What's interesting about "Meta" and abortion issues... I had posted a video about an actual c-section from YouTube and it was taken down as violating their rules. An actual procedure that is done to around 30% of US women is apparently too graphic but not images from anti-abortion groups. Doesn't pass the smell test. If women can endure a c-section and that procedure is common, how is it too graphic to be seen, but not abortion propaganda.
I often wonder about this, too. I tried to call a couple of SC "justices" assholes on IG a couple of weeks ago, and they wouldn't let me post it. But every troll-dude-bro on earth can troll and call women much worse, and nothing happens to them. I think it's tied to how much money they spend with Meta on advertising.
Spaceforce not moving to Alabama - along with abortion rights, that also might be because Tuberville is holding up military promotions. In fact, that is a more likely reason.
It’s also because Space Command wants to stay in Colorado. And because Trump’s original decision was political. He was punishing Colorado for not voting for him in 2020, and made that pretty damned clear to the former Republican mayor of Colorado Springs.
It drives me bonkers that democrats can't shout, "The whole proposed move from CO to AL was political," (because it was), but somehow Biden is "punishing" Alabama now. Why is messaging so fucking hard for Dems? I'd say we can't control what the media reports, but the right manages to relay their messages by saying the same things over and over and over and over and over again. End of rant.
I’ve been talking about how poorly Democrats handle messaging for decades.
You’d think that by now, they could have figured out that they need to handle messaging with the same discipline that Republicans do. It makes me want to scream.
Republicans have always been greater believers in authoritarianism, so monotone conformity probably comes more naturally to them. It's not something liberals naturally do well; it takes training.
This situation regarding access to reproductive care is really untenable in the long term - in one state, access to care is a state Constitutional right and in the state next door it's a felony. This disparity cannot continue.
Yes, exactly. Tensions will continue to build until something more dramatic happens. It's like a fault line that causes an earthquake. You know it's there but you can never say quite when and where it will happen.
I’ve been following the Space Commsnd, because I live in Colorado Springs.
The hypocrisy of the Republicans on the issue is startling in its nakedness. Our former Republican Mayor asked Trump - who, btw, says the decision to move it to Alabama was entirely his - relayed this story back in March of this year. Trump came to the Sprungs for a rally in 2020, and Mayor Suthers made his case for leaving Space Command here.
“ The mayor greeted Trump on the tarmac when his plane arrived, and took the chance to make his argument to keep the headquarters in Colorado Springs. Suthers said Trump asked him if he was Republican. Suthers confirmed he was and then Trump asked what his chances were of carrying Colorado in November. Suthers replied “uncertain,” which he said seemed to perturb Trump.
Suthers then recalled that when a high-ranking officer in the Space Force affirmed that the command should stay in the city, Trump said he’d make the decision after the 2020 election. “I want to see how it turns out,” Suthers said Trump said.”
Trump announced the decision to move the command to Alabama on January 13, 2021, a week before he left office.
With the Trump Supremos about to consider clinic buffer zones, I think it's more important than ever to not let assholes - excuse me, "sidewalk counselors" get away with harassing people. If they can force their message on patients, we can force ours on them.
They don't like the whistles much either. That's why we use them. Also whistles are less likely to provoke noise complaints involving the police than other kinds of noisemakers, but we've also used tambourines, maracas, and other percussion instruments.
Know what they REALLY don't like? Cowbells. Know what our response to that is? "More COWBELL!"
I'm not in this one. That's my sister sitting in the chair. She's been doing this since the '80s and roped me into helping when I retired in 2019. I'm in my 70s and in less than optimal health, so I can't be there as often as I might like, although being retired allows me to provide coverage during the week when everybody else is working. Always there in spirit and do my best to publicize our efforts and recruit new defenders.
If you look back a couple of months, there's a KC Clarity video called "Orange Vest Clowns" that features an extended interview with me. (I'm the old guy)
Hi again. Sorry about the mom bit. I assumed. To quote Benny Hill, when u assume, you can make an ass out of u and me. Sorry to hear about your health. I'm 66 and in fairly good health. I'm a big advocate of walking. I started tracking in March of last year and am a bit over 3 and a half million steps. I'm at a loss why cowbells work so well. I'll recheck the video and check on the one you mentioned. Hope your health improves.
