Commie Mandami and the 2028 Election

[DoctwoB]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I am quite taken aback by so many on here defending YM. I assumed that most on here are docs who are educated and should be able to grasp economics 101. Crazy to defend a guy whose policies are taxing the rich to leave the city, grocery stores at costs, "defund" the police, free childcare, free education, rent freeze.

Name me one true socialist government that is or has been successful? Don't say the Norway or it will jus show your ignorance
Name me a place where rent freeze works? Didn't NYC try this before and people just burned their buildings down?
Name me a place where a government grocery works? Good luck keeping the shelves stocked
Free transportation?
Free childcare? I can name you a handful of bad outcomes

I can not think of any government takeover has been successful. Student loans? Post office? Government Healthcare? School system?

What a cluster F NYC will be if he gets even half of his agenda passed. Do Socialists even understand economics or is this all feelings?

Will play devils advocate here, as I'm more of a libertarian who also recognizes the negative externalities of various industries that require regulation to truly allow the free market to internalize said externalities.

First thing you need to understand is there are two completely seperate but related issues
1. How involved is the government in the economy and free market
2. What services and social safety net does the government provide the people.

We tend to think of those together, that they are actually very separate and one can enable the other. For example: Denmark and Norway, despite your claims of "socialism", are actually quite free market in their economy. They rank near the top of the (very conservative) heritage foundation's economic freedom index, actually higher then the USA. So companies can conduct business in a very free market.

Index of Economic Freedom | The Heritage Foundation

Explore the Index of Economic Freedom to gauge global impacts of liberty and free markets. Discover the powerful link between economic freedom and progress. The 32nd edition, once again, illustrates key factors shaping our world's landscape. From @Heritage

www.heritage.org

However they also make the decision to use some of the wealth created by that free market to provide a robust social safety net.
So Norway does have universal healthcare. universal free/subsidized childcare, etc. And much more.

So government can absolutely provide more services then it does in the US, while still supporting a thriving free market economy. However, government can also be extremely wasteful and inefficient. Like in all things, the devil is in the execution. The best thing that democrats can do, in my view, is focus on being the party of EFFECTIVE government. Read the book "Abundance," for example. We should be focusing on destroying the barriers that limit our abundance, such as zoning, streamlining regulation, etc. Go back to the new deal style of democrat where build roads, housing, energy generation, electric grid and so on.

 

[Splenda88]

Is this a joke?

Unfortunately, it is not. Amazing!

 

[kidthor]

Is this a joke?

It is real. The press secretary released several tweets referencing DoorDash economic data.

Link to the one I posted: here

 

[Toothpickwars]

Listen man, I don't think it makes me a commie to want the hefty share of my taxes taken by this corrupt government to be spent to actually benefit the neediest in our society instead of a mad race to see how fast we can make the first trillionaire or line the pockets of our elected officials or kill some brown people in another country.

 

[UscGhost]

Isn't Trumps idea for $2000 checks for each person socialism?

 

[aneftp]

Will play devils advocate here, as I'm more of a libertarian who also recognizes the negative externalities of various industries that require regulation to truly allow the free market to internalize said externalities.

First thing you need to understand is there are two completely seperate but related issues
1. How involved is the government in the economy and free market
2. What services and social safety net does the government provide the people.

We tend to think of those together, that they are actually very separate and one can enable the other. For example: Denmark and Norway, despite your claims of "socialism", are actually quite free market in their economy. They rank near the top of the (very conservative) heritage foundation's economic freedom index, actually higher then the USA. So companies can conduct business in a very free market.

Index of Economic Freedom | The Heritage Foundation

Explore the Index of Economic Freedom to gauge global impacts of liberty and free markets. Discover the powerful link between economic freedom and progress. The 32nd edition, once again, illustrates key factors shaping our world's landscape. From @Heritage

www.heritage.org

However they also make the decision to use some of the wealth created by that free market to provide a robust social safety net.
So Norway does have universal healthcare. universal free/subsidized childcare, etc. And much more.

So government can absolutely provide more services then it does in the US, while still supporting a thriving free market economy. However, government can also be extremely wasteful and inefficient. Like in all things, the devil is in the execution. The best thing that democrats can do, in my view, is focus on being the party of EFFECTIVE government. Read the book "Abundance," for example. We should be focusing on destroying the barriers that limit our abundance, such as zoning, streamlining regulation, etc. Go back to the new deal style of democrat where build roads, housing, energy generation, electric grid and so on.

