• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT2| we love the poorly educated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tarkus

Tarkus

Member
RastaMentality said:
Hm, I didn't know so many liberals were in favor of late term abortions. People are chiding Hillary's pro-choice record for not being fully in support of it on Twitter but honestly, it's probably not something I'd go to bat for in an argument. I am heavily pro choice but being anti late term would most likely probably reasonable to me.

Are there any polls showing the public opinion on it?
Click to expand...
If I can deliver the baby without the support of machines, I don't support aborting it.

A dilatation and curettage of a 20 week old will fuck with you.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
RastaMentality said:
Hm, I didn't know so many liberals were in favor of late term abortions. People are chiding Hillary's pro-choice record for not being fully in support of it on Twitter but honestly, it's probably not something I'd go to bat for in an argument. I am heavily pro choice but being anti late term would most likely probably reasonable to me.

Are there any polls showing the public opinion on it?
Click to expand...

Last I remember, abortion legal in the third trimester is about 70-30 against.
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
RastaMentality said:
Hm, I didn't know so many liberals were in favor of late term abortions. People are chiding Hillary's pro-choice record for not being fully in support of it on Twitter but honestly, it's probably not something I'd go to bat for in an argument. I am heavily pro choice but being anti late term would most likely probably reasonable to me.

Are there any polls showing the public opinion on it?
Click to expand...

I think you could honestly get people behind a law that said that abortions during the last 2-3 months are allowable only in cases where the mother's life is threatened, on the grounds that fetuses at that developmental stage do have nervous systems and may be able to feel pain, and that women by that point have had ample time to make a decision on whether or not to keep a child, but as long as Republicans have a strong anti-abortion position in their national platform, people are naturally going to perceive any restriction on abortion as just a sneaky backdoor to put more regulations and restrictions in down the line.
 
R

RastaMentality

Banned
SourShoes said:
If I can deliver the baby without the support of machines, I don't support aborting it.

A dilatation and curetage of a 20 week old will change you.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's a completely reasonable opinion. I really wouldn't engage in actively arguing about it besides probably a response like Bernie gave.

Hillary would get killed with ads if she had stated complete support for it at the town hall tonight.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
I support third trimester abortions possibilities because almost no one gets them and because of possibilities like Zika babies or a woman only getting away from her abusive boyfriend after 20 weeks.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
I'm all for going after dealers that do not follow state and federal law in their sale of weapons and ammunition, but manufacturers simply make and sell a product. The government already has a system to determine who is and is not allowed to sell guns, and gun manufacturers seem largely to follow that law in terms of who they sell their guns to. If they don't, they absolutely should be held accountable, but it does not seem reasonable to me that they should have to go above and beyond what is already legally mandated of them or be sued for massacres they are many steps removed from. If a gun doesn't include a safety on it, they should be able to be sued in the same way that car manufacturers should be able to be sued if they produce cars that are not safe enough, but why, legally, should the Sandy Hook families be able to receive money from the manufacturer of the gun used because of a failure elsewhere in the chain of commerce? The gun did not malfunction, presumably did not lack a safety. You can argue the gun should not have been available for sale in the first place, morally, but legally, the manufacturers did nothing wrong. The failure was in who the gun eventually got to, which the manufacturers have no control over once they sell their wares to those the state has deemed acceptable to conduct such sales.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem is the PLCAA often prevents these cases from being heard at all. The Sandy Hook parents are arguing that the way in which the gun was sold and marketed demonstrated negligent entrustment on behalf of the manufacturer. However, the case may not even go to trial because of PLCAA.