Yes we'll need to re-strategize on clinic security if (i.e. when) the court strikes down buffer zone laws. If only clinics were as well funded as the damn anti-abortion centers.
They deal with it here by simply posting the entire property as no-tresspassing. Only patients and staff are allowed on the property. So things shouldn't change too much unless they also strike down no-tresspassing laws. (which nobody expects to happen)
Yes, siting and construction matter. The issue is how close anyone has to get to public property to access the clinic. Some clinics may need remodels, and that's expensive. These people will find any way to attack that they can.
Hi Zach. Did u check out the clip above? The whistle was quite annoying. Using that would not only annoy the bastards, but would probably drown tthem out too. By the way, your comments were quite inciteful. Good job.
What's tragic about the North Carolina story is this is not a change that can be easily undone. Democrats would need the trifecta at the federal level to override North Carolina law (just as for every other anti-abortion state), and that's difficult due to the constitution (Senate in particular). The only way to reverse it at the state level is to get a Democratic trifecta in state government, which is far far less likely than the federal trifecta, or to get a Democratic majority on the state supreme court and have them declare that abortion is a categorically protected right. That second option is more realistic but will also take many years. So it's just massive massive damage that's been done to the women of North Carolina. I'm curious what the fallout will ultimately be at the state level.
My state (SC) has already voted to have a convention. One of many reasons state-level elections and flips from red-to-blue are so important right now. As soon as they have the state houses they need, they’ll call a Constitutional Convention. And we’re done.
This could absolutely happen in our lifetimes, Zach. And we on the left should be mounting a similar movement to make the Constitution work for a multi-racial 21st century democracy.
Yes, if we get a new constitution it's not going to be exclusively on their terms. We're not filling it with provisions opposed by large majorities of the population (at least not unless those provisions are backed by vast amounts of wealth). Otherwise at that point we do break up the country.
It can be done, at the state level anyway. But it’s likely to take at least as long to do that as it took for the Republicans to do it. Figure 40-50 years.
I’m not sure it can be done on the federal level as long as the filibuster remains in the Senate. And the danger in getting rid of that is greater than the danger of keeping that.
It has to be done on the federal level precisely because of how difficult it is to do at the state level. It would be like having waited for the Confederate states to decide on their own to end slavery.
As for the filibuster, if the Republicans ever have control they will be certain to eliminate it if there is legislation they want to pass. The Senate is already a very heavy lift because the median seat is several points more Republican than the country as a whole since each state gets two senators. With the filibuster, it's almost guaranteed that no legislation can EVER be passed at the federal level. I say almost because it would be possible for Republicans to get 60 Senate seats, far more possible than for Democrats. Remember that Hillary got more votes but Trump won 30 states in 2016. I would prefer a whole new constitution, but, barring that, the filibuster has to go (or at the very very least be reformed from what it is now). Even then the composition of the Senate is so blatantly unfair that it makes a mockery of democracy. No other country has an upper house that is both so unrepresentative and granted such wide powers.
If we have to wait several decades to restore basic human rights to women in this country, we might as well step in front of a bus.
What’s your absolutely worst nightmare bill Republicans can think of? Get rid of the filibuster and it’ll become realty so fast it’ll make your head spin.
With the filibuster, it’s what used to be called a Mexican standoff - both sides equally armed such that no strategy exists to allow either side victory. The Republicans are just as afraid as the Democrats to let that go. They know if they eliminate the filibuster, if the Democrats have control of the Senate, they can do whatever they like. That’s why, at least thus far, there’s more discussion about filibuster carve-outs. When judicial appointments became too unwieldy, there was a carve-out.
Yes, the Senate is inherently undemocratic. So is the Electoral College. At the time the government was created, those things, and the abhorrent 3/5 rule were the only way to get the southern states on board. The Founders didn’t think 13 separate counties would be able to survive on their own - and they were right about that. Now, tossing the structure of the government would be hard - we don’t have enough power to get through a Constitutional Convention without ending up with an autocracy.
One of the other problems I have is the size of the House. There are 650 members of the UK House of Commons. Their population is under 70 million. Our representatives cannot really be in responsive to the issues, concerns and opinions with as many constituents as there are in each district. I think once you get past about 100,000 people per district, the representatives are too remote to really understand their constituency- and that makes the parties too strong in their selection of not only who runs, but what policies and issues matter. A larger House would almost inevitably open the system up to more parties.
The thing is, Zach - it *is* going to take a long time to restore abortion rights. That’s why I keep harping on patience. Either half the SCOTUS needs to resign while a Democrat is in the White House, or we have to win 60 Senate seats, more than half the House, and the White House all at once. And even if we do that, the next time the wheel turns and we lose that control, whatever we did can be undone.
To get a Constitutional Amendment, rather than just passing a law that can be decreed unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, or overturned by the next Congress, we need to have 3/4 of the states. They each have their own rules, but by and large, it means having a very large majority of each of the state legislatures.
At this point, we need to pass amendments to each state’s constitution, or a federal amendment. Either way, we have to work at the state level.
I'll be blunt, and I hope you don't think it's rude. The process you are talking about, it will be impossible for it to come to fruition in your lifetime. I'm not even sure it could happen in my lifetime (I'm 45). If that means the system is hopelessly broken, then it's hopelessly broken. The other side is ready to put militias in the streets, and we have a lot more to legitimately complain about than they do. I just don't think the country can tolerate this state of affairs a lot longer. And I really don't want to see widespread political violence.
I think if the Democrats get the opportunity, they will scrap the filibuster for at least some legislation. Abortion rights would be one such bill. Democrats also realize the constitutional deck is stacked so heavily against them that they'll want to do election reform, voting rights, and add states. It will be one swing for the fences because they know it may be the last chance.
If Republicans win (all three) in 2024, democracy is effectively ended. It will be similar to when the Nazi Party came to power in Germany in 1933. (I'm not saying the next twelve years will follow the same path). They know they're unpopular and that's why their followers favor autocracy. There would most likely be bills to stifle dissent; they'll want to silence or detain academics, activists, journalists, creative types. Someone like Jessica would be at great risk if she stayed in the country. I don't think this is an overstatement. They would have contested the election running on a fascist platform, and won on that platform. If we think they're bad now imagine what happens when they're validated. And they would have to find their way around the federal judiciary if it tried to stop them. It would be too good of an opportunity for the MAGAts to pass up.
Most likely we'll get a split decision. A Democratic president, a Republican Senate, and the House could go either way. I don't know how much violence that would spark from their side but we'd have to contain it. We'd go on much like we are now, although Biden (or another Dem) would not be able to make any appointments anymore, judicial or otherwise. The citizens of the red states would still be enslaved, and the tensions in this country would continue to build. And we'd have to reassess the future path in subsequent elections.
If things get bad enough it might start a serious movement for a new constitution. But that would be full of danger as well as opportunity, and it's such a big change that it's very unlikely until it seems like there are no other options (other than civil war).
I don’t disagree with you - in fact, we agree on a lot.
The scrapping of the filibuster for some legislation you talk about is exactly what I meant when I talked about carve-outs. Of course the carve-outs put in place for judicial appointments are also how we ended up with the Trump justices on SCOTUS, and the heavily rightward tilt of the circuit courts. But the Democrats felt they had no choice but to put in a carve-out for all presidential appointments (except SCOTUS nods) because the Republicans were stonewalling on Obama’s nominations in 2013. McConnell of course, extended this carve-out to Supreme Court Justices in 2017 to get Gorsuch in - and said it was the Democrats’ fault because they used the nuclear option first.
I agree that we will probably have a split government, but I’m very concerned about the presidential race. If, gods & little green fishes forbid, a Republican takes the WH, they might run the board.
And then we’re all screwed.
I agree that a Constitutional Convention is the last step - but I think it’s just as likely to lead to a war as to prevent one.
Yes, that last paragraph. Although it might be a chicken-and-egg situation.
Most Americans don't want a war. But there is a sizable minority of the population with a LOT of guns. The bigger question is what those we rely on to keep the peace would do; law enforcement and military skew more Republican than the rest of the population.
The problem with the election is the presidential race is by far the hardest of the trifecta for them. That means if they win that, they're almost guaranteed to have full control. Whereas most situations in which we win the presidency don't result in full control.
