407
So.....he waited to make this a reelection issue?
Implying he could have done anything else?
List the exact actions Biden could have actually taken between Roe being struck down and now that he "waited to do" to make it a reelection issue.
I swear Republicans will start imposing mandatory pregnancy tests at travel checkpoints between state borders and the white left will still find a way to make it the Democrats' fault to justify not doing anything to stop the Republicans from coming back to power.
Fuckin' porcelain-american shit.
This. This right fucking here that he waited till close to reelection is at least what he could have done. This article we are commenting on.
So you're mad that he's making it a campaign issue because he didn't explicitly make it one beforehand, which he did, you just either didn't read the news when he did or forgot he did it.
I'm as annoyed with Dems not being loud enough as the next guy but at a certain point it stops being their fault for being bad at communicating and yours for just refusing to listen.
The article itself in the headline calls out that this is an effort that he's been contributing to and is publicizing a fresh push in.
Porcelain American Shit.
yes. Im mad he waited till close to election to really make an issue of this instead of leaving it on the back burner. This is a MASSIVE FUCKING THING that he has said next to nothing about. yes I know he has finger waged about it a few times, i haven't forgotten.
also...dude is that porcelain thing like a signature for you?
If it's such a "fucking massive thing" then why did no one bother to show up to vote in 2016? 2016 had the lowest voter turn out among young voters. Seems really convenient when something matters. Biden can do no right it seems, even though Roe v Wade was overturned like last year.
Because we had shit options in 2016. Remember? You were there right? Everybody constantly talking about how the fuck are we having to pick between Trump and Clinton?
I showed up and I voted for Clinton even though I wasn't happy about it but yeah... Here we are.
Also I'm not understanding your quotation marks around massive fucking thing. Are you trying to act like this isn't actually a big deal? That this isn't a hot button issue among people? That's the only thing I can figure out you're trying to imply with that?
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(13 replies)
He did make it an issue an election ago. "vote for us and we'll do something".
Resize the obviously politically biased Supreme Court.
Of course he did. The dems have had many chances to enshrine Roe v Wade in law. They just always decided that holding it over everyone's head as a "look what they'll do if you don't vote for us!" was more valuable thsn doing the bare fucking minimum of the right thing.
When have Dems had a chance to secure it into law? They need the House and Senate, plus the President. When was the last time they had that by not a 1-2 margin? Because margins that tight are asking for assholes like Manchin or Sinema to make it all about them and there are still moderately conservative democrats.
As others said, dem supermajority during Obama’s first term. He campaigned on it, then gave a speech after getting elected saying it wasn’t their highest priority. A few months later Kennedy died and they lost their chance. As an aside, Pelosi should be fucking ashamed for this - but she has no shame.
Could have pushed hard for it during the first 2 years of Biden’s presidency as well, and bullied Manchin/Sinema into going along or losing their seat. But that would mean change, which is the one thing Biden promised he wouldn’t do. And so here we are, another election year, another bullshit campaign promise of something they might do if we elect them again. (Narrator: they won’t do it.)
He campaigned on ACA too and we actually got that. Roe v Wade wasn't a priority as much since it was codified precedent and we weren't in a time when judges just overturned precedents willy nilly.
Were you paying attention during Biden's term? Those two torpedoed any chance at legislation. And maybe they could have brokered a deal but the cost would have been staggering and the rest of the term shot for getting concessions.
Yep we got ACA, Romney’s healthcare plan, but notably without the public option. And guess who immediately gave that concession to repugs, before negotiations had even begun? Genocidin’ Biden.
Roe was precedent, yes, but most importantly it was not codified by law. “Codified precedent” isn’t a thing. Congress is supposed to make laws, and the courts are supposed to enforce them. Congress dropped the ball to pass this absolute layup in 2008, and then just 15 years later women lost the right to bodily autonomy because of that failure.
I find it odd the implication that Congress can’t work on more than 1 legislative item at a time, but ok feel free to make that claim for what it’s worth.
The fact of the matter is this: legislation for this stuff has been drafted and ready to go for decades. It could have been a “day 1 and done” law, as was promised during Obama’s campaign. Dems simply don’t want to do it, so they can do exactly what’s happening in the OP - use Roe as a dangling carrot to coerce voter turnout.
load more comments
(13 replies)
The only thing that would have prevented Dobbs would have been a constitutional amendment. SCOTUS can overturn anything else.
load more comments
(15 replies)
He didn't wait. This isn't the first time he's made it an election issue.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Well if it isn't the Democrat's hallmark of way too little and way too late.
Maybe if they got elected in 2016 it wouldn't have had been too late at all.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The extensive plans include ad buys, campaign rallies and events across the U.S. organized in lockstep with the Democratic National Committee, which will launch opinion pieces in local newspapers focusing on statewide abortion bans.
Ahead of the 51st anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision on Jan. 22, television and digital ads highlighting the personal impact of abortion restrictions will air in swing states like Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, according to a Biden-Harris campaign official.
The rally will focus on attempts in Virginia and other states to roll back reproductive rights in the wake of the Supreme Court's June 2022 Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade.
"Virginians unequivocally rebuked the MAGA agenda and their attacks on women's reproductive freedom, leading to Democrats retaining the Senate and flipping the House of Delegates to take full control of the General Assembly," the Biden-Harris campaign said in a statement to CBS News.
According to Democratic allies close to Mr. Biden's reelection effort, his campaign sees abortion rights as a galvanizing issue for their coalition that will bolster the president's chances of retaining the White House.
"Trump directly paved the way for Republican extremists across the country to enact draconian bans that are hurting women and threatening doctors," Biden-Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement.
The original article contains 568 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
407 points (97.7% liked)
politics
19072 readers
4584 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS