New Developments III

[Sabin]

This has been a dreadful week that has been hitting me in waves when thinking of the implications in years to come. Red states getting redder. Blue states getting bluer. Red states protesting blue states and blue states protesting red states. Political violence as blue states provide outreach to women who need abortions in red states, as we waste the precious years we need to come together and prevent the hell of Earth climate change promises us.

This has been a dreadful week. I needed something to take my mind off and give me some form of happiness.

That something was Steve Schmidt.

Over the last few weeks, Meghan McCain's book has sold dismally. She's posted photo ops by her father's grave. And the final nail in the coffin was when she liked a tweet accusing Schmidt of being a pedophile. That was it. Steve Schmidt went off.

https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/sta ... 0643088385

I'm not proud of the fact that the most enjoyment I received this week was watching one DC insider bury the other, but it was. It was fantastic. But he wasn't done.

He continued onward into:

Russian infiltration of the GOP: https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/sta ... 7088128001
Sarah Palin: https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/sta ... 7353896960

And finally, this one: https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/sta ... 0968726528

In this one, he settles into the following sentiment: "The Exhausted Majority is what I’m part of. It’s got Republicans, democrats, independents, new voters and new citizens. It’s made up of people of all faiths, creeds religions and no religion at all. It is common sense based and we are sick of the bullshit and will not allow a belligerent minority to hijack our Country, our Families, our Kids, our Faiths, our Communities, our unity, our liberty, our bodies and our future."

I want to believe in the exhausted majority. I'm not sure how it can exist post Roe.

[Big Magilla]

We're getting in the weeds here.

The minutia generally applies to how people feel about abortion for themselves and how they would feel about someone they know having an abortion, not whether it should apply to everyone. The key question is should it be legal or shouldn't it be. It's a question that shouldn't have to be asked on settled law so 70% is the correct number. Even that, though, is too small, for something that is not only settled law in this country but in all civilized countries including Italy and Ireland where its passage was hard fought.

The only other questions should be how many of the 70% care enough about the issue to vote for candidates that share their beliefs and how many of the 22% who are not opposed in all cases will do the same. Given that this could be just the tip of the iceberg, it should in theory be all but most of the remaining 8% who are opposed to abortion no matter what the circumstances are. If the upcoming elections were about this one issue, the overturning of Roe v Wade would create the seismic shift the Democrats are looking for, but elections are never about one issue. Could it be enough? It could, but will it? And even if it is, will it change anything in the Senate?

[Sonic Youth]

Americans Favor Abortion Rights, But It's Complicated

This gets at what I was talking about before, and it's something pro-choice absolutist's (like me) have got to start coming to terms with. 70% of the American people are pro-choice - or at least that's the figure I keep seeing - but what does "pro-" mean? Does it mean "agree with"? Or does it mean "unilaterally vote in support of"? Because if it's the latter, it's much less than 70%. Majorities mean little without a unified front.

[Sonic Youth]

The ironic thing about the Supreme Court decision is that the number of abortions in the U.S. have been plummeting for a while.

Which only makes it easier.

[Sonic Youth]

The most devastating thing about this week for me is the number of people in my life that I'm realizing are largely indifferent. We're not even there yet and I feel heartbroken. I'm discovering a large number of people around me who aren't so much Pro-Choice as it's just a mild preference for them -- whether it's indifference or they've been misinformed. I'm just trying to stuff my hopelessness into a bindle for the long, long road ahead.

I held out a tiny bit of hope that this leak could mobilize Democratic voters. You and Magilla just did a fine job bringing me back to reality. Thanks guys.

The truth is, for all the statistics that get trotted out saying that more Americans are pro-choice than pro-life, it's the pro-life movement that's stronger, more vocal, more passionate and more organized. They'll do a better job getting out the vote, which didn't need much help to begin with. This year's enthusiam is at Tea Party levels, and with this president's unpopularity the Dems have a looooong way to go to match it. They're starting from way behind in the first place, especially with the younger demographic. What I find most interesting is, what is corporate America doing about this? Hollywood, Big Tech, etc. were all strongly in support of the fight for marriage equality. Is there anything like this today? Where are the boycotts? Where are the celebrities? Where are the PSAs? There is nothing. \And all this talk about how "members of their own party will rise up in outrage if Republicans outlaw abortion" is delusion, at least in this Trumpian day and age. It would have happened at least in Texas already if it were true.