I think barring an economic collapse Trump can be stopped. The problem is what if somehow they stop him themselves and nominate someone else. Trump could go third party and hand us the election, but there's also a situation in which he doesn't and the media sells this other Republican nominee as a return to normalcy. Which would be very dangerous. Because of course Trump was never the problem; he's a symptom of the problem.
“As I travel the country, it becomes clear to me that so many people in these state legislatures don’t even know how women’s bodies work.” It’s depressing because it’s so fucking true.”
Yep. US Sex and Reproductive education is all about not getting diseases and abstinence. Oh and I guess something about showering and using deodorant. But it says very little about reproductive health or pregnancy. I talked to a lot of mothers who don’t know what is an ectopic pregnancy.
BTWs Those 6 week fetal tissue pictures at scale were amazing. Imagery like that should be used more imo by the pro-choicers. Force people to confront the stupid.
I thought I could no longer be shocked by Republican nefarious moves but that Cotham was a plant surprised me. Curious if she had a primary opponent and how she was vetted by the Democratic Party.
I guess let the record here show that I am more jaded. Let's hope that doesn't have any correlation with accuracy of predictions about the future in this country.
It doesn't surprise me at all. And I'm sure they'll argue that it's Democrats' responsibility to vet her, not her responsibility to not be a fraud. Which is true but it's a massive escalation in political tactics. Might be hard for us to do the same in return, since they're more of a cult so I think it takes more to verify that someone is one of their own. Also if the Democrats did this the person would be assassinated. At least now people should be a little less quick to call us crazy or say we're overreacting when we raise the alarm about what Republicans are doing.
Someone should let Trump know where he can find some of that election fraud he's always looking for, because if running for election under a false flag isn't fraudulent, I don't know what is.
Trump loves fraud. He's an expert at it. He'd be very proud of this North Carolina scheme and everyone who was involved in pulling it off. Would be, if he ever paid attention to anything which doesn't directly involve himself. Which he doesn't. Also he's kind of busy with multiple criminal indictments, both those already filed against him and those which are to be filed soon. Georgia should charge him by the end of August, and I suspect the special prosecutor would like to file charges related to January 6th before we get too deep into election season.
It's an escalation for sure. The question is whether every escalation increases the chances that the situation in this country will not be resolved peacefully.
Has Santos actually voted the wrong way for them on any issue? I have barely followed that story at all; all I know is we should have won those New York Biden districts.
As for RFK Jr. I know very little about him, other than that he's nothing but trouble.
I think he’s stuck to the script- but I suspect he’s lost that seat for the Republicans for twenty years.
(And he’s also provided the Democrats with someone they can point to as as far more unqualified and ridiculous than anyone the Republicans try to beat them up over.)
I don’t see anything else as a viable option so i hope the progressive message on abortion can be overwhelming positive in tone. And fun. And joyous. We are protecting women. And all pregnant people -- including kids and teens. And people who could be become pregnant. And anyone who cares about or needs them in their lives. And that’s like ... a LOT of people. And how fucking cool is that?!
Protecting is the key word. It means there's an aggressor; and there is. Forced pregnancy is state violence against women's bodies. The other side is much more willing and likely to resort to violence. Gun policy, disputes over policing, defense of abusers. Mass shooters also tend to much more closely fit the profile of a Republican than of a Democrat. But January 6th is the clearest harbinger of what's to come. I don't see anything that's working to deescalate the situation.
What's interesting about "Meta" and abortion issues... I had posted a video about an actual c-section from YouTube and it was taken down as violating their rules. An actual procedure that is done to around 30% of US women is apparently too graphic but not images from anti-abortion groups. Doesn't pass the smell test. If women can endure a c-section and that procedure is common, how is it too graphic to be seen, but not abortion propaganda.
I often wonder about this, too. I tried to call a couple of SC "justices" assholes on IG a couple of weeks ago, and they wouldn't let me post it. But every troll-dude-bro on earth can troll and call women much worse, and nothing happens to them. I think it's tied to how much money they spend with Meta on advertising.
Spaceforce not moving to Alabama - along with abortion rights, that also might be because Tuberville is holding up military promotions. In fact, that is a more likely reason.
It’s also because Space Command wants to stay in Colorado. And because Trump’s original decision was political. He was punishing Colorado for not voting for him in 2020, and made that pretty damned clear to the former Republican mayor of Colorado Springs.
