679
Wtf this wasn't even a leak but was in an ad the dude put out? How can you say "we made the decision to have an abortion" and not realize that "decision" is a synonym for "choice"? These fucking ass hats.
God I hope the "moral pro life" folks rip into him and demean his wife like they do every other woman who chooses abortion.
I'd rather that they didn't, but I won't go rushing to defend them.
I'd prefer that a nonhypocrite healthcare advocate get elected instead.
Well thats just crazy talk!
And no mention of how they rationalized their decision. That would have been rich.
Because he knows that this will lose him exactly zero pro-life votes. That crowd made their peace with voting for hypocrites long ago.
The only moral abortion is my abortion
https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/
One cannot upvote this high enough. This is hypocrisy at it's highest level.
"Genocide for me, but not for thee."
That… was a fucking read. I couldn’t get through it. The mental gymnastics some folks perform…
Thanks for sharing.
This shit was written 20 years ago and is still fucking relevant to this day fucking hell
Some of the cases it quotes are from 50 years ago. This kind of hypocrisy is enduring.
The majority of Americans believe abortion should be legal.
When Republicans say they want to ban abortions, and try to play it off as a popular position, they are lying to your face.
Even a substantial portion of Republican voters want abortion to be legal.
They aren't just fighting most Americans, they're fighting themselves too.
They just want to restrict access to reproductive healthcare for poor people and minorities. It's never about "saving babies".
Yeah, they feel they can go somewhere else but want as many minorities in their communities as possible
Wait…did they think their position through?
They also want to fill their religious adoption agencies with unwanted babies. They are LEGALLY ALLOWED to discriminate against non Christian families. I believe a Jewish family sued over it a few years ago, but I don't remember the outcome.
Those adoption agencies work closely with so called 'crisis pregnancy centers."
People are leaving churches and they need to fill them up by getting a monopoly on adoption and adopting out to only white Christian families. It's disgusting honestly.
I am a supporter of access to abortion. I want to get that out of the way before going into the reasons why making access to abortion a central campaign issue is a bad idea.
Yes, most people support the right to choose. But how many people base 100% of their vote on keeping abortion legal? As a ballot initiative, access to abortion does well. As a central issue for a candidacy, it's poison because the reality is pro-choice single-issue voters don't exist.
Pro-life voters are by far the most powerful single-issue voting block in America. Millions of would-be Democrats who truly, honestly believe abortion is murdering babies put aside everything else to try and stop it. It's how the Republicans can get away with having policies that are so harmful to children after they're born. No other issue exists as long as abortion is on the menu.
How many current Harris supporters would vote for Trump if their positions on abortion were swapped? Millions of Trump voters would swap.
The GOP was actually a little terrified of Roe being overturned because nothing saps political steam like achieving a goal. Lots of voters in states that now restrict abortion who spent 50 years voting to try and get Roe overturned suddenly felt the freedom to vote on other issues. But with so much Democratic effort being focused on restoring abortion rights, those voters are locked back in as solid GOP votes. The better political move for the Dems would be to essentially ignore the issue on the campaign trail and try to get a ballot initiate through. It would protect the right to choose while simultaneously neutralizing the GOP's strongest hand.
I have to disagree with this.
A study done recently using data from the 2020-2022 US midterm elections found that people's views on abortion directly affected changes in vote choice, while other factors like the economy were blamed on both sides, and were substantially less influential in swaying votes. (here's an article with more detail regarding the study)
I don't think most are single-issue voters, on either side, but yes, Republicans do tend to vote more single-issue than Democrats. That said, if the Democrats stopped making access to abortion a central campaign issue, not only would it lose them support from those who are, y'know, big on women's rights, a substantial amount of the population, but it wouldn't actually change most Republican voters, since they would still be able to vote for a candidate that would be more strict on abortion.
The only shift caused by de-prioritizing abortion as a campaign issue would be pushing more Democrats toward either Independent, or right-wing candidates, both of which make it harder for the Democrats to win against the explicitly anti-choice party of Republicans.
Rules for thee, not for me
UH-OH.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
shockedpikachu.jpg
to be fair, the only thing surprising to me at this point is if a republican DIDN'T personally benefit from access to abortion.
“Abortion in this country is not about protecting the lives of mothers, it is about killing the child because you weren’t responsible enough to keep your skirt down," Robinson claimed.
Charge him with murder.
she looks thrilled LOL
he'll probably blame her when he loses
As always these weirdos do exactly what they wish to condemn others for.
Fun fact: When our governor leaves the state, Mark Robinson is in charge and can theoretically do whatever he wants. He's basically holding Roy Cooper and every North Carolinian hostage. It's insane
Do you mean NC Republican governor candidate and self-described genocidal murderer Mark Robinson?
So now the Republicans have people who committed genocide among their ranks. At least, in their own terms they have.
This is old news. But I'm glad to see it repeated.
We're just skipping over the pre-marital sex. Even more hypocrisy.
But has he fucked his couch?
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
679 points (99.1% liked)
politics
19126 readers
1835 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