Mid Term Elections- Lessons Learned

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Where abortion was on the ballot, the states have spoken.


Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Love
Reactions: 1 user
You use "socialist" as a pejorative even though neither Southpaw nor myself are socialists, and then you whine about name calling. You are a hypocrite blade, plain and simple, and I'm not going to apologize for calling a spade a spade, a buffoon a buffoon, or a clown a clown.

And your cries of "what you cant stand" are as hollow as they were in 2015. You pay lip service to these values and then cast your vote for what was definitely the worse of two evils. It's obvious why you never responded to the observation that true moderates like @pgg who would've benefited from trump voted third party (because they knew a trump vote was a vote against the best interests of the country). You know your vote was indefensible, but yet you continue this holier than thou bs charade even though we all know you would vote for "toxic trump" -who you freely admit is a narcissist and a criminal - if you thought he could win in '24
We're about an hour away from Trump announcing his candidacy for 2024. I'll vote for the Democrat if he's the Republican nominee. Whoever it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
We're about an hour away from Trump announcing his candidacy for 2024. I'll vote for the Democrat if he's the Republican nominee. Whoever it is.
The only white house he deserves to live in has iron bars at every door and window.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 4 users
Members don't see this ad :)
You use "socialist" as a pejorative even though neither Southpaw nor myself are socialists, and then you whine about name calling. You are a hypocrite blade, plain and simple, and I'm not going to apologize for calling a spade a spade, a buffoon a buffoon, or a clown a clown.

And your cries of "what you cant stand" are as hollow as they were in 2015. You pay lip service to these values and then cast your vote for what was definitely the worse of two evils. It's obvious why you never responded to the observation that true moderates like @pgg who would've benefited from trump voted third party (because they knew a trump vote was a vote against the best interests of the country). You know your vote was indefensible, but yet you continue this holier than thou bs charade even though we all know you would vote for "toxic trump" -who you freely admit is a narcissist and a criminal - if you thought he could win in '24
Name Calling? You are Socialists by my definition. You support Bernie Sanders, an avid socialist. That isn't name calling- it's a fact. Do you prefer the nicer term "Social Democrat"? I am a Conservative so I vote Republican because there are no conservative Democrats left.

I do not support Donald Trump for President in 2024. Ever since January 6th I had my doubts about Trump. But, these past few months have cemented in my mind that Trump is indeed a narcissist and unfit to be President. For some reason, you want to make this a personal attack against me. I respect your views as a socialist but I firmly they believe they are wrong, will hurt the country and destroy the future for my children and grandchildren. Socialists like yourself always have the best intentions at heart, they just don't learn from history and the failed experiment called socialism.

Now, let's move forward to 2022 and discuss the issues.
 
Neither of these extremes are prevalent views, though. A plurality of liberals think abortion should be legal with some exceptions and a plurality of conservatives think it should be illegal with some exceptions. That being said, a solid majority of Americans support the legality of abortion with some exceptions.

View attachment 362131
Many Republicans support legal abortions in the first trimester. I would guess at least a 1/3 of GOP voters recognize abortion as a sin but not necessarily murder. This is a murky issue so stop painting with such a broad brush. The true hard core right wing wants all abortions banned but that isn't the viewpoint for many GOP voters (at least a 1/3). There used to be Pro-Life Democrats as well, maybe 5% or so, and I acknowledge they exist as well.


 
Where abortion was on the ballot, the states have spoken.

You still don't get the fact there are many GOP voters willing to allow abortions in the first trimester; they don't like abortion, think it is a sin, an immoral act, but agree the woman has a right to decide for herself early in the pregnancy. When you let the voters decide this issue, you will get enough GOP votes to keep abortion legal as long as the procedure has restrictions on the time frame like 12-14 weeks.

Once you allow abortions past 15 weeks or so, you lose GOP voters in droves. We are then forced to either ban all abortions or allow babies to be killed at 26 weeks. The latter choice is unacceptable.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
We're about an hour away from Trump announcing his candidacy for 2024. I'll vote for the Democrat if he's the Republican nominee. Whoever it is.

Even Bernie or a member of the Squad?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
We aren't politicians on this board. We are practicing anesthesiologists looking to express our views. We are all imperfect and vote for the wrong person from time to time. But, we try to pick the best one among the choices we are given.

Donald Trump has become too toxic for at least 1/3 of GOP voters. But, he has a loyal base of 35% or so. Hence, if there are multiple candidates seeking the GOP nomination, he will likely be the victor. But, he will lose BADLY in the General Election to anyone except maybe Bernie (only a small loss to Bernie).

Donald Trump is simply unelectable to more than 50% of this nation so he has ZERO chance of becoming President in 2024.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You still don't get the fact there are many GOP voters willing to allow abortions in the first trimester; they don't like abortion, think it is a sin, an immoral act, but agree the woman has a right to decide for herself early in the pregnancy. When you let the voters decide this issue, you will get enough GOP votes to keep abortion legal as long as the procedure has restrictions on the time frame like 12-14 weeks.

Once you allow abortions past 15 weeks or so, you lose GOP voters in droves. We are then forced to either ban all abortions or allow babies to be killed at 26 weeks. The latter choice is unacceptable.


No. I perfectly understand that the vast majority of Americans, both Republicans and Democrats, would like to keep abortions legal. Plenty of conservative Republicans have had abortions themselves. My post was pointing that out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Name Calling? You are Socialists by my definition. You support Bernie Sanders, an avid socialist. That isn't name calling- it's a fact. Do you prefer the nicer term "Social Democrat"? I am a Conservative so I vote Republican because there are no conservative Democrats left.

I do not support Donald Trump for President in 2024. Ever since January 6th I had my doubts about Trump. But, these past few months have cemented in my mind that Trump is indeed a narcissist and unfit to be President. For some reason, you want to make this a personal attack against me. I respect your views as a socialist but I firmly they believe they are wrong, will hurt the country and destroy the future for my children and grandchildren. Socialists like yourself always have the best intentions at heart, they just don't learn from history and the failed experiment called socialism.

Now, let's move forward to 2022 and discuss the issues.

Lol, "by your definition." You state that woke leftists and socialists are literally destroying the country, I tell you that neither Southpaw nor myself are socialists, but then you go ahead and call us socialists as an obvious pejorative and insult anyway. As I said, you're a pure, unapologetic hypocrite.

Ultimately, my main point remains uncontested. You're only changing your tune on trump because you've [finally!] come to the realization that he's a political drag on your party, not because you care about the attacks on democracy, sowing doubt about legitimate elections, the outright corruption, COVID downplaying, xenophobia, 20 sexual assault/harrassment allegations, or all the pending lawsuits and criminal charges.

You might not support him in the primary, but you'd still vote for him (again, someone you freely admit is a criminal) if he was the R nominee in '24. And while I'm replying to you here, blade, I honestly don't care what you personally do in the future. You're just one person.

What I care about are the other 74 million ppl who voted for the worst president of the last 100 years. Are they changing their tune on trump for the same reason as you? Pure political expediency to get a W with DeSantis? Or have the rational voices from both sides shouting about the threat posed to the whole goddamned system by trump and co started finally breaking through the MAGA mist surrounding your brains? Cause if it's simply the former, we're in big trouble whenever the next self-serving MAGA-by-another-name demagogue comes around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 users
The bigness of the dealio is very much in the eye of the beholder. And sometimes small deals are merely visible symptoms of a deeper problem.

Transgender athletes aren't a "big deal" in the grand scheme of western civilization, and I'm not a viewer of any NCAA sports (much less swimming), but the people who come down on the side of commending and glorifying the Lia Thomases of the world have a particular way of framing issues and viewing problems. And it's completely demented. I wouldn't trust their judgment in a anything else.


This is a fair point, though I'd argue that it's about as useful (and limited) as any generalization or label. You could say the same about Marxist, leftist, liberal, progressive, communist... or even Democrat. None of those labels perfectly describe any person (except maybe Karl Marx himself :)) or ideology but they still have utility in grouping mostly-like-minded people together for the purpose of discussion.

I also think it's funny that your followup to "No, wait, don’t tell me I already lost interest" is a comment about how using the term woke is a debate avoidance tactic. :)

If you want to talk about transgender issues then say so, but don’t make some glib pop culture reference and expect me to follow along…or care. I dislike when people talk in code or don’t say what they mean (that’s the northeasterner in me, I suppose). I have opinions on transgender issues, but not to the point where I care about a single swimmer. You essentially took an extremely complex issue and distilled it down to one incident that was incited by “the woke” in your telling. How does anyone respond to that? If anything, your reference was more of an avoidance tactic because you are reducing a complicated topic down to one smart-alecky bit of trivia. That’s my point about the whole “woke” thing anyway. It’s become a convenient talking crutch to avoid any hard intellectual debate on a wide range of issues. Politicians do it to avoid talking about issues. They can just pejoratively refer to the opposition as “woke” and move on. Weak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Many Republicans support legal abortions in the first trimester. I would guess at least a 1/3 of GOP voters recognize abortion as a sin but not necessarily murder. This is a murky issue so stop painting with such a broad brush. The true hard core right wing wants all abortions banned but that isn't the viewpoint for many GOP voters (at least a 1/3). There used to be Pro-Life Democrats as well, maybe 5% or so, and I acknowledge they exist as well.



I'm not painting with a broad brush. Conservatives have literally banned abortion in 15 states WITH NO EXCEPTIONS FOR RAPE OR INCEST.

And Lindsey Graham's 15 week federal bill would still allow all these draconian no-exception state laws totally banning abortion to stand. . Oh yeah, not to mention a bill codying the right to contraception only received 10 GOP house votes.

