350
submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

“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.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ApostleO@startrek.website 24 points 10 months ago

I mean, what's he supposed to do right now? Republicans still control both houses of congress (or, at least, hold enough seats to render both houses impotent). The upcoming congressional elections matter as much as (or potentially more than) the presidential election.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 10 points 10 months ago

And next term, when the Republicans control both houses of Congress, he also won't be able to do anything about abortion.

This is why I've stopped believing presidential candidates when they say they're gonna do things. They're one branch of government, so there's only so much they could possibly do, and even that will take years.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

He had zero issues going around Congress to "sell" weapons to Israel to be used in an o going genocide...

Bonus points:

They "bought" the weapons with American taxpayers money after Biden had just given it to them.

Why can Biden go around Congress for that, but not for what would help Americans?

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

Because the president can't create a constitutional amendment. They are not a member of the legislative branch. He can provide emergency military support, being the leader of the executive branch (head of the military)

I don't agree with what he did, but it is under his perview apparently. Much like he can send our troops to fight for ~90 days before needing congressional approval. Essentially creating a situation that you are already in a war by the time congress can say no

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

He can fix the supreme Court all on his own by adding members, then the case can be brought up again.

But let me guess, you think if Dems do that, Republicans will somehow do even more of what they're already doing?

So we're going to ignore the stolen SC, because if we take it back legally, they might steal it again?

And people wonder why 1/3 of the country don't vote.

Only one side is actually fighting, the other wants to pretend there's no war because then people will ask them why they let it get this bad

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Yeah, I suspect they'll have no problem getting those new judges confirmed through the Senate. Genius play.

I get that you're frustrated. We all are. But attacking the people who are mostly on your side instead of the people actively trying to hurt you doesn't help.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

A firefighter standing by my house while it brings down isn't helping me.

Especially when he keeps telling me I need to work with the arsonist who set the fire and unless the arsonist agrees, he has no choice but to stand there socializing with the arsonist

I can say we need a different firefighter and that if the only other option is the arsonist....

Then ignoring that our system is broken doesn't help anyone.

All it does is make less people vote on who the next firefighter is, and gives the arsonist better odds of winning.

I know it's tempting, but burying your head in the sand won't fix anything anymore than it has with climate change

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Ok but the alternative wants me dead. He’s promising to strip my rights and get rid of people like me. So maybe some of us see y’all standing and taking this position and think “wow, we’re fucked”. Because you can’t even bring yourself to vote for a liberal against a fascist. Vote in the primaries like the rest of us. Try to convince moderates to vote left as they can.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -3 points 10 months ago

Do you honestly think everyone that criticizes Biden won't vote for him?

Jill Stein would have gotten second place if that was true. Most of the votes moderates get are from people that hate them.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I’m seeing a lot of people saying they won’t on here. And I’m getting sick of their bullshit.

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

You keep trying to push this narrative that only the far left has any actually significant popularity, like mainstream dem success is all a part of some grand conspiracy or something. But I think the reason most of the dem party in the House and Senate is more moderate, is because there are still a huge number of moderate voters.

It's odd that you're so reluctant to acknowledge that the dem party is a party of diversity, not some monolith of purity.

[-] Pyramid8058@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

The number of Supreme Court justices is set by statute. The president cannot add more justices without the support of Congress.

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Hes supposed to encourage a floor vote so we can at least find out whos not supporting this and vote them out of congress. But were gonna go into the election without knowing anyone stance, so politicians of both parties can simply claim anything since theres no record.

[-] ApostleO@startrek.website 2 points 10 months ago

The leader of each house is Republican, and they control what comes up for a vote. He can encourage all he wants, he has no say in the matter.

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Okay and what was his excuse before Midterms when that wasn't true?

[-] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

what’s he supposed to do right now?

There's a lot of cases during his presidency where he could do something within his power as president, and go around Congress.

He has shown he has the willpower to do so when he wants to, just not for things i want. There are many things unrelated to this specific case where it has played out that way.

To me, a dumb working stiff, it sure seems like he won't use his power to help people like me. So he and you will have to excuse me on this case, where he may not even have the power (as you said), for not trusting him when he promises me something he knows i want without even promising that he will succeed.

It is just too cynically timed, and I've heard this one before

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -3 points 10 months ago

There’s a lot of cases during his presidency where he could do something within his power as president, and go around Congress.

Then fuck him for not doing that in his first term.

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

And that's precisely what makes this so fucking meaningless. What's he able to do in his second term for abortion rights he couldn't in his first? Neither answer is a good look.

this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
350 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19159 readers
4573 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS