…
“The president has been adamant that we need to restore Roe. It is unfathomable that women today wake up in a country with less rights than their ancestors had years ago,” Fulks said.
Biden has been poised to run on what has been described as the strongest abortion rights platform of any general election candidate as he and his allies look to notch a victory in the first presidential election since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.
Last month, Biden seized on a case in Texas, where a woman, Kate Cox, was denied an abortion despite the risk to her life posed by her pregnancy.
“No woman should be forced to go to court or flee her home state just to receive the health care she needs,” Biden said of the case. “But that is exactly what happened in Texas thanks to Republican elected officials, and it is simply outrageous. This should never happen in America, period.”
“Restoring Roe isn’t the only item on Biden’s to-do list. In a second term, the president would aim to “finish the job,” on a slate of priorities his administration has already begun pushing for, Fulks said, including banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines, cutting the cost of insulin and expanding student loan forgiveness.”
This all sounds like shit he should have done in his first term if he wanted Dems to have any faith in him whatsoever.
You seem to think a president can act unilaterally. Or that Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema weren’t holding the senate by the balls until the house got taken by Republicans two years ago.
Then what the fuck is Biden going to do in his second term? You just said he can’t do anything.
If the house and senate don’t go blue? Or if they do? Because I assure you I much prefer him vetoing republicans to trump encouraging them
Welp, unfortunately Biden has decided he’d rather block strikes, fuck the BBB and support genocide over getting my vote so…
I did not say that. That is false.
Then explain it to me. What does “prioritizing” mean? What the fuck can Biden do and why should I vote for him “prioritizing” abortion rights?
Are you going to acknowledge you made a false accusation about me?
Not until you prove otherwise. You haven’t given a concrete example of what he can do.
No. I do not have to prove that I didn’t say something you claimed I said. It is not my job to prove that you didn’t lie. It is yours. If I said Biden can’t do anything, quote me. If I didn’t say it, be an adult and admit you lied.
The cool thing is though, nothing you or I or anyone else has said here is important.
Buddy, four comments in and you haven’t given a single example. Biden can’t do anything about abortion rights and you fucking know it. (And I know he wouldn’t do anything about it even if he could because he’s a fucking piece of shit.) Take the L and let the grown ups talk.
Biden is pathetically weak.
He let two of the most corrupt senators in his caucus bully him into losing ALL of his agenda, while he still called them his good friends.
On the one hand you are saying Biden was powerless, but somehow in the future he won’t be?
You’re even more pathetic than Biden
I was going to post a real response to this, but then you ended with a personal attack. Sorry if you wanted a discussion.
And this is Exactly why Biden will lose
You don’t have to make excuses for the powerful, you know. There are always going to be challenges to overcome to create positive change. We should judge people by how well they overcome those challenges.
Okay, explain exactly how Biden would have been able to ban assault weapons, cut insulin costs and expand student loan forgiveness without congress. And without SCOTUS blocking it. I’d honestly like to know.
Then why promise it
Because that’s how politics has worked for centuries. Is this your first day on planet Earth?
And why should anyone believe his empty worthless promises he has no intention of doing anything about this time?
We all know that Democrats don’t want to do shit about Roe. We know they’ll find just enough no votes, or find some procedural bullshit excuse, and of course they will never get rid of the filibuster.
I’m going to say a thing that would be considered entirely reasonable if we were talking about any other profession, but since we are talking about the powerful, will be disregarded:
That is not my job. That is the president’s job. I should not be expected to come up with a strategy to solve their problems. When they tell me they are going to do something, and then fail to do so, they did a bad job.
I used to think like you do. I used to think I was savvier than all the naive people who wanted things from their politicians, and criticized the politicians when they didn’t deliver, because how could they have? But over time I’ve realized that I was being duped. That I should stop arguing that better things aren’t possible, because when people believe that, it comes true.
A criticism I’ll head off: I understand I can’t vote for them and forget it. I’m not advocating for reduced civil engagement; it’s our job to protest and agitate.
Please provide evidence that I think I am “savvier than all the naive people who wanted things from their politicians and criticized politicians when they didn’t deliver.”
Unless that was a lie. Was it a lie that I think the way you used to think?
Sure, in response to this statement that is a criticism that Biden did not deliver:
You said:
I don’t think it’s unfair to say you think it is naive to believe that the “president can act unilaterally”, and the natural converse of naivety is being savvy.
Anyway, I fail to see the point of arguing with someone who thinks I am a liar, so I will bow out of this conversation. Have a nice day. Believe it or not, I do sincerely wish you well.
Abortion, guns, medical costs, student loans.
It’s more a list of generally winning issues for Democrats to be trotted out ever 2-4 years. With the added ‘benefit’ of Republicans fucking up abortion rights so bad that now it’s a flagship issue for Dems more than it has been since Roe.
Honestly, Republicans fucked this up for themselves. Abortion was the classic wedge issue. Single-issue voters that wanted abortion banned would come out every 2-4 years to vote for the candidate who claimed to be pro-life, who would then make a token effort then shrug when nothing changed, rinse-repeat. Now, those voters have no reason to come out and people that are actually affected negatively have EVERY reason to come out.
In my country it’s called anti-abortion. Is it ever called this in the US? I think it frames it better, as everybody here is pro-living-things
That’s exactly why they like to call it a pro life stance, even though nobody’s life is preserved. Not mothers in need of emergency medical care. Not fetuses with debilitating medical deficiencies. It’s a fake stance that projects compassion without actually having any.