You can bring up polling all you want, but the polling of a party becomes irrelevant when you consistently elect the most extreme right-wing members who enact the most extreme right-wing laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
We aren't politicians on this board. We are practicing anesthesiologists looking to express our views. We are all imperfect and vote for the wrong person from time to time. But, we try to pick the best one among the choices we are given.

Donald Trump has become too toxic for at least 1/3 of GOP voters. But, he has a loyal base of 35% or so. Hence, if there are multiple candidates seeking the GOP nomination, he will likely be the victor. But, he will lose BADLY in the General Election to anyone except maybe Bernie (only a small loss to Bernie).

Donald Trump is simply unelectable to more than 50% of this nation so he has ZERO chance of becoming President in 2024.


The Republicans did not perform well in the midterms because their base has turned into a cult of personality. If Trump had been on top of the ticket, the MAGA crowd would have shown up and Republican candidates down ballot would have benefited. Someone like Dr(?) Oz does not excite the personality cult the way Trump does. Unfortunately, any legitimate ideas that Republicans may have, have been completely drowned out by the Trump cult insanity.

Maybe Liz Cheney runs as a third party candidate and gives reasonable Republicans someone to vote for? Who knows.

Also, Trump is way too old. He’s only 3 years younger than Biden. No more septuagenarians, please.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Ever since January 6th I had my doubts about Trump. But, these past few months have cemented in my mind that Trump is indeed a narcissist and unfit to be President.

Blade. Get woke. He was never fit in the first place. As much as Hillary is maligned she was exactly right about trump and the "deplorables". Anyone with more than one functioning neuron knew that the only interest trump had was in himself and that he would sell out his own mother if it benefited him.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Dislike
Reactions: 4 users
We're about an hour away from Trump announcing his candidacy for 2024. I'll vote for the Democrat if he's the Republican nominee. Whoever it is.

Fingers crossed, but...

Screenshot_20221115_203242.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Fingers crossed, but...

View attachment 362148

I fear you are right.

Like pgg - I will probably have to vote democrat, even if it’s someone like Bernie or Warren. While I disagree with both of them on pretty much everything- I do think unlike Trump they will pass on power without much fuss if they lose the next time around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We aren't politicians on this board. We are practicing anesthesiologists looking to express our views. We are all imperfect and vote for the wrong person from time to time. But, we try to pick the best one among the choices we are given.

Donald Trump has become too toxic for at least 1/3 of GOP voters. But, he has a loyal base of 35% or so. Hence, if there are multiple candidates seeking the GOP nomination, he will likely be the victor. But, he will lose BADLY in the General Election to anyone except maybe Bernie (only a small loss to Bernie).

Donald Trump is simply unelectable to more than 50% of this nation so he has ZERO chance of becoming President in 2024.


You do know that there have been Presidential candidates who been elected with less than 50% of the popular vote right? E.g., Donald Trump 2016.
 
Last edited:
You essentially took an extremely complex issue and distilled it down to one incident that was incited by “the woke” in your telling. How does anyone respond to that? If anything, your reference was more of an avoidance tactic because you are reducing a complicated topic down to one smart-alecky bit of trivia. That’s my point about the whole “woke” thing anyway. It’s become a convenient talking crutch to avoid any hard intellectual debate on a wide range of issues. Politicians do it to avoid talking about issues. They can just pejoratively refer to the opposition as “woke” and move on. Weak.

And fascists do it to create their necessary “enemy from within”. It’s part of the fascism playbook and we have smart people on this board who have completely bought into it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
I plan on living long enough to wait out Trump for 2024; that means he will lose the Presidential election again and hopefully disappear for good this time around. The big problem is having Trump on the ticket means many GOP races will be lost that could be won in 2024 giving complete control of the govt. to liberal democrats. This will lead to more trillions in spending and large tax increases across the board.

Many of us have had enough of Trump but I will just have to wait out another 2 years for him to finally be off the stage.

 

"Needless to say, Trump is a magnetic political figure who has managed to bond countless millions of Republicans to him. Many GOP voters appreciate his combativeness and hate his enemies, who so often engaged in excesses in pursuit of him. Once he won the nomination in 2016, they understandably voted for him in 2016 and 2020, given the alternatives. But the primaries won’t present a choice between Trump and progressives with calamitous priorities for the nation, but other Republicans who aren’t, in contrast to him, monumentally selfish or morally and electorally compromised. (And it should be added, won’t be 78 years old if elected and ineligible to serve two terms.)

It’s too early to know what the rest of the field will look like, except it will offer much better alternatives than Trump.

The answer to Trump’s invitation to remain personally and politically beholden to him and his cracked obsessions for at least another two years, with all the chaos that entails and the very real possibility of another highly consequential defeat, should be a firm, unmistakable, No."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I was referencing major political stances on major issues on a national level. Not on your microscopic personal level that you seem to have taken offense to when none was intended. Sorry you took it that way. But it does sound like you are against loan forgiveness which is something that we both have in common!