The difference is Norway/denmark are both 5 and 6 million total population.

The USA is 320 million? Population.

Name me any country remotely close in population to the USA with the same /similar first world social safety net program. Indoesnia? Pakistan? Brazil? Nigeria? Russia?

You would need to go all the way down to Japan and Germany (1/3 the size of the USA population) to get a sense of what country can support full social services.

 

[DocMcCoy]

Isn't Trumps idea for $2000 checks for each person socialism?

Only if (presumably) I’m not getting one 🤪

 

[aneftp]

Isn't Trumps idea for $2000 checks for each person socialism?

The govt is so dumb.

I really don’t understand like I posted previous to make people document their assets before claiming these checks. Make them go through from effort like student financial aid rather than just depending on tax returns.

It’s like hospital administration depending on computer print out metrics and and not know the full disclosure

 

[Mad Jack]

James Carville is predicting a big left-wing surge in the Democrat Party for 2028. The socialist wing of the part is gaining strength and momentum so anyone running for national office in a blue state must move left to stay in office. The moderates are being phased out in favor of democrat socialists like AOC and Mandami.

The filibuster in the US Senate requiring 60 votes will be eliminated. Massive tax hikes on those making $400K or more are all but certain. A reduction in the estate tax exemption, Social Security wages being taxed above $250K, massive ACA subsidies vs Medicare for all, a national abortion bill, packing the Supreme Court, an increase in capital gains taxes. etc are all on list for the progressive socialist left. Did I mention giving state hood to Puerto Rico and Washington D.C. so the US senate gets 4 more socialists?

All it will take is 51 Senators, a 1 vote majority in the House plus a Democrat President to accomplish these goals.

That all sounds pretty whatever, you sound hysterical about it though. Like, oh no, slightly higher taxes (which honestly need to happen, the deficit is way too high and will likely collapse the dollar if it keeps going unchecked) and Puerto Rico maybe getting much-deserved statehood (PR residents largely lean conservative). In reality we have a moderate right party (Dems) and a far right party (GOP) when compared with most developed nations. These views would be politically centrist almost anywhere elsen in the world. Stop being an overly emotiinal trainwreck over a mayor that is functionally powerless due to checks and balances put in place by NY state in the 70s to prevemt a rogue mayor from tanking the entire state's budget, you sound like the right-wing equivalent of a catastrophizing newly minted liberal in their first semester of college

 

[emergentmd]

Even if Carville is right, which I highly doubt it as even the democratic party is run by the elite/billionaires. They will never let anyone touch their $$$.

Even if this happens, it will only screw over the upper middle class..... I am looking at everyone here making 2-800K.

Reduce estate exemption = Trust
Increase income Taxes = Rich do not have income
Medicare for all = Rich will have private insurance b/c they can afford it
Increase SS and Medicare Taxes = No income to tax
Increase Capital gains taxes = NEVER will happen (see above) but if they do, then they just won't sell their stocks

Interesting to see what happens in 5-10 years. I am already planning for the above.

 

[arkgal]

James Carville is predicting a big left-wing surge in the Democrat Party for 2028. The socialist wing of the part is gaining strength and momentum so anyone running for national office in a blue state must move left to stay in office. The moderates are being phased out in favor of democrat socialists like AOC and Mandami.

The filibuster in the US Senate requiring 60 votes will be eliminated. Massive tax hikes on those making $400K or more are all but certain. A reduction in the estate tax exemption, Social Security wages being taxed above $250K, massive ACA subsidies vs Medicare for all, a national abortion bill, packing the Supreme Court, an increase in capital gains taxes. etc are all on list for the progressive socialist left. Did I mention giving state hood to Puerto Rico and Washington D.C. so the US senate gets 4 more socialists?

All it will take is 51 Senators, a 1 vote majority in the House plus a Democrat President to accomplish these goals.

Someone's watching too much Fox News.

How do you suppose all of these things can happen under a Republican POTUS, Republican majority House and Senate, and conservative majority Supreme Court?

Man, you need a chill pill.

 

[pgg]

Isn't Trumps idea for $2000 checks for each person socialism?

It's this week's bread and circus, another erratic attempt to move the 24h news cycle away from the kids he raped and everything else he's failed at.

He doesn't give a **** about those people, or good policy, or economic effects, or consistency, or anything else.