[Big Magilla]

Big Magilla wrote
The Senate has to throw out the filibuster, codify Roe v Wade, pass voting protection laws, and act on lowering drug costs at the very minimum of the Biden administration's proposals, and they need to do all of it without further obfuscation and delay.

That won't happen. Manchin and Sinema don't support it. I'm not even sure Joe Biden supports it. This "Democratic Control" is the biggest Catch 22 I've ever seen. It's probably the only thing that could have won. We just can't do much with it (with respectful nods to federal judges and anti-gerrymandering).

The most devastating thing about this week for me is the number of people in my life that I'm realizing are largely indifferent. We're not even there yet and I feel heartbroken. I'm discovering a large number of people around me who aren't so much Pro-Choice as it's just a mild preference for them -- whether it's indifference or they've been misinformed. I'm just trying to stuff my hopelessness into a bindle for the long, long road ahead.

I know. I'm so sick of listening to Democrats say, "you have to vote for us if you want things to change."

I heard Kamela Harris say that on the news again this morning. I wanted to yell at the screen, "We did that two years ago. You're in charge and you still can't get anything done."

No, Biden doesn't want to end the filibuster. Either he's nostalgic for the way things were when he was in the Senate, or he thinks the pendulum will swing back to civility on its own. Someone needs to wake him up and he in turn needs to read the riot act to Manchin and Sinema. Neither, though, is likely to happen. It's going to have to be a state-by-state fight that will last as long as the Civil War and probably be fought for forty years after it ends, though one hopes without too much actual blood being spilled.

[Greg]

The ironic thing about the Supreme Court decision is that the number of abortions in the U.S. have been plummeting for a while.

[Sabin]

Big Magilla wrote
The Senate has to throw out the filibuster, codify Roe v Wade, pass voting protection laws, and act on lowering drug costs at the very minimum of the Biden administration's proposals, and they need to do all of it without further obfuscation and delay.

That won't happen. Manchin and Sinema don't support it. I'm not even sure Joe Biden supports it. This "Democratic Control" is the biggest Catch 22 I've ever seen. It's probably the only thing that could have won. We just can't do much with it (with respectful nods to federal judges and anti-gerrymandering).

The most devastating thing about this week for me is the number of people in my life that I'm realizing are largely indifferent. We're not even there yet and I feel heartbroken. I'm discovering a large number of people around me who aren't so much Pro-Choice as it's just a mild preference for them -- whether it's indifference or they've been misinformed. I'm just trying to stuff my hopelessness into a bindle for the long, long road ahead.

[Big Magilla]

I received my mail-in ballot for the upcoming June primary yesterday which I opened this morning. It gave me quite a shock.

I knew that the congressional map was redrawn by the New Jersey State Legislature, but I was under the impression that it heavily favored Democrats. Maybe it does overall, but not here.

I was part of Andy Kim's progressive 3rd District. I was shocked to find that all of Ocean and Monmouth counties now constitute the entire 4th District which is the most Republican district in the state. The current representative, who is from Manchester, is the only politician in the state who has come out in favor of the opinion espoused in the leaked Supreme Court draft proclaiming the end of Roe v Wade. He is being challenged by five or six other Republicans, but he's been challenged in the past and won against the odds time and time again. The old farts love him. The only Democrat running is a small-time businessman from the Delicious Orchards area. I will vote for him, but he has no chance of winning against whoever the Republicans nominate.

Ugh!

[Big Magilla]

As the Times article points out, it's minority rule that is to blame.

Someone pointed out the other day that the Dakotas (North and South) have the combined population of Staten Island, one of the five boroughs (counties) that make up New York City, yet the conservative Dakotas have double the power in the Senate of all of generally liberal New York State. Mitch McConnell's Kentucky, and other small conservative states, receive financial support from the so-called wealthier states like New York, New Jersey, and California with their heavier taxes. National politics in the U.S. has been disproportionately geared toward the dozens of smaller states for some time.