No. I can't imagine anyone transitioning for that reason. But Lia's decision had consequences that many women had to suffer for and they paid the price, not Lia. I feel for the women that got beat and you feel for Lia. We are both compassionate. We just have different viewpoints on what was fair.

I think all abortion is wrong. Yet I am willing to concede on certain abortions despite it going against my personal convictions. I think that shows much tolerance and nuance for living life in the gray... as opposed to how you paint republicans as only black and white. Agree, all life is in the gray.

I had an analogy that you can pick apart. Say I was immature and took out student loans way in excess of what I needed. Yes, it was a poor decision but it was fun at the time. Should I really be punished and let it ruin my life? I mean it was a bad decision so can't we just get rid of it? Or should I have to pay back the loans? Most abortions are for convenience and because of bad decisions. Those that are bc of bad decisions or that are for convenience are the ones that I can't defend.

I’m not offended. No worries. I feel for everyone involved in the Lia situation, including Lia. As I told pgg, I don’t think she should’ve been allowed to swim against females. But I think Penn and the NCAA were in a tough spot as they shouldn’t be allowed to force someone, especially someone transitioning, to stop swimming unless there is already policy in place which makes sense.

I’m not touching abortion analogies. No one here is changing their opinion on abortion because of anything said. To be brief, personal responsibility or skin in the game, needs to occur on many levels in life. Loan borrowing - sure. Students hold some responsibility. I’m not sure how many who borrowed knew they wouldn’t be able to pay back their loans in their lifetime with their non-anesthesiologist salary after graduating from Trump U.

But do colleges, especially crappy ones, but also elite ones, not hold responsibility as well? I don’t see anyone holding their feet to the fire with the outrageous cost of tuition.

Do institutions have a responsibility to financially educate students who are borrowing all this money? If the education isn’t happening at home, it needs to come from somewhere.

I don’t agree with Biden’s loan forgiveness, mostly because it was an attempted solution that didn’t address the real problem that’s occurring with regard to education in this country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
And fascists do it to create their necessary “enemy from within”. It’s part of the fascism playbook and we have smart people on this board who have completely bought into it.
Not just fascists. ANY radical extremists, e.g. the Marxists aka the woke. The radical playbook was written by Marxists way before fascism (e.g. 1917).

That's the mistake the left makes, that they look at progressives as if they were some saints, and not as if some were as deplorable as the extremists from Charlottesville. The road to hell is paved with good intentions... and devils.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I never was a fan of the “wrong on both sides” argument. Are there extremist on both sides, of course but saying both sides are the exact same is a cop out in my opinion.

Biden is nowhere near as “extreme” as Trump, yet Trump had over 40% of the population’s support. These elections are way too close for one extreme to be the policy maker over a diverse nation.
 
I never was a fan of the “wrong on both sides” argument. Are there extremist on both sides, of course but saying both sides are the exact same is a cop out in my opinion.

Biden is nowhere near as “extreme” as Trump, yet Trump had over 40% of the population’s support. These elections are way too close for one extreme to be the policy maker over a diverse nation.
Biden is not his electorate, nor is Trump. Every person has their reasons for voting for a candidate, or not. My vote does not define me, especially when I have to vote between two evils. It's not like I have 5-10 candidates in the national elections, as in other countries.

And I would be careful when comparing Biden with Trump. While I am sure that his character is much better, it's still far from being a paragon of integrity. He's the prototype of the lifetime career politician, and that says it all. And there has been a lot of influence peddling in his family, along the years, and no way he didn't know about it (reminds me of the Trump Hotel). Hunter Biden is such a loser nobody would pay big money for his "expertise". Any regular citizen in his place would have been indicted by now.

As the recent elections have shown again, Americans are much more centrist than extremist.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Point of order: the people in this thread are the top 1% educated, so all these logical arguments don’t matter. A majority on Election Day will still just look at the ballot and pick the name with a D or a R next to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
Point of order: the people in this thread are the top 1% educated, so all these logical arguments don’t matter. A majority on Election Day will still just look at the ballot and pick the name with a D or a R next to it.
yup. the candidates are fighting over the small percentage of people that will occasionally pull a lever for the party that they are not affiliated with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Biden is not his electorate, nor is Trump. Every person has their reasons for voting for a candidate, or not. My vote does not define me, especially when I have to vote between two evils. It's not like I have 5-10 candidates in the national elections, as in other countries.

And I would be careful when comparing Biden with Trump. While I am sure that his character is much better, it's still far from being a paragon of integrity. He's the prototype of the lifetime career politician, and that says it all. And there has been a lot of influence peddling in his family, along the years, and no way he didn't know about it (reminds me of the Trump Hotel). Hunter Biden is such a loser nobody would pay big money for his "expertise". Any regular citizen in his place would have been indicted by now.

As the recent elections have shown again, Americans are much more centrist than extremist.
The salient point here is that pre-Obama Biden was a run-of-the-mill career politician. He engaged in the kind of behavior that literally all 535 members of the legislative branch engage in. That doesn't make it right (indeed, the casual nepotism/inside trading/etc is a kind of a depressing commentary on US politics), but what it does signify is that Biden's "corruption" was a Honda Civic while trump's is a Space-X rocket exiting the stratosphere.