It drives me bonkers that democrats can't shout, "The whole proposed move from CO to AL was political," (because it was), but somehow Biden is "punishing" Alabama now. Why is messaging so fucking hard for Dems? I'd say we can't control what the media reports, but the right manages to relay their messages by saying the same things over and over and over and over and over again. End of rant.
I’ve been talking about how poorly Democrats handle messaging for decades.
You’d think that by now, they could have figured out that they need to handle messaging with the same discipline that Republicans do. It makes me want to scream.
Republicans have always been greater believers in authoritarianism, so monotone conformity probably comes more naturally to them. It's not something liberals naturally do well; it takes training.
Zach,
Agreed. But Democrats have had *decades* to do that training. And they haven’t.
makes sense.
That letter from the Idaho FC to the hospital was chilling.
This situation regarding access to reproductive care is really untenable in the long term - in one state, access to care is a state Constitutional right and in the state next door it's a felony. This disparity cannot continue.
Yes, exactly. Tensions will continue to build until something more dramatic happens. It's like a fault line that causes an earthquake. You know it's there but you can never say quite when and where it will happen.
I’ve been following the Space Commsnd, because I live in Colorado Springs.
The hypocrisy of the Republicans on the issue is startling in its nakedness. Our former Republican Mayor asked Trump - who, btw, says the decision to move it to Alabama was entirely his - relayed this story back in March of this year. Trump came to the Sprungs for a rally in 2020, and Mayor Suthers made his case for leaving Space Command here.
“ The mayor greeted Trump on the tarmac when his plane arrived, and took the chance to make his argument to keep the headquarters in Colorado Springs. Suthers said Trump asked him if he was Republican. Suthers confirmed he was and then Trump asked what his chances were of carrying Colorado in November. Suthers replied “uncertain,” which he said seemed to perturb Trump.
Suthers then recalled that when a high-ranking officer in the Space Force affirmed that the command should stay in the city, Trump said he’d make the decision after the 2020 election. “I want to see how it turns out,” Suthers said Trump said.”
Trump announced the decision to move the command to Alabama on January 13, 2021, a week before he left office.
More details here, from March:
https://www.cpr.org/2023/03/24/president-trump-colorado-springs-mayor-space-command-decision/
Just dropped from Kansas City Clarity: Satan's Cheerleaders Defend Planned Parenthood
https://youtu.be/w5vhnjZ92c4
With the Trump Supremos about to consider clinic buffer zones, I think it's more important than ever to not let assholes - excuse me, "sidewalk counselors" get away with harassing people. If they can force their message on patients, we can force ours on them.
Wow what a simple counter attack. Brilliant. Good for you. 👍🥰
Hi mom. Ok if I call u that? I just watched the clip. Pretty cool, but I could have done without the whistle. Are you in the clip?
They don't like the whistles much either. That's why we use them. Also whistles are less likely to provoke noise complaints involving the police than other kinds of noisemakers, but we've also used tambourines, maracas, and other percussion instruments.
Know what they REALLY don't like? Cowbells. Know what our response to that is? "More COWBELL!"
I'm not in this one. That's my sister sitting in the chair. She's been doing this since the '80s and roped me into helping when I retired in 2019. I'm in my 70s and in less than optimal health, so I can't be there as often as I might like, although being retired allows me to provide coverage during the week when everybody else is working. Always there in spirit and do my best to publicize our efforts and recruit new defenders.
If you look back a couple of months, there's a KC Clarity video called "Orange Vest Clowns" that features an extended interview with me. (I'm the old guy)
Hi again. Sorry about the mom bit. I assumed. To quote Benny Hill, when u assume, you can make an ass out of u and me. Sorry to hear about your health. I'm 66 and in fairly good health. I'm a big advocate of walking. I started tracking in March of last year and am a bit over 3 and a half million steps. I'm at a loss why cowbells work so well. I'll recheck the video and check on the one you mentioned. Hope your health improves.
Yes we'll need to re-strategize on clinic security if (i.e. when) the court strikes down buffer zone laws. If only clinics were as well funded as the damn anti-abortion centers.