 

[drmwvr]

All the arguments on threads like these fall flat (except to the folks posting them) because that which is criticized in the opposing ideology is absolutely tolerated/ignored in the defended one. The one thing ideologues have in common is their spittle flecked SDN posts...so that's progress, I guess...

 

[circleK]

This thread is so dumb. Is there gonna be a new post on every talking point Jesse Waters tells you to parrot/be scared of?

 

[DoctwoB]

The difference is Norway/denmark are both 5 and 6 million total population.

The USA is 320 million? Population.

Name me any country remotely close in population to the USA with the same /similar first world social safety net program. Indoesnia? Pakistan? Brazil? Nigeria? Russia?

You would need to go all the way down to Japan and Germany (1/3 the size of the USA population) to get a sense of what country can support full social services.

Why should that matter? USA and Norway have similar per capita GDP, both significantly higher then Denmark. So we have the same wealth, per person, to spend on government services if we choose to do so. If anything, there would be economies of scale in providing government services. Furthermore, we actually have a higher population density then Norway.

The issue with your comparison is there are almost no countries of the USA's size with a similar per capita GDP

 

[Johan321]

I don’t agree with his politics, but gotta say this dude is so cool! He carries certain aura and positive energy around him which is a stark contrast to current reality.

Reminds me of Obama days. He used to make these surprise public appearances, and really vibed with the public.



Make politicians cool again!

 

[BLADEMDA]

Let's see if his policy and tax increases are good for NYC. He is elected and now must govern.

In a city already struggling with fiscal pressure, there’s little room to expand government. Mamdani’s budget shortfall over this fiscal year and the next ranges between $5.4 and $7.1 billion. City Comptroller Mark Levine warns that FY 2026 operating expenses could exceed revenues by between $4.5 and $6.3 billion.

Mamdani’s Equity Plan Misses What Makes New York Expensive

Hundreds of goals and a wonky metric ignore the true drivers of high costs.

www.city-journal.org

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Let's see if his policy and tax increases are good for NYC. He is elected and now must govern.

In a city already struggling with fiscal pressure, there’s little room to expand government. Mamdani’s budget shortfall over this fiscal year and the next ranges between $5.4 and $7.1 billion. City Comptroller Mark Levine warns that FY 2026 operating expenses could exceed revenues by between $4.5 and $6.3 billion.

Mamdani’s Equity Plan Misses What Makes New York Expensive

Hundreds of goals and a wonky metric ignore the true drivers of high costs.

www.city-journal.org

Here’s a clear, reality-based breakdown of that article’s bias and financial accuracy, so you can separate signal from ideology.

---

🧭 1) First — what the article is​

The piece you linked from City Journal is an opinion/analysis article, not straight reporting.

• It’s published by the Manhattan Institute
• That institution is generally center-right / market-oriented
• Their typical stance: skeptical of government expansion, DEI policies, and redistributive frameworks

👉 Translation: you should expect ideological framing, not neutral policy analysis.

---

⚖️ 2) How biased is it?​

🔴 Clear signs of bias​

The article:

• Uses loaded framing like “more government” and “sprawling managerial framework”
• Emphasizes bureaucracy and inefficiency (hundreds of goals, indicators, etc.)
• Dismisses the plan as focusing on “process” rather than outcomes

These are value judgments, not just facts.

🔴 What it leaves out (important)​

It largely ignores:

• The plan was mandated by a 2022 voter referendum
• The policy goal: addressing racial and economic disparities tied to cost of living
• Supporting arguments from the administration (e.g., affordability + inequality link)

👉 That omission is a classic sign of selective framing bias.

🟡 Bottom line on bias​

• High ideological bias (conservative economic lens)
• Not “fake” — but clearly argumentative, not neutral

---

💰 3) How financially accurate is it?​

This is where it gets more nuanced.

✅ What’s factually grounded​

These claims are broadly accurate or at least grounded in real data:

• The plan is large and complex (dozens of agencies, hundreds of goals)
• NYC affordability is severe (housing, childcare, etc.)
• The plan introduces a “True Cost of Living” metric
• That metric finds ~62% of NYC residents struggle financially

👉 These are real elements of the policy.

---

⚠️ Where it becomes interpretation / spin​

1. “62% can’t afford to live” framing​

• The number is real
• But:
  • It depends on a new definition of “economic security”
  • Critics say the threshold is very high / expansive

👉 So:

• Fact = true
• Implication = debatable

---

2. “More government won’t fix affordability”​

This is not a factual claim — it’s an economic opinion.