Just as a reminder, he was one of the least wealthy members of the Senate during his entire tenure. "Biden ranked 570th of 585 officials in 2005; 614th of 636 officials in 2006; and 626th of 639 officials in 2007" . And after he left office as VP his wealth ranking was still below Al Gore, Dick Cheney, or Mike Pence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Just as a reminder, he was one of the least wealthy members of the Senate during his entire tenure. "Biden ranked 570th of 585 officials in 2005; 614th of 636 officials in 2006; and 626th of 639 officials in 2007" . And after he left office as VP his wealth ranking was still below Al Gore, Dick Cheney, or Mike Pence.
That's what happens when you appoint a crackhead family member to lead your corrupt side hustles. That's an important job, as any politician will tell you -- should have interviewed more broadly. Red flag IMO. How are you supposed to be president if you can't even do basic political corruptness competently?
 
  • Like
  • Okay...
  • Dislike
Reactions: 4 users
You had me until you started talking about abortions.

Unless you are a woman, you should not have such a strong opinion about this, no offense. I am a man, and I can only imagine how all of this feels to a woman, even just having a vagina that I cannot defend from a stronger male who wants to rape me. Or that, if I make a sexual mistake, I am supposed to carry it for 9 months, like a parasite, then live with the consequences for my entire life, even "just" with the consequences of an abortion. Let's not mention how unpleasant that whole process is, starting with going to a gynecologist. No, thanks.

When about abortion, we should vote what the women we love want. One should not make rules about other people's bodies. It's called "skin in the game".
Let me play contrarian to your contrarian.

I agree with your take on a lot of things but I’m not sure it’s fair to say a man can’t have an opinion on abortion. Men have wives and daughters and some even say men can carry babies now.

If you can’t have an opinion on something that doesn’t involve you directly this can get extended to a lot of things. For example we should not have an opinion on Lia Thomas unless we are transgender.

By the way tell all the vaccine and mask mandate people that we can’t make rules about other peoples bodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Let me play contrarian to your contrarian.

I agree with your take on a lot of things but I’m not sure it’s fair to say a man can’t have an opinion on abortion. Men have wives and daughters and some even say men can carry babies now.

If you can’t have an opinion on something that doesn’t involve you directly this can get extended to a lot of things. For example we should not have an opinion on Lia Thomas unless we are transgender.

By the way tell all the vaccine and mask mandate people that we can’t make rules about other peoples bodies.

In a free society, people can have opinions on whatever they want. Nobody has the freedom to not be offended. This used to be something people knew by preschool. We are living with the consequences of a world in which people are unable to accept this basic reality that you can't have it both ways. Do you want a free society, or do you want to be North Korea?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
You had me until you started talking about abortions.

Unless you are a woman, you should not have such a strong opinion about this, no offense. I am a man, and I can only imagine how all of this feels to a woman, even just having a vagina that I cannot defend from a stronger male who wants to rape me. Or that, if I make a sexual mistake, I am supposed to carry it for 9 months, like a parasite, then live with the consequences for my entire life, even "just" with the consequences of an abortion. Let's not mention how unpleasant that whole process is, starting with going to a gynecologist. No, thanks.

When about abortion, we should vote what the women we love want. One should not make rules about other people's bodies. It's called "skin in the game".
I should just strike that word from my vocabulary. Lol. It is very polarizing and accomplishes little. It is never a subject that decides my vote bc it doesn't effect me in the slightest. My point at the end was even though I am against it/something I can still understand and defend certain ones/things I am against.

I do abhor the identity politics that state you can't have an opinion or position if you are not directly involved. Usually it is good people that are not involved that can make the difference with their opinions and actions. I could give many analogies but will abstain for the good of the thread!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Let me play contrarian to your contrarian.

I agree with your take on a lot of things but I’m not sure it’s fair to say a man can’t have an opinion on abortion. Men have wives and daughters and some even say men can carry babies now.

If you can’t have an opinion on something that doesn’t involve you directly this can get extended to a lot of things. For example we should not have an opinion on Lia Thomas unless we are transgender.

By the way tell all the vaccine and mask mandate people that we can’t make rules about other peoples bodies.
Regardless of your opinions on abortion, we can all agree (hopefully) that it should not be criminalized/policed. Not every evil in the world can be fixed by law enforcement.
 
  • Hmm
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
We aren't politicians on this board. We are practicing anesthesiologists looking to express our views. We are all imperfect and vote for the wrong person from time to time. But, we try to pick the best one among the choices we are given.

Donald Trump has become too toxic for at least 1/3 of GOP voters. But, he has a loyal base of 35% or so. Hence, if there are multiple candidates seeking the GOP nomination, he will likely be the victor. But, he will lose BADLY in the General Election to anyone except maybe Bernie (only a small loss to Bernie).