They deal with it here by simply posting the entire property as no-tresspassing. Only patients and staff are allowed on the property. So things shouldn't change too much unless they also strike down no-tresspassing laws. (which nobody expects to happen)
Yes, siting and construction matter. The issue is how close anyone has to get to public property to access the clinic. Some clinics may need remodels, and that's expensive. These people will find any way to attack that they can.
Hi Zach. Did u check out the clip above? The whistle was quite annoying. Using that would not only annoy the bastards, but would probably drown tthem out too. By the way, your comments were quite inciteful. Good job.
What's tragic about the North Carolina story is this is not a change that can be easily undone. Democrats would need the trifecta at the federal level to override North Carolina law (just as for every other anti-abortion state), and that's difficult due to the constitution (Senate in particular). The only way to reverse it at the state level is to get a Democratic trifecta in state government, which is far far less likely than the federal trifecta, or to get a Democratic majority on the state supreme court and have them declare that abortion is a categorically protected right. That second option is more realistic but will also take many years. So it's just massive massive damage that's been done to the women of North Carolina. I'm curious what the fallout will ultimately be at the state level.
The GOP is already way ahead of us on the Constitution. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/gop-spends-big-in-state-level-effort-to-change-u-s-constitution
My state (SC) has already voted to have a convention. One of many reasons state-level elections and flips from red-to-blue are so important right now. As soon as they have the state houses they need, they’ll call a Constitutional Convention. And we’re done.
This could absolutely happen in our lifetimes, Zach. And we on the left should be mounting a similar movement to make the Constitution work for a multi-racial 21st century democracy.
Yes, if we get a new constitution it's not going to be exclusively on their terms. We're not filling it with provisions opposed by large majorities of the population (at least not unless those provisions are backed by vast amounts of wealth). Otherwise at that point we do break up the country.
It can be done, at the state level anyway. But it’s likely to take at least as long to do that as it took for the Republicans to do it. Figure 40-50 years.
I’m not sure it can be done on the federal level as long as the filibuster remains in the Senate. And the danger in getting rid of that is greater than the danger of keeping that.
It has to be done on the federal level precisely because of how difficult it is to do at the state level. It would be like having waited for the Confederate states to decide on their own to end slavery.
As for the filibuster, if the Republicans ever have control they will be certain to eliminate it if there is legislation they want to pass. The Senate is already a very heavy lift because the median seat is several points more Republican than the country as a whole since each state gets two senators. With the filibuster, it's almost guaranteed that no legislation can EVER be passed at the federal level. I say almost because it would be possible for Republicans to get 60 Senate seats, far more possible than for Democrats. Remember that Hillary got more votes but Trump won 30 states in 2016. I would prefer a whole new constitution, but, barring that, the filibuster has to go (or at the very very least be reformed from what it is now). Even then the composition of the Senate is so blatantly unfair that it makes a mockery of democracy. No other country has an upper house that is both so unrepresentative and granted such wide powers.
If we have to wait several decades to restore basic human rights to women in this country, we might as well step in front of a bus.
Zach, I hear you. But.
What’s your absolutely worst nightmare bill Republicans can think of? Get rid of the filibuster and it’ll become realty so fast it’ll make your head spin.
With the filibuster, it’s what used to be called a Mexican standoff - both sides equally armed such that no strategy exists to allow either side victory. The Republicans are just as afraid as the Democrats to let that go. They know if they eliminate the filibuster, if the Democrats have control of the Senate, they can do whatever they like. That’s why, at least thus far, there’s more discussion about filibuster carve-outs. When judicial appointments became too unwieldy, there was a carve-out.
Yes, the Senate is inherently undemocratic. So is the Electoral College. At the time the government was created, those things, and the abhorrent 3/5 rule were the only way to get the southern states on board. The Founders didn’t think 13 separate counties would be able to survive on their own - and they were right about that. Now, tossing the structure of the government would be hard - we don’t have enough power to get through a Constitutional Convention without ending up with an autocracy.
One of the other problems I have is the size of the House. There are 650 members of the UK House of Commons. Their population is under 70 million. Our representatives cannot really be in responsive to the issues, concerns and opinions with as many constituents as there are in each district. I think once you get past about 100,000 people per district, the representatives are too remote to really understand their constituency- and that makes the parties too strong in their selection of not only who runs, but what policies and issues matter. A larger House would almost inevitably open the system up to more parties.