• The article assumes:
  • Supply-side issues (housing, regulation) are the main drivers
• The plan assumes:
  • Structural inequality + wages + access also matter

👉 This is a policy debate, not a factual dispute

---

3. Ignoring tradeoffs​

The article:

• Focuses on costs / bureaucracy
• Doesn’t quantify:
  • Expected benefits
  • Potential ROI (e.g., reduced inequality, workforce participation)

👉 That makes the financial critique incomplete, not necessarily wrong.

---

🧠 4) Clean takeaway​

Bias level:​

👉 High (ideological, selective framing, opinion-driven)

Financial accuracy:​

👉 Mixed

• ✔️ Describes real components of the plan correctly
• ⚠️ Interprets data in a way that supports a pre-existing viewpoint
• ❌ Does not present a balanced cost-benefit analysis

 

[sevoflurane]

I am surprised so many of you don't see the rise in the numbers of younger Democrats embracing Socialism. There will be many politicians running for office in Blue states that won't get past the primary without the support of the far left socialists. I predict even the Presidential candidates will need to move to the left significantly if they want to win the Democrat nomination in 2028.

As for the 2026 mid terms I think the Blue wave continues unless Trump and the GOP pivots significantly in early 2026. I don't see this happening even as Trump loses his Tariff case at SCOTUS.

Anything is better than what is happening now. Look at our national debt, gas prices, inflation, another war, suppression of the press, ICE, look at the dollar, look at what our image is to the world and our fractured NATO alliance, look at the ongoing Epstein cover up… Bondi suddenly can’t testify….?

Republicans had their chance to make a meaningful change- Instead, they have royally f’d up. They had all of the cards and what did they do with it? Ask yourself that one question.

I don’t like Mamdani and any of his socialist policies, but lets be real for just a second- If we turn slightly socialist, that change lies squarely on the republicans shoulders.

Outside of securing our border, this has been the worst administration in decades.- maybe ever.

I have lost faith in the republican party- at least as it is now.

I am all in for a moderate democratic party because we are currently on a road to nowhere.

I have zero empathy for what is to come in the midterms.

I think that swing voters like myself will be heard loud and clear. Hopefully lessons learned, but I doubt that.

 

[maxxor]

Anything is better than what is happening now. Look at our national debt, gas prices, inflation, another war, suppression of the press, ICE, look at the dollar, look at what our image is to the world and our fractured NATO alliance, look at the ongoing Epstein cover up… Bondi suddenly can’t testify….?

View attachment 417633

Republicans had their chance to make a meaningful change- Instead, they have royally f’d up. They had all of the cards and what did they do with it? Ask yourself that one question.

I don’t like Mamdani and any of his socialist policies, but lets be real for just a second- If we turn slightly socialist, that change lies squarely on the republicans shoulders.

Outside of securing our border, this has been the worst administration in decades.- maybe ever.

I have lost faith in the republican party- at least as it is now.

I am all in for a moderate democratic party because we are currently on a road to nowhere.

I have zero empathy for what is to come in the midterms.

I think that swing voters like myself will be heard loud and clear. Hopefully lessons learned, but I doubt that.

We are living the nightmare that Goldwater predicted.

 

[GassYous]

Also his assault on higher education (decreased funding for research), immigration (keeping highly educated and skilled workers from staying here), tourism, the legal profession in general, the military. These jokers are in the middle of an unnecessary war that they precipitated and are firing all of these competent generals. They are paying billions to stop windmills as they jack up oil prices. They purposefully increased prices for everything with their stupid tariffs. And they are making billions by betting on what they're doing on a "prediction market" that they themselves run. The grift and incompetence are just astounding.

 

[chessknt]

Also his assault on higher education (decreased funding for research), immigration (keeping highly educated and skilled workers from staying here), tourism, the legal profession in general, the military. These jokers are in the middle of an unnecessary war that they precipitated and are firing all of these competent generals. They are paying billions to stop windmills as they jack up oil prices. They purposefully increased prices for everything with their stupid tariffs. And they are making billions by betting on what they're doing on a "prediction market" that they themselves run. The grift and incompetence are just astounding.

It is very sad to see all of the worst fears of the left come true. We have yet to see if we will even have free elections moving forward as they have certainly postured themselves in multiple front to interfere or override that process. The swing voters who empowered this administration may not get a chance to repent for their generational mistakes.