Donald Trump is simply unelectable to more than 50% of this nation so he has ZERO chance of becoming President in 2024.

My point to others I have talked to that support Trump was this: if Trump runs, you lose many voters that dislike the person. If DeSantis runs, I assume 100% of Trump voters vote for him in addition to others. And you don't get the drama show that goes along with Trump.

I hate that it appears that DeSantis had the covid response pegged better than the CDC. I feel a loss of respect in the public's eye for our profession with how the CDC handled it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The salient point here is that pre-Obama Biden was a run-of-the-mill career politician. He engaged in the kind of behavior that literally all 535 members of the legislative branch engage in. That doesn't make it right (indeed, the casual nepotism/inside trading/etc is a kind of a depressing commentary on US politics), but what it does signify is that Biden's "corruption" was a Honda Civic while trump's is a Space-X rocket exiting the stratosphere.

Just as a reminder, he was one of the least wealthy members of the Senate during his entire tenure. "Biden ranked 570th of 585 officials in 2005; 614th of 636 officials in 2006; and 626th of 639 officials in 2007" . And after he left office as VP his wealth ranking was still below Al Gore, Dick Cheney, or Mike Pence.

I would agree with this. Biden is just a regular politician while Trump is another level of self-interest to the point of danger to all of us.

I just hope Biden picks a better VP because I think there is a pretty good chance he dies in office. He’s definitely less mentally sharp than Trump despite them both being way older than I’d like.

I also am afraid he will not be able to perform in the Biden vs Trump debates in this election, leading to a loss; he did pretty well last time but I fear he’s declined significantly since then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Regardless of your opinions on abortion, we can all agree (hopefully) that it should not be criminalized/policed. Not every evil in the world can be fixed by law enforcement.

You have to draw the line somewhere. A doctor who kills a healthy infant that has been alive for one hour is unquestionably guilty of murder and should go to prison for a very long time. What about the doctor who kills the same life 2 hours earlier before it has exited the womb? Any rational person can reason that this is also murder and should be punished the same. So where's the line drawn? Remarkably, there some who want to put that line right at the time of full-term birth. They can't defend it and explain on any basis why terminating the life 5 minutes before the exit vs. 5 minutes after the exit suddenly steps from totally fine to first degree murder, but they say it anyway because their political dogma demands it. Nobody wants to think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
No. I perfectly understand that the vast majority of Americans, both Republicans and Democrats, would like to keep abortions legal. Plenty of conservative Republicans have had abortions themselves. My post was pointing that out.
The hypocrisy of the average human is unsettling but known. Most would agree you shouldn't do certain things, but then many do them anyway. The hypocrisy of the average politician is exponentially worse. It is alarming how the political system warps people. That is the only answer that I have for why there is a total lack of acceptable candidates on both sides. I would rather trust an amateur politician/great person making decisions than a career politician.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
But do colleges, especially crappy ones, but also elite ones, not hold responsibility as well? I don’t see anyone holding their feet to the fire with the outrageous cost of tuition.

Do institutions have a responsibility to financially educate students who are borrowing all this money? If the education isn’t happening at home, it needs to come from somewhere.

I don’t agree with Biden’s loan forgiveness, mostly because it was an attempted solution that didn’t address the real problem that’s occurring with regard to education in this country.
Yes. How do we hold them accountable? I don't trust or want the government deciding. So let people decide with their money. Don't guarantee or help with student loans using government money. Colleges will be forced to offer a product that has value and the public is willing to pay for. Banks will also decide if it is a good college and degree to extend a loan. Prices will drop and colleges will adapt the education to what there is enough demand for.

I find it difficult to tell a blue collar worker that they are less important than a white collar worker and thus they don't deserve to have the aid that college students receive.
 
I should just strike that word from my vocabulary. Lol. It is very polarizing and accomplishes little. It is never a subject that decides my vote bc it doesn't effect me in the slightest. My point at the end was even though I am against it/something I can still understand and defend certain ones/things I am against.

I do abhor the identity politics that state you can't have an opinion or position if you are not directly involved. Usually it is good people that are not involved that can make the difference with their opinions and actions. I could give many analogies but will abstain for the good of the thread!
Sorry, I'm not saying you can't have an opinion. Like you, I dislike that kind of identity politics. But if you have a strong opinion about abortion which is not really based on facts, I probably won't respect it.

When about pregnancy and abortions, I think men cannot walk a foot in a woman's shoes. It's not the same as with minorities and discrimination, because there are a lot of ways of being a minority and being discriminated against. Most of us have experienced one form of injustice or another in our lives, so they are not as hard to imagine. But being told what one can do with one's body, by people who have never been subjected to anything similar, is at a completely different level.