The thing is, Zach - it *is* going to take a long time to restore abortion rights. That’s why I keep harping on patience. Either half the SCOTUS needs to resign while a Democrat is in the White House, or we have to win 60 Senate seats, more than half the House, and the White House all at once. And even if we do that, the next time the wheel turns and we lose that control, whatever we did can be undone.
To get a Constitutional Amendment, rather than just passing a law that can be decreed unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, or overturned by the next Congress, we need to have 3/4 of the states. They each have their own rules, but by and large, it means having a very large majority of each of the state legislatures.
At this point, we need to pass amendments to each state’s constitution, or a federal amendment. Either way, we have to work at the state level.
I'll be blunt, and I hope you don't think it's rude. The process you are talking about, it will be impossible for it to come to fruition in your lifetime. I'm not even sure it could happen in my lifetime (I'm 45). If that means the system is hopelessly broken, then it's hopelessly broken. The other side is ready to put militias in the streets, and we have a lot more to legitimately complain about than they do. I just don't think the country can tolerate this state of affairs a lot longer. And I really don't want to see widespread political violence.
I think if the Democrats get the opportunity, they will scrap the filibuster for at least some legislation. Abortion rights would be one such bill. Democrats also realize the constitutional deck is stacked so heavily against them that they'll want to do election reform, voting rights, and add states. It will be one swing for the fences because they know it may be the last chance.
If Republicans win (all three) in 2024, democracy is effectively ended. It will be similar to when the Nazi Party came to power in Germany in 1933. (I'm not saying the next twelve years will follow the same path). They know they're unpopular and that's why their followers favor autocracy. There would most likely be bills to stifle dissent; they'll want to silence or detain academics, activists, journalists, creative types. Someone like Jessica would be at great risk if she stayed in the country. I don't think this is an overstatement. They would have contested the election running on a fascist platform, and won on that platform. If we think they're bad now imagine what happens when they're validated. And they would have to find their way around the federal judiciary if it tried to stop them. It would be too good of an opportunity for the MAGAts to pass up.
Most likely we'll get a split decision. A Democratic president, a Republican Senate, and the House could go either way. I don't know how much violence that would spark from their side but we'd have to contain it. We'd go on much like we are now, although Biden (or another Dem) would not be able to make any appointments anymore, judicial or otherwise. The citizens of the red states would still be enslaved, and the tensions in this country would continue to build. And we'd have to reassess the future path in subsequent elections.
If things get bad enough it might start a serious movement for a new constitution. But that would be full of danger as well as opportunity, and it's such a big change that it's very unlikely until it seems like there are no other options (other than civil war).
Zach,
I don’t disagree with you - in fact, we agree on a lot.
The scrapping of the filibuster for some legislation you talk about is exactly what I meant when I talked about carve-outs. Of course the carve-outs put in place for judicial appointments are also how we ended up with the Trump justices on SCOTUS, and the heavily rightward tilt of the circuit courts. But the Democrats felt they had no choice but to put in a carve-out for all presidential appointments (except SCOTUS nods) because the Republicans were stonewalling on Obama’s nominations in 2013. McConnell of course, extended this carve-out to Supreme Court Justices in 2017 to get Gorsuch in - and said it was the Democrats’ fault because they used the nuclear option first.
I agree that we will probably have a split government, but I’m very concerned about the presidential race. If, gods & little green fishes forbid, a Republican takes the WH, they might run the board.
And then we’re all screwed.
I agree that a Constitutional Convention is the last step - but I think it’s just as likely to lead to a war as to prevent one.
Yes, that last paragraph. Although it might be a chicken-and-egg situation.
Most Americans don't want a war. But there is a sizable minority of the population with a LOT of guns. The bigger question is what those we rely on to keep the peace would do; law enforcement and military skew more Republican than the rest of the population.
The problem with the election is the presidential race is by far the hardest of the trifecta for them. That means if they win that, they're almost guaranteed to have full control. Whereas most situations in which we win the presidency don't result in full control.
I think barring an economic collapse Trump can be stopped. The problem is what if somehow they stop him themselves and nominate someone else. Trump could go third party and hand us the election, but there's also a situation in which he doesn't and the media sells this other Republican nominee as a return to normalcy. Which would be very dangerous. Because of course Trump was never the problem; he's a symptom of the problem.
