Congressionally passed national abortion or contraception bans or any state abortion or contraception bans? Intellectually, Yes.
But should a compulsion to consistency be tactical messaging and communication constraint? Hell no!
It is awful limiting, and it is nothing the other side obeys.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-echoes-mitt-romney-s-comment-about-people-automatically-voting-democrat/ar-BB1lRODl?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=883dc1bcd8334313c51173a51e7cebef&ei=39
Amplify.
Not quite as damning with swing voters as Romney's words in 2012 because DJT shut his mouth before continuing the insults and shaved off 7% from his dismissal. And because the way DJT/Orange Man played into the steady pre-demonization of government workers, Union workers, and of course welfare recipients, digging in on the last.
Nevertheless, The Donald was doing an open eff u to what he thinks is 40%, He's found his deplorables, and he's saying eff u to welfare recipients - hey wait, does he mean disability recipients? And to Civil servants and public employees. And to the most normal and relatable of creatures, people in Union jobs. Share with those you know.
Has it ever occurred to liberal people, to move in quantity to purple, or small population red states?
We might not all get shot by Cletus.
We might not all depend on jobs requiring physical proximity to major metros.
If you're you a post-menopausal woman, or a vasectomied man, it doesn't matter for you, personally, what the local abortion laws are.
Housing and food prices may be cheap!
There's purple and red locales that still have doctors and hospitals.
Nearly all states have few college towns or small cities with some ethnic food and health food and organic food, and that at least let's you vote for their Presidential elector, Senators, and possibly single Representative, so you may not even have to be rural-rural.
Thousands of people could move just a few miles, one congressional district or one state over, keeping the same job, but making their vote geographically more effective.
In America, it's not just the people that vote, the "land" votes two. It's like soccer, baseball, football. You consistently overstack your players badly in one part of the field, you will underperform.
Remember MoveOn.Org from the 1990s-2000?
How about MoveIn.Org for today?
Remember Occupy Wall Street from the Great Recession?
How about Inhabit America for today?
Blue state secession is a pipe dream.
Calexit? Vermont-exit? Don't count it. Do you really think redder America, left behind with America's military and nuclear weapons which let those rich, noncombative targets alone in peace?
We need to change the subject on campus, and everywhere from Israel-Palestine, not engage deeper in it, get "good trouble" about other things, women's rights, freedoms, health:
Background: We haven’t yet seen the kind of coordinated, deliberately staged acts of civil disobedience that can sometimes transform politics, on the abortion issue. But this topic is well suited to this kind of aggressive strategy. People hate the rules Republicans are making Republicans themselves are embarrassed to talk about enforcing them, and the biggest substantive risk to abortion rights isn’t that people don’t agree with the cause, it’s that many people may just not be thinking about it enough. Anything that forces more attention to the issue and prevents it from fading from view is constructive, and dramatic events that make real-word news are much more impactful than paid television ads. The fact is, we *are* seeing deliberately staged acts of civil disobedience to try to transform politics on the Israel-Palestine issue, that will not succeed in doing so, in the intended manner at least (ie, it would help elect Trump who would just tell Netanyahu to do what he wants in the region, and tell the religious wrong to do what it wants in America). And Republican politicians and the Republican message machine sense the opportunity in playing it up in fissuring the Democratic coalition so much they play up coverage, and, like Mike Johnson at Columbia, bodily throw themselves into the controversy. And non-conservative media can’t strategically control its substantive fascination with the issue. Democrats or anyone interested in the prospering of center-left politics desperately need to change the subject, and abortion rights would fit the bill perfectly to be the new story to change it to.
Question: What types of acts of civil disobedience have “the groups” and citizens that care about reproductive freedom, women’s rights and health been forgetting to do in the half dozen or so prosecutorial or regulatory nightmare stories going on at any given time downstream of Dobbs that make Republicans at state, federal, local, judicial or activist levels look terrible, keep the story alive in national media, and "unignorable"? What events and stories could Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and other politicians and candidates throw their whole bodies into, to reinforce and direct news media eyeballs, whether inclined or not, onto Republican responsibility for the anti-abortion and anti-woman prosecutions and decisions?
Well we will see if this drives out voters. I suspect they will vote for an abortion rights amendment, then cross back to vote for republicans.
They’re just not the brightest individuals. These voters aren’t thinking ahead.
These fanatics are never going to stop shoving their religious beliefs down our throats.
In the end, to truly bury this issue, they must vote out every Republican.
Every election is voting for your daughter or granddaughter's Supreme Court justices.
As a man in my fifties, we still live with a SCOTUS judge (Thomas) installed by a POTUS and Senate elected before I could vote. Every election counts for this reason. Big hole to climb out of, not to dig deeper into.
The FedSoc fuckers by the way decided government was for sale along the way. (Citizens United) and generally for over a decade before Dobbs have consistently decided the minority rights they like are the moneyed minority, and that's about it.
Their decisions re: guns also fail to be life-affirming when affirming that life does not *also* interfere with a woman's sexual and reproductive choices and privacy. Out of the womb, on your own.