 

[amyl]

I didn’t leave the Republican Party, it left me…. To follow the Grifter-in-chief, most openly corrupt president ever.

The democrats have to come forward with reasonable candidates with moderate agendas and focus on kitchen table issues. Inflation, affordability…. It’s not enough to be the alternative to Trump. They have to get a message together on what they will offer, not just trump is bad.
I hope the midterms are a landslide for moderate democrats that will investigate and prosecute the grift.

 

[chessknt]

I didn’t leave the Republican Party, it left me…. To follow the Grifter-in-chief, most openly corrupt president ever.

The democrats have to come forward with reasonable candidates with moderate agendas and focus on kitchen table issues. Inflation, affordability…. It’s not enough to be the alternative to Trump. They have to get a message together on what they will offer, not just trump is bad.
I hope the midterms are a landslide for moderate democrats that will investigate and prosecute the grift.

I wish they would but I strongly disagree. If you can't bring yourself to vote against what Trump is doing right now you are part of the problem. It doesn't matter if nothing on your wish list is on the menu--the alternative is such an existential threat to every facet of our lives that voting against that must be enough now. If you care about repudiating a president joking about genocide on Twitter and openly manipulating the markets while paying himself settlements with US tax dollars you should be voting against that.

 

[Arch Guillotti]

I wish they would but I strongly disagree. If you can't bring yourself to vote against what Trump is doing right now you are part of the problem. It doesn't matter if nothing on your wish list is on the menu--the alternative is such an existential threat to every facet of our lives that voting against that must be enough now. If you care about repudiating a president joking about genocide on Twitter and openly manipulating the markets while paying himself settlements with US tax dollars you should be voting against that.

Not to mention openly trying to throw elections.

 

[amyl]

I agree with you…
you don’t have to convince me he’s an existential threat. I will vote for Kermit the Frog over Donald Trump. But I’m not the average voter - the dems should win in a landslide in the midterms considering what’s occurred in this first year or so of this regime - but I’m worried they won’t. And I don’t think it’s enough to be the “we aren’t trump party.”
I don’t understand how anyone can back Trump now but there are still lots of people that support him.

 

[Southpaw]

I agree with you…
you don’t have to convince me he’s an existential threat. I will vote for Kermit the Frog over Donald Trump. But I’m not the average voter - the dems should win in a landslide in the midterms considering what’s occurred in this first year or so of this regime - but I’m worried they won’t. And I don’t think it’s enough to be the “we aren’t trump party.”
I don’t understand how anyone can back Trump now but there are still lots of people that support him.

The platform of any Democrat running for office can be found on their webpage. That it isn’t in your face at every hour of the day, like the culture wars that MAGA creates and fights on FoxNews 24/7, is just further evidence that MAGA supporting billionaires have usurped our media. These days I basically look at social media for my news and look at ‘media’ for comedy and rage bait.

 

[Southpaw]

Also because this Republican Congress has supported Trump at every step you can rest assured, that despite what they may say to try to get elected, any Republican running will support Trump.

 

[chessknt]

Also because this Republican Congress has supported Trump at every step you can rest assured, that despite what they may say to try to get elected, any Republican running will support Trump.

This is true even for the moderate ones like Murkowski. The Republican brand means absolute obedience to Trump on everything that matters. It has broken the system and needs to be voted out.

 

[Splenda88]

I agree with you…
you don’t have to convince me he’s an existential threat. I will vote for Kermit the Frog over Donald Trump. But I’m not the average voter - the dems should win in a landslide in the midterms considering what’s occurred in this first year or so of this regime - but I’m worried they won’t. And I don’t think it’s enough to be the “we aren’t trump party.”
I don’t understand how anyone can back Trump now but there are still lots of people that support him.

The dems should focus more on economic issues and place less emphasis on social issues.

I believe the dems are better than republican for the average voter on the economy (the numbers/results back that up), yet I have voted for republicans (except Trump) because of abortion, gender issues and (less so) immigration.

 

[aneftp]

Anything is better than what is happening now. Look at our national debt, gas prices, inflation, another war, suppression of the press, ICE, look at the dollar, look at what our image is to the world and our fractured NATO alliance, look at the ongoing Epstein cover up… Bondi suddenly can’t testify….?