So, the question is we need to be able to go to court and prove that they didn't do anything wrong. No other industry really has this type of protection. I'm not saying they should be held responsible every time, but we shouldn't have given them special protection.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
I think you could honestly get people behind a law that said that abortions during the last 2-3 months are allowable only in cases where the mother's life is threatened, on the grounds that fetuses at that developmental stage do have nervous systems and may be able to feel pain, and that women by that point have had ample time to make a decision on whether or not to keep a child, but as long as Republicans have a strong anti-abortion position in their national platform, people are naturally going to perceive any restriction on abortion as just a sneaky backdoor to put more regulations and restrictions in down the line.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. I get really uncomfortable with the idea of aborting a fetus far enough along to respond to outside stimuli, but I get people's automatic rejection due to the similarity to other "common sense" restrictions that are ultimately just an attempt to circumvent Roe v. Wade.
 
C

Cat

Member
A very large portion of abortions aren't late and the ones that are, are usually at the risk of the mother's life or the unborn. I read a very sad piece one time about a family that was forced to go through with a pregnancy to full delivery, no abortion, even though they knew the baby would die due to the condition it had. The mother really did have to give birth, and she and her husband to wait the hours it took for the baby to die, knowing they could do absolutely nothing in the whole process. I really wish I had bookmarked it because it really hit me how real it is for the people who experience it.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
I don't much care for Ben Jealous.

He's actually going with "Bernie wins the AA vote when he campaigns, that's why we won Kansas."

Okay then, why did he bother to not campaign anywhere in the South then, hmmm?
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Most embarrassing campaign options:

Scott Walker: From frontrunner to <1% and millions in debt within two months after being suffocated by Trump. Advocated for a wall along the Canadian border and three different positions on the 14th amendment within 5 days. Compared the teacher's union to ISIS.

Bobby Jindal: From Republican star in 2008 to <1% throughout the campaign despite destroying Louisiana for a chance at the presidency. Called immigration without assimilation "invasion."

Lindsey Graham: Never broke 1% in polls, despite a massive amount of experience, and watched his party get taken over by Ted Cruz and Donald Trump.

Rand Paul: One of Trump's main punching bags while Trump stole away all of his father's supporters despite Trump calling for an end to the first amendment. Campaign proved that libertarians don't exist in America and he soon abandoned his principles to try to win votes while getting fucked up by Cruz throughout the entire process.

Jeb Bush: The Trump punching bag, political career ended with Trump shitting on his entire family and then taking the Bush territory of South Carolina. Spent over $1.5k per vote. A big, fat mess.

Marco Rubio: Went through 12 revisions on the campaign trail until he settled on the Scrappy Doo persona. Political career concluded with him discussing the size and color of Donald Trump's penis.

Ben Carson: Campaign was a scam and he might not have been in on the scam.
 
G

Gruco

Banned
Hey GAF. So, I was planning on voting for Hilldawg in MI tomorrow, but unfortunately I was born in a southern red state. Under the democratic party primary rules, will my vote still count? Pls advise.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
Cerium said:
I agree that if the baby can already be delivered it's fucked up to abort it at that point.
Click to expand...

I concur with this, provided that it's effectively identical to abortion for the mother ie if its possible to deliver and support it without further intervention cost to the mother that is a superior option to abortion and should be done if possible (but the responsibility here must fall upon the state, ie its essentially a delivery and adoption).
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Gruco said:
Hey GAF. So, I was planning on voting for Hilldawg in MI tomorrow, but unfortunately I was born in a southern red state. Under the democratic party primary rules, will my vote still count? Pls advise.
Click to expand...

No. I'm sorry. It will not. You're forever contaminated by the shame of not being born from one of the good and acceptable blue states. Except Oklahoma. And Kansas. And Nebraska. Those are the only red states so far that don't belong under the bus.
 
W

watershed

Banned
The whole "winning red states doesn't matter" argument is so silly and born completely out of political reality. Hillary in 08 tried the same argument when Obama's superior ground game won him some smaller states that Hillary didn't invest in. It's the kind of silly political argument that serves only an immediate purpose and will be quickly forgotten once the primary is over.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Rubio and Romney and Paul Ryan are so hated by Republicans now that how would a compromise candidate even come out of a brokered convention?

Wouldn't be surprised if Cruz and Drumpf both end up with negative favorables among Republicans after they spend the three months after March 15th knifing each other.
Click to expand...

Compromise candidates are impossible because the very word is mud to that part of the base. They want their chosen candidate, and they want him right now. They've been arguing for years that too many moderates have run and lost, so it's time to just let them have their candidate. They'll lose badly (and I fear what the response to that will be), but it's unavoidable at this point.

BoboBrazil said:
Compare that to Bernie. "You don't matter because you are in a red state"
Click to expand...

The optics are pretty bad. And I totally believe Hillary saw the viral story about that GOP voter that was thanking Obama for the ACA. She really brought it with that crowd. With that attitude, and Trump on the other side, I could really see more bipartisan work going on if she's in the White House. Tons of GOP folk will defect in the House since they're only beholden to their districts. If your district hates the Tea Party, then you can feel safe enough in your seat to reach across the aisle.

Side question: how does one know if someone replies to your posts? I'd hate to ignore somebody.
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Her story about finding the republican who cared about the foster care system was a perfect example of how you frame "working across the aisle" to both people who want "both sides to work together" and to people who (often rightfully) deride the entire Republican side of the government due to their big picture stances: you try and find the one or two personal issues a candidate might be open to being more progressive, or hell, forget being "progressive", you just find the one or two issues that they genuinely want to help people with and you make that the focus of your co-operation
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Michigan,

Look. You don't like me, and I don't like you. But you better turn out for the Queen tomorrow for truths. I'm diablosing for no reason at all over Michigan.
 
B

Basileus777

Member
AntraxSuicide said:
Compromise candidates are impossible because the very word is mud to that part of the base. They want their chosen candidate, and they want him right now. They've been arguing for years that too many moderates have run and lost, so it's time to just let them have their candidate. They'll lose badly (and I fear what the response to that will be), but it's unavoidable at this point.



The optics are pretty bad. And I totally believe Hillary saw the viral story about that GOP voter that was thanking Obama for the ACA. She really brought it with that crowd. With that attitude, and Trump on the other side, I could really see more bipartisan work going on if she's in the White House. Tons of GOP folk will defect in the House since they're only beholden to their districts. If your district hates the Tea Party, then you can feel safe enough in your seat to reach across the aisle.

Side question: how does one know if someone replies to your posts? I'd hate to ignore somebody.
Click to expand...
You can't defect if the Speaker never lets things come to a vote.
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
Likely delegate count before Ohio and Florida:

2vldkUW.png


95btU70.png


XNTtWTe.png


Ohio and Florida are crucial if you're planning on a contested convention.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
This would matter if political endorsements had any causal effect, but they don't.
Click to expand...

Ole Phil is shockingly popular in this state. I mean, he got re-elected to the governor's position with 66.6% (the irony isn't lost on me) even though he argues against his own son's lifestyle. That could help Cruz close the polling gap, though I still think Trump takes it by at least 10.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
adam387 said:
Michigan,

Look. You don't like me, and I don't like you. But you better turn out for the Queen tomorrow for truths. I'm diablosing for no reason at all over Michigan.
Click to expand...

Seriously, what has to happen for you not to cartoonsoldier about Hillary? Does Bernie have to actually pass away? You guys need lithium, not vodka.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Macho Madness said:
Likely delegate count before Ohio and Florida:

2vldkUW.png


95btU70.png


XNTtWTe.png


Ohio and Florida are crucial if you're planning on a contested convention.
Click to expand...