I have similar feelings when women, especially the feminist, men-hating kind, try to define "healthy" masculinity, and they have all these BS theories that contradict millions of years of evolutionary biology and instincts. That's when I tell them: fsck off, you have no friggin' idea what you're talking about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Sorry, I'm not saying you can't have an opinion. Like you, I dislike that kind of identity politics. But if you have a strong opinion about abortion which is not really based on facts, I probably won't respect it.

When about pregnancy and abortions, I think men cannot walk a foot in a woman's shoes. It's not the same as with minorities and discrimination, because there are a lot of ways of being a minority and being discriminated against. Most of us have experienced one form of injustice or another in our lives, so they are not as hard to imagine. But being told what one can do with one's body, by people who have never been subjected to anything similar, is at a completely different level.

I have similar feelings when women, especially the feminist, single mother, hateful kind try to define "healthy" masculinity. That's when I tell them: fsck off, you have no friggin' idea what you're talking about. Raise men, not poossies.
Welcome back FFP to SDN. We don’t agree on everything but I always enjoy reading your posts. Politically incorrect for the Woke agenda of 2022 but always honest and from the heart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
When about pregnancy and abortions, I think men cannot walk a foot in a woman's shoes.

Serious question for you and anyone who thinks that men cannot have a legitimate (one you respect, as you say) opinion on abortion: Can a transwoman have a legitimate opinion on abortion? The argument is that transwoman are women. However, they obviously cannot get pregnant as they do not have a uterus.

A similar thought experiment: What about females (people with uteruses) who have always been infertile? By logic, that in order to have a legitimate opinion on abortion, you need to be able to get pregnant (or at least were able at some point in your life), then where do you view the legitimacy of the opinions of these two groups of people? Just curious how the reasoning works on this.

The reason why I'm asking, if it's not obvious, is that it seems common for people who are vehemently pro-choice and don't think men should have a say on it because they can't get pregnant, also tend to support the stance that transwomen are the same as women. I don't understand how both viewpoints can be held simultaneously, on the basis of logic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You have to draw the line somewhere. A doctor who kills a healthy infant that has been alive for one hour is unquestionably guilty of murder and should go to prison for a very long time. What about the doctor who kills the same life 2 hours earlier before it has exited the womb? Any rational person can reason that this is also murder and should be punished the same. So where's the line drawn? Remarkably, there some who want to put that line right at the time of full-term birth. They can't defend it and explain on any basis why terminating the life 5 minutes before the exit vs. 5 minutes after the exit suddenly steps from totally fine to first degree murder, but they say it anyway because their political dogma demands it. Nobody wants to think.
Have you ever seen this happen? A full term, viable baby being aborted? I haven’t. I don’t know of any place that does this. Policymaking based on imaginary problems is not wise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Serious question for you and anyone who thinks that men cannot have a legitimate (one you respect, as you say) opinion on abortion: Can a transwoman have a legitimate opinion on abortion? The argument is that transwoman are women. However, they obviously cannot get pregnant as they do not have a uterus.

A similar thought experiment: What about females (people with uteruses) who have always been infertile? By logic, that in order to have a legitimate opinion on abortion, you need to be able to get pregnant (or at least were able at some point in your life), then where do you view the legitimacy of the opinions of these two groups of people? Just curious how the reasoning works on this.
Wrong. All human life is precious and has great value. Hence, once you believe a fetus becomes a human being you have a moral obligation to speak out or try to protect that life from being terminated. If you saw someone being murdered on the street would you not at least call the police? Or, would you remain silent because the person being killed was female? Yes, the woman carries the fetus but at some point we all know that fetus is a living entity which can survive on its own. That’s why I draw the line at 15 weeks well before viability. A woman must make up her mind prior to 15 weeks if she wants to terminate the fetus.

I respect the argument on this subject from all sides. But, I simply disagree that 15 weeks isn’t sufficient time to make up your mind. I also don’t know how one can argue with certainty that human beings begin at conception. Cellular life begins at conception but not human beings as we know them
I certainly agree to disagree on this issue except for abortion after 20 weeks which occur for convenience. I fully support abortions for medical reasons at all points of pregnancy.

My point of view is the minority among conservatives but I’m pretty sure that a significant percentage will allow a woman the right to choose up to the second trimester even if they are told over and over again life begins at conception.
 
Last edited:
Serious question for you and anyone who thinks that men cannot have a legitimate opinion on abortion: Can a transwoman have a legitimate opinion on abortion? The argument is that transwoman are women. However, they obviously cannot get pregnant as they do not have a uterus.

A similar thought experiment: What about females (people with uteruses) who have always been infertile? By logic, that in order to have a legitimate opinion on abortion, you need to be able to get pregnant, then where do you view the legitimacy of the opinions of these two groups of people? Just curious how the reasoning works on this.
I think you're not seriously asking, but let me humor you.

I don't think that men "cannot" have a legitimate opinion on abortion. I believe just that men "should not" have strong opinions of the kind @BobLoblaw78 expressed, because men have never been in any similar situation.

I don't think a trans woman is a biological woman, so I don't think they are more competent then men when about pregnancies.