Covid may have been a blessing if it provides a model for how to deal with abortion on social media.
“As I travel the country, it becomes clear to me that so many people in these state legislatures don’t even know how women’s bodies work.” It’s depressing because it’s so fucking true.”
Yep. US Sex and Reproductive education is all about not getting diseases and abstinence. Oh and I guess something about showering and using deodorant. But it says very little about reproductive health or pregnancy. I talked to a lot of mothers who don’t know what is an ectopic pregnancy.
BTWs Those 6 week fetal tissue pictures at scale were amazing. Imagery like that should be used more imo by the pro-choicers. Force people to confront the stupid.
Me again! I just read the entire thread again. Your line about deodorant was the only thing that made me smile.
That last sentence is the story of this country in a nutshell.
I thought I could no longer be shocked by Republican nefarious moves but that Cotham was a plant surprised me. Curious if she had a primary opponent and how she was vetted by the Democratic Party.
It managed to even shock me! And I'm pretty jaded!
I guess let the record here show that I am more jaded. Let's hope that doesn't have any correlation with accuracy of predictions about the future in this country.
It doesn't surprise me at all. And I'm sure they'll argue that it's Democrats' responsibility to vet her, not her responsibility to not be a fraud. Which is true but it's a massive escalation in political tactics. Might be hard for us to do the same in return, since they're more of a cult so I think it takes more to verify that someone is one of their own. Also if the Democrats did this the person would be assassinated. At least now people should be a little less quick to call us crazy or say we're overreacting when we raise the alarm about what Republicans are doing.
Someone should let Trump know where he can find some of that election fraud he's always looking for, because if running for election under a false flag isn't fraudulent, I don't know what is.
Trump loves fraud. He's an expert at it. He'd be very proud of this North Carolina scheme and everyone who was involved in pulling it off. Would be, if he ever paid attention to anything which doesn't directly involve himself. Which he doesn't. Also he's kind of busy with multiple criminal indictments, both those already filed against him and those which are to be filed soon. Georgia should charge him by the end of August, and I suspect the special prosecutor would like to file charges related to January 6th before we get too deep into election season.
Between her and George Santos we have some serious vetting issues on our hands. This will not be the last time this happens.
Hi Anon. We must be on the same wavelength. Mr. I'm Jew-ish popped into my head too.
It's an escalation for sure. The question is whether every escalation increases the chances that the situation in this country will not be resolved peacefully.
Zach,
I hear you, but Santos was a mistake in vetting on the Republican side, so they aren’t bullet-proof on this.
I’m concerned about the stalking horse known as RFK, Jr.
Has Santos actually voted the wrong way for them on any issue? I have barely followed that story at all; all I know is we should have won those New York Biden districts.
As for RFK Jr. I know very little about him, other than that he's nothing but trouble.
I think he’s stuck to the script- but I suspect he’s lost that seat for the Republicans for twenty years.
(And he’s also provided the Democrats with someone they can point to as as far more unqualified and ridiculous than anyone the Republicans try to beat them up over.)
I don’t see anything else as a viable option so i hope the progressive message on abortion can be overwhelming positive in tone. And fun. And joyous. We are protecting women. And all pregnant people -- including kids and teens. And people who could be become pregnant. And anyone who cares about or needs them in their lives. And that’s like ... a LOT of people. And how fucking cool is that?!
Protecting is the key word. It means there's an aggressor; and there is. Forced pregnancy is state violence against women's bodies. The other side is much more willing and likely to resort to violence. Gun policy, disputes over policing, defense of abusers. Mass shooters also tend to much more closely fit the profile of a Republican than of a Democrat. But January 6th is the clearest harbinger of what's to come. I don't see anything that's working to deescalate the situation.
🤦 We've got to do better than that in a war. Let's see if Democrats learn anything from this.
Jessica, have you stopped doing an audio version?
Hi, just temporarily! Will be coming back soon, I promise :)
Audio version is less frequent due to time constraints. I know she wrote something about it a while back. I think she's trying to do it once a week?
Thanks, Zach! Yes, once a week for now though I think I may go back to daily next month after I get back from a short vacation :)
thank you