this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
62 points (95.6% liked)

Slop.

861 readers
423 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fannin@hexbear.net 28 points 2 months ago (15 children)

Christ you’re insufferable. “Pooor weeeeedle pwwesudennt can’t do annnnything!”

Fuck you, everyone knows that’s not true.

[–] Lurker123@hexbear.net 9 points 2 months ago (9 children)

If we’re talking about strictly legal methods, Biden’s only option would be to pack the court to overrule Dobbs and reinstate Roe/Casey (or, ideally a stronger version). This would be done via a new federal law, and given that the dems only held 50 senate seats (which included people such and Manchin and Sinema), this was not something that could actually happen.

I think Biden should have tried this, used the bully pulpit of the presidency to argue for it, and campaigned against the senators that stood in the way of this. That’s what I would expect a president who actually cared about this issue to do. But it would not have stopped SCOTUS’s rollback of the law.

Biden could of course have instead triggered a constitutional crisis by directly threatening SCOTUS and forcing them to rule with a (potentially actual) gun to their head. But I’m not sure that’s what you had in mind?

[–] SmokinStalin@hexbear.net 25 points 2 months ago (2 children)

You kinda making the point. He didnt even try. People here probably wouldnt be holding him so responsible for things if he had tried AT ALL to stop it even if he still failed.

[–] Lurker123@hexbear.net 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ye if the point is that he failed to try and that’s why you don’t like him, fair enough, I definitely agree there. I was reading the OP as blaming him for the result, rather than the failure to try, which is what I was responding to.

[–] SmokinStalin@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago

The failure to try makes him complicit. While not directly responsible, he allowed it to happen by doing exactly nothing. Like you said. It's clear he didn't actually care.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)