View attachment 417633

Republicans had their chance to make a meaningful change- Instead, they have royally f’d up. They had all of the cards and what did they do with it? Ask yourself that one question.

I don’t like Mamdani and any of his socialist policies, but lets be real for just a second- If we turn slightly socialist, that change lies squarely on the republicans shoulders.

Outside of securing our border, this has been the worst administration in decades.- maybe ever.

I have lost faith in the republican party- at least as it is now.

I am all in for a moderate democratic party because we are currently on a road to nowhere.

I have zero empathy for what is to come in the midterms.

I think that swing voters like myself will be heard loud and clear. Hopefully lessons learned, but I doubt that.

Moderate Democrats don’t do the shouting for the Democratic Party. It’s the left leaning that does the shouting these days. But I have no clue who the real voice of the Democratic Party is.

 

[rowsdower88]

The dems should focus more on economic issues and place less emphasis on social issues.

I believe the dems are better than republican for the average on voter on the economy (the numbers/results back that up), yet I have voted for republicans (except Trump) because of abortion, gender issues and (less so) immigration.

Debatable. I would argue that after Roe/Casey was overturned and with the rush of dangerous pro-life bills passing, this is a winning issue for Dems in many locations. (1) Laws favored by AOC and Ilhan Omar are not the same laws favored by Fetterman.

The Inflation reduction act, CHIPs and BBB are signature Dem legislation and were championed during the past election cycle. Sucks they didn't get more coverage and/or information about them didn't reach the right people.

1. NEWS: Hundreds of women charged with pregnancy-related crimes since fall of Roe | Repro Health Watch

 

[Splenda88]

Debatable. I would argue that after Roe/Casey was overturned and with the rush of dangerous pro-life bills passing, this is a winning issue for Dems in many locations. (1) Laws favored by AOC and Ilhan Omar are not the same laws favored by Fetterman.

The Inflation reduction act, CHIPs and BBB are signature Dem legislation and were championed during the past election cycle. Sucks they didn't get more coverage and/or information about them didn't reach the right people.

1. NEWS: Hundreds of women charged with pregnancy-related crimes since fall of Roe | Repro Health Watch

Fetterman has been quiet lately.

 

[aneftp]

Debatable. I would argue that after Roe/Casey was overturned and with the rush of dangerous pro-life bills passing, this is a winning issue for Dems in many locations. (1) Laws favored by AOC and Ilhan Omar are not the same laws favored by Fetterman.

The Inflation reduction act, CHIPs and BBB are signature Dem legislation and were championed during the past election cycle. Sucks they didn't get more coverage and/or information about them didn't reach the right people.

1. NEWS: Hundreds of women charged with pregnancy-related crimes since fall of Roe | Repro Health Watch

Well if the Dems win all 3 branches in November 2028. They need to codify federal law supporting a woman’s right to abortion.

Let’s see if they do that.

 

[Splenda88]

Well if the Dems win all 3 branches in November 2028. They need to codify federal law supporting a woman’s right to abortion.

Let’s see if they do that.

They will never do it. They don't have the balls like republicans.

 

[maxxor]

Fetterman has been quiet lately.

He’s on Fox News like every day.

 

[Splenda88]

He’s on Fox News like every day.

Let's see if he will be re-elected.

 

[aneftp]

They will never do it. They don't have the balls like republicans.

Duh. I know that. You know that. There are no more excuses for them not to codify it into federal law (which trumps states laws) as we all know

Supreme Court cannot overturn codified abortions laws.

People all up in arms with Supreme Court decision in 2022. Supreme Court did not rule abortion illegal. They simply said the previous Supreme Court decision was wrong and to let the states decide it.

Forget all of Alito “noise:reasoning”. The truth is once you codified it. The Supreme Court is pretty much powerless and must let federal abortion rights laws stay once it’s passed into legislation

 

[NPJR]

Duh. I know that. You know that. There are no more excuses for them not to codify it into federal law (which trumps states laws) as we all know

Supreme Court cannot overturn codified abortions laws.

People all up in arms with Supreme Court decision in 2022. Supreme Court did not rule abortion illegal. They simply said the previous Supreme Court decision was wrong and to let the states decide it.

Forget all of Alito “noise:reasoning”. The truth is once you codified it. The Supreme Court is pretty much powerless and must let federal abortion rights laws stay once it’s passed into legislation

Wont get the votes because they would HAVE to ban partial birth abortions and put limits on the said abortions. Cant have federal law saying it;s ok up to delivery. Wont ever pass! even with the dems in charge. They arent THAT crazy. Well maybe they are.