Infertile biological women also don't have much skin in the game, though I would trust their opinions more, especially if they have been fertile once.

I find it very hard (and inappropriate) to legislate about another human's body. Women are not children and they don't need men to make rules about something that's uniquely female.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Have you ever seen this happen? A full term, viable baby being aborted? I haven’t. I don’t know of any place that does this. Policymaking based on imaginary problems is not wise.

Have you ever seen a couple hours old baby murdered? I haven't either. Murder is rare. But it does happen. You read stories about babies left in dumpsters, whatever. Similarly, elective full term abortions do happen. They are certainly very rare, but they do happen, even if you or I haven't seen them. Again, murder is rare, but does that mean we shouldn't have laws about it? What this is, and this is what politicians do, is use strawman arguments like this to avoid having to state the obvious that virtually everybody knows in their gut: full-term elective abortions are wrong, they are wrong because they are murder, and if they are murder, the question is why is that murder not criminalized when we criminalize the murder of a 15 minute old baby or, to the other extreme, if you walked into a hospital and shot a terminal 95 unconscious year old patient on life support in the head, you would also be charged with murder. Are there different types of murder depending on the viability and stage of the life? That's not how our criminal system treats murder. People get squishy because the 8 lb. fully formed baby is still in the mother, and they don't want to make a statement that strips the mother of any autonomy to make that decision before it exits the birth canal. At the same time, they won't look you in the eye and say, "yep, there's nothing wrong with killing the fetus at that stage, totally ok" so they just change the subject.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Have you ever seen a couple hours old baby murdered? I haven't either. Murder is rare. But it does happen. You read stories about babies left in dumpsters, whatever. Similarly, elective full term abortions do happen. They are certainly very rare, but they do happen, even if you or I haven't seen them. Again, murder is rare, but does that mean we shouldn't have laws about it? What this is, and this is what politicians do, is use strawman arguments like this to avoid having to state the obvious that virtually everybody knows in their gut: full-term elective abortions are wrong, they are wrong because they are murder, and if they are murder, the question is why is that murder not criminalized when we criminalize the murder of a 15 minute old baby or, to the other extreme, if you walked into a hospital and shot a terminal 95 unconscious year old patient on life support in the head, you would also be charged with murder. Are there different types of murder depending on the viability and stage of the life? That's not how our criminal system treats murder. People get squishy because the 8 lb. fully formed baby is still in the mother, and they don't want to make a statement that strips the mother of any autonomy to make that decision before it exits the birth canal. At the same time, they won't look you in the eye and say, "yep, there's nothing wrong with killing the fetus at that stage, totally ok" so they just change the subject.
I'm sure a lot of women would agree.

Let's not forget about the maternal INSTINCT. Again, one cannot beat millions of years of evolution. So I would give women the benefit of the doubt.

Usually, when there is a crime involving a viable fetus, there is much more to that than "convenience". Again, I would not want to walk in the shoes of that mother. But I can see how, as a civilized society, we need to draw some lines (e.g. at 15 weeks).

We can talk about counseling, especially young women whose prefrontal lobes are not mature yet and are much more likely to make a decision they would regret later, but we should be very cautious with telling people (not just women) what they can(not) do with their own bodies. Hence I am also for elective euthanasia. I also don't think that prisoners of the State should not have decision rights about their own bodies. I don't think the State should regulate the drugs people use in the privacy of their homes. Etc.

"Live Free or Die."

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you're not seriously asking, but let me humor you.

I don't think that men "cannot" have a legitimate opinion on abortion. I believe just that men "should not" have strong opinions of the kind @BobLoblaw78 expressed, because men have never been in any similar situation.

I don't think a trans woman is a biological woman, so I don't think they are more competent then men when about pregnancies.

Infertile biological women also don't have much skin in the game, though I would trust their opinions more, especially if they have been fertile once.

I find it very hard (and inappropriate) to legislate about another human's body. Women are not children and they don't need men to make rules about something that's uniquely female.

No, I seriously was asking. And I appreciate the honest response. Your statement that transwomen are not "biological" women really frames your answer. I guess the people who really need to respond to the question are those who disagree with that. The reason I asked about women who have always been infertile rather than just post-menopausal women, was to make a logical point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
My point of view is the minority among conservatives but I’m pretty sure that a significant percentage will allow a woman the right to choose up to the second trimester even if they are told over and over again life begins at conception.

That's because your viewpoint (the viability limit) doesn't make any logical sense. A fetus at all stages cannot support itself. A 1 hour old baby can't viably sustain itself either. It requires the mother or somebody to feed it. True viability of a human doesn't occur until the age of, what, maybe 5 years at the absolute earliest? So if it's not about feeding one's self, then it's presumably breathing on your own. Your idea that all human life is precious with the exception that it has to be able to breathe on its own makes no sense. Were the humans with polio in iron lungs not precious lives?

Clearly this a more complicated subject and you can't just set a limit, based on logic, at "viability" or "born at full term" IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top