This pending ruling by the Supreme Court, with its six conservative judges, all of them appointed by Republicans, four of them appointed by presidents who won the electoral vote but not the popular vote, is not a surprise but it is still a shock. It is the first time that the Court has ever (if this goes through as drafted) taken away a right that has been granted by the Constitution. Contrary to what Alito thinks, amendments to the Constitution are part of the Constitution. This current Court is beyond conservative. It's reactionary. It wants to put things back to the way they were in 1776 when the Constitution was written. This ruling wants to not just take away a woman's right to choose, but a citizen's right to privacy as protected by the tenth amendment. Everything is at risk. Marriage equality is next on their evil agenda. Then, who knows what they'll go after.

The Senate has to throw out the filibuster, codify Roe v Wade, pass voting protection laws, and act on lowering drug costs at the very minimum of the Biden administration's proposals, and they need to do all of it without further obfuscation and delay.

[Sonic Youth]

I think I have mentioned it before but I'm astounded that in the year 2022 abortion is still a hot button issue in a so-called western democracy.
I live in the most conservative EU country and we settled that matter 40 years ago with nary a peep from the right-wing parties or our powerful Orthodox church. And that was just codifying and formalizing a situation where abortions have been de facto legal since the 1950s.

As Abortion Rights Expand, the U.S. Joins a Handful of Telling Exceptions

[Okri]

One assertion about the rise of the religious right and abortion as a wedge issue, taki, was that abortion was easier to rally behind that than protecting segregated schools.

[taki15]

I think I have mentioned it before but I'm astounded that in the year 2022 abortion is still a hot button issue in a so-called western democracy.
I live in the most conservative EU country and we settled that matter 40 years ago with nary a peep from the right-wing parties or our powerful Orthodox church. And that was just codifying and formalizing a situation where abortions have been de facto legal since the 1950s.

[Sabin]

I think Democrats (and by that, I mean us) have been slow to realize the GOP's success with wedge issues on voters. We are in the middle of twelve culture wars right now. All a GOP politician needs to do is pick one of them, proclaim loudly "I will be your bulwark against X," and a disheartening number of voters will find it easy to bail on literally everything else. I've seen this with people I formerly considered friends. To be be fair, abortions rights have been the Democrats' wedge issue for ages but perhaps we've just underestimated the degree to which voters will sanction Christian nationalist insanity in the voting booth to fight culture war bullshit.

Will this be different? It's big enough, so perhaps. But I'm not convinced that a fair amount of voters won't just say "Well, Roe v. Wade is already gone. Let's get back to my fears about CRT."

[Sonic Youth]

Roberts knows that an opinion like this would damage the court's reputation beyond repair. He doesn't want it to happen and would rather chip away at it until it's toothless, that way there isn't galvanized support against it. I think Roberts arranged for this leak so that the 5 conservative members could see the dangers of going full-tilt against Roe and scale back.

I have heard theories that Justice Sotomayor leaked it. I've heard that Clarence Thomas leaked it. I've heard that Roberts leaked it. It's fun to speculate, but c'mon. The chances that any of them did this is or authorized it is zero (especially since we all know it was Breyer who leaked it).

I don't see how a conservative Justice would back off from a firmly held belief. I don't see how a leak would shatter anyone's convictions any more than the usual behind-the-scenes negotiations and a lifetime of observations. I certainly don't believe Roberts would do something as foolish as this, especially since it would lead to his expulsion once he got caught.

He knows that this is the one issue that could lose the Republicans control of several moderate districts and is one of the few things that would finally unify support among women and younger voters, causing them to finally see that their namby-pamby support and lack of turnout can result in just this kind of outcome and encourage their participation in democracy, which would destroy the Republicans. It's also the kind of decision that would undoubtedly build support for neutering or outright destroying the Supreme Court. An appellate review court under the Supremes would be the kind of thing that could pass without needing to pack the court, which would also be on the table.

As many have told the Republicans, be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

And I'm sorry, but I've heard this my whole life, and I don't believe this either. Maybe it was true 20 years ago, but not anymore.

I can elaborate when I have more time, EXCEPT..... if there was an opportunity to build a united front of support, this is it. This could build momentum where a mere decision announcement wouldn't. I think electorally this could move a point or two, and a point or two is actually quite a bit when it comes to the total number of congressional seats. But it would only mean the Democrats lose in the midterms rather than get crushed.