the problem with this to me is not the absolute # of delegates or % of delegates he needs...it's that if he loses florida, it means his support is really evaporating so it would be basically impossible to get the nomination AND it might be hard to even make the argument he has the widest support among the voters. They didn't do Florida without Ohio? I think that's a very possible outcome.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-would-be-easy-to-stop-under-democratic-rules/

oh this article is better

52% of delegates is easy IMO if he wins Ohio and Florida because Kasich and Rubio will both drop.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Elaugaufein said:
I concur with this, provided that it's effectively identical to abortion for the mother ie if its possible to deliver and support it without further intervention cost to the mother that is a superior option to abortion and should be done if possible (but the responsibility here must fall upon the state, ie its essentially a delivery and adoption).
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, it's never going to be identical to abortion for the mother because of the inherent danger of giving birth. The risk of death or injury for the mother is almost always higher to carry it to term or to deliver it early via C-section. So there's no way to pass such a law without inherently asserting a right to endanger the mother's life.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Y2Kev said:
Seriously, what has to happen for you not to cartoonsoldier about Hillary? Does Bernie have to actually pass away? You guys need lithium, not vodka.
Click to expand...

Because Michigan is just the worst. (Not really, but I'm from Ohio...it's genetically encoded in me that I have to throw shade because of their inability to recognize their football teams are just the worst....) I learned the hardway that you can't put your faith in Michigan....I'm looking at you MSU. You had ONE job. ONE.

I'm also not drinking tonight until RuPaul starts in two minutes.
 
M

Mrs. Manky

Banned
watershed said:
The whole "winning red states doesn't matter" argument is so silly and born completely out of political reality. Hillary in 08 tried the same argument when Obama's superior ground game won him some smaller states that Hillary didn't invest in. It's the kind of silly political argument that serves only an immediate purpose and will be quickly forgotten once the primary is over.
Click to expand...

I saw a meme post on Facebook that said "If the South's Votes Counted, We'd Still Have Slavery" or something to that affect. I was incensed, because the reason Hillary is winning in the South is due to BLACK VOTES, so this stinks of racism. I'm of the belief that you canvas all states and territories, you put in the work in all states and territories. For all you know, you might end up flipping a state eventually. And to ignore the Democrats in red states is, as I said, an insult to their support and hard work for the party. Also...this affects downticket candidates, people.
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
adam387 said:
Part of the problem is the PLCAA often prevents these cases from being heard at all. The Sandy Hook parents are arguing that the way in which the gun was sold and marketed demonstrated negligent entrustment on behalf of the manufacturer. However, the case may not even go to trial because of PLCAA.

So, the question is we need to be able to go to court and prove that they didn't do anything wrong. No other industry really has this type of protection. I'm not saying they should be held responsible every time, but we shouldn't have given them special protection.
Click to expand...

If the gun was legal to sell, and if the person to whom the manufacturer sold to gun to sell to consumers was licensed by the state to do so, I don't really see an argument for why that manufacturer should even have to go to court. If you sell a legal ware according to legal strictures, and it works as advertised and does not malfunction and harm consumers, why should it be an option for you to be "held accountable"? The whole thing largely seems to me to be a backdoor way for people who don't think the gun should have been legal in the first place to get "justice" against the manufacturers, and while I understand the emotional and moral impetus for that, I also can't say that I think it's legally or ethically justified.
 
M

Maengun1

Member
adam387 said:
Because Michigan is just the worst. (Not really, but I'm from Ohio...it's genetically encoded in me that I have to throw shade because of their inability to recognize their football teams are just the worst....) I learned the hardway that you can't put your faith in Michigan....I'm looking at you MSU. You had ONE job. ONE.

I'm also not drinking tonight until RuPaul starts in two minutes.
Click to expand...


I'm voting for Clinton tomorrow in Michigan. And I'm a white male millennial :gasp:

It's okay though, I hate Ohio :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2 3
115
12K
LavitzSlambert replied
Capcom Platinum Titles & Franchise Sales Update (as of December 31, 2024) | DMC5 at 10M, RE4R 9.2M, SF6 4.4M, DD2 3.5M & More
Sales-Age
48
2K
[Sigma] replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
54K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
62K
DGrayson replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
Top Bottom