 

[aneftp]

Wont get the votes because they would HAVE to ban partial birth abortions and put limits on the said abortions. Cant have federal law saying it;s ok up to delivery. Wont ever pass! even with the dems in charge. They arent THAT crazy. Well maybe they are.

Federal law trumps state laws.

Dems can do it. But like you said they will make excuses why they can’t do it.

plus if they start writing legislation we all know they will be too cute in writing it with too many holes in the bill to try to appease moderate democrats

Just write a single on page bill

Woman’s right to make decisions with her own body. She can terminate up to delivery even in the delivery room.

Very simple one page legislation. Supreme Court cannot overturn it. Don’t add anything else to the bill.

 

[chessknt]

Ah the imaginary full term abortion in the delivery room. The right wing propaganda machine truly is a modern marvel to convince (alleged) physicians that these medical situations not only occur but do so with such frequency that they specifically need to be legislated

 

[Splenda88]

Ah the imaginary full term abortion in the delivery room. The right wing propaganda machine truly is a modern marvel to convince (alleged) physicians that these medical situations not only occur but do so with such frequency that they specifically need to be legislated

The poster was being tongue-in-cheek.

 

[chessknt]

All three of them?

 

[aneftp]

Ah the imaginary full term abortion in the delivery room. The right wing propaganda machine truly is a modern marvel to convince (alleged) physicians that these medical situations not only occur but do so with such frequency that they specifically need to be legislated

The Dems have had mutiple opportunities to make federal abortions rights federal laws when they had all 3 branches of govt. u can can fillabuster this and that. It’s all a show. They can change the fillabuster rule anytime they wanted if it was that important to them.

Just many of them won’t stick their necks/political careers to go all in with a federal bill

It’s a very touchy subject. And for the record for the 100th time or whatever. I support a woman’s right to abortion.

It’s govt 101
Make a law. Make sure it passes the constitution muster and don’t get cute trying to justify it (like how they tried to force the states into the aca mess with Medicaid expansion)

Don’t include insurance and Medicaid payments into paying for abortion. Because you don’t want to tie the Medicaid fiasco of payments into the equation

It’s a very simple bill they can pass written in one page.

 

[Splenda88]

All three of them?

I only saw @aneftp talking about abortion.

 

[aneftp]

I only saw @aneftp talking about abortion.

I meant the trifecta. House senate White House

When I wrote all 3 branches. So I mistyped

Obviously the Dems can “win” the judicial branch. But they can expand it if they wanted to.

After trumps fiasco running the country doing what he wants. Dems need to play hard and expand the courts as well.

Nice people finish last in the business world.

It’s time to stop being nice. You can be kind. But you don’t have to be nice. It’s a subtle difference.

 

[rowsdower88]

The Dems have had mutiple opportunities to make federal abortions rights federal laws when they had all 3 branches of govt. u can can fillabuster this and that. It’s all a show. They can change the fillabuster rule anytime they wanted if it was that important to them.

Just many of them won’t stick their necks/political careers to go all in with a federal bill

It’s a very touchy subject. And for the record for the 100th time or whatever. I support a woman’s right to abortion.

It’s govt 101
Make a law. Make sure it passes the constitution muster and don’t get cute trying to justify it (like how they tried to force the states into the aca mess with Medicaid expansion)

Don’t include insurance and Medicaid payments into paying for abortion. Because you don’t want to tie the Medicaid fiasco of payments into the equation

It’s a very simple bill they can pass written in one page.

You've got to stop with this nonsense that the Dems had a chance to ever codify Roe or make a similar abortion rights law.

When Dems had the trifecta under Obama there were still 25-60 Democrats in office who were reliable Pro-life votes. The unification of the Dems as pro-choice is relatively recent (last ten years).

Look up the stupak-pitt amendment to the ACA. 64 Democrats voted for that amendment that sought to restrict federal funding for abortion in 2009.

The Democratic party has NEVER had enough pro-choice members in Congress and the Presidency to codify Roe. There was no "opportunity".

I'm not even sure if they had enough pro-choice votes under Biden even if they overturned the filibuster.

 

[pgg]

Wont get the votes because they would HAVE to ban partial birth abortions

Ban what?

 

[Johan321]

 

[Johan321]

This will be a revolution. It was inevitable.