From Politico..Right wing conservatives around the world (including Trump) are using (completely made up) immigrant violence against women to rally women voters. Distracting in this country from the mess the Republicans have made of the abortion issue...
"Around the world, the far-right is using anti-immigrant rhetoric around protecting women to woo female voters. Men tend to vote more conservatively than women do, but this tactic is starting to gain some traction among women, potentially closing the political gender gap.
In France, where far-right politicians have sought to link women’s rights and safety to immigration, that’s proving to be an effective strategy. Earlier this month, Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella’s National Rally party won 33 percent of the women’s vote in this year’s Parliamentary election, outpacing 30 percent of men — a 12 percentage point increase from women voters over five years, according to an election day poll by OpinionWay.
On Sunday, French citizens will cast their ballots in the first round of voting in the snap election that will determine whether Le Pen’s party takes control of Parliament. (There will be another round of voting next month.) If the National Rally wins, Bardella, a protégé of Le Pen, could become prime minister of France, making him the leader of Parliament with Macron as president until 2027. Le Pen then could run for president against Macron in 2027.
There are parallels across the pond. Le Pen’s populist, anti-immigration rhetoric is often compared to that of former President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, the approval rating for incumbent President Emmanuel Macron is at 26 percent, mirroring that of President Joe Biden’s, at 36 percent.
Will France’s election serve as a preview for the U.S. in November?
“There could be women who have very right-wing views that will be watching [Le Pen], to see how successful and maybe they can mimic some of that same rhetoric elsewhere,” says Amanda Hunter, executive director of the Barbara Lee Foundation, a nonprofit which advocates for women’s equality and representation in politics.
During the European parliamentary elections on June 9, amidst the surge of far-right wins across the continent, Le Pen’s National Rally party sweeped the French election, crushing Macron’s Renaissance party by more than two to one. Macron responded by dissolving the National Assembly and calling for a high-risk snap vote in a last-ditch effort to prove Le Pen’s party cannot win on a national level. (Keep up with the French snap election results here.)
Throughout their campaign, Bardella and Le Pen have made a concerted effort to appeal to women, mainly through hard-hitting messages about safety and protection. Immigrants, they say, are the problem.
“There isn’t a single woman watching us tonight who, when she goes out in the streets of our country … isn’t afraid for her safety because she worries that … she will be harassed, insulted and sometimes assaulted,” by immigrants, Bardella said at a political debate in Paris Tuesday night.
Last week, Bardella posted a “message to all the women of France” on X, saying he’d be a “prime minister who guarantees the rights and freedoms of every woman and girl in France.”
He has also said he would deport “foreign delinquents and criminals” and introduce stricter sentences for violence against women.
In the U.S., the Republican Party has applied similar tactics in efforts to woo the women’s vote, mainly through the narrative that Latino immigrants commit violent crimes against women. (And typically, they showcase white women victims.)
At the State of the Union speech in March, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) wore a T-shirt emblazoned with “Say Her Name,” a reference to Laken Riley, a Georgia nursing student killed in February by a man who authorities say was an undocumented immigrant.
“Laken Riley would be alive today if Joe Biden had not willfully and maliciously eviscerated the borders of the United States and set loose thousands and thousands of dangerous criminals into our country,” Trump said.
At campaign events in April, Trump attempted to tie the death of Riley to the death of Ruby Garcia, a 25-year-old in Grand Rapids, Michigan, who was allegedly killed by Brandon Ortiz-Vite, a Mexican citizen.
Trump asserted that his administration had kicked Ortiz-Vite “out of the country and crooked Joe Biden took him back and let him back in and let him stay in and he viciously killed Ruby.”
Riley and Garcia are the latest in a string of womens’ deaths, linked to immigrant men, that have been used in Republicans’ anti-immigration policy push. Often, the victims are white and their killers are not: Kate Steinle in 2015, Sarah Root in 2016 and Mollie Tibbetts in 2018.
Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics, notes another example of this strategy in Republicans’ restrictions on transgender athletes, referencing how efforts to ban transgender girls from women’s sports teams are often angled as a precaution to protect young girl athletes.
Italy’s first female Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has employed the same strategy in her country to further her nationalist, anti-immigration policies.
After congratulating police officers for dismantling a Nigerian-run trafficking network in April 2019, Meloni said “the fight against illegal immigration involves saving trafficked women from the hands of their traffickers.”
Meloni’s party, Fratelli d'Italia, won 28.8 percent of the vote this year, up almost 3 percent from the 2022 legislative elections, and Fratelli d’Italia now intends to engage in dialogue with France's National Rally party to form majorities in the European Parliament."
I have been reading about abortion rights, as much as I have been able to daily since Dobbs. I have also seen MORE comments from Trump supporters repeating the “abortion until the moment of birth” line. I realize there’s no such thing as “after birth abortion”.
The best I have been able to understand is that abortion care given past 24-28 weeks is extremely rare and for reasons of fetal abnormalities incompatible with life or emergencies for the life of the mother, wanted pregnancies that go wrong. If someone could please explain this to me or provide a link for me to understand these situations more, I would really appreciate it. I personally do not believe the government has any moral authority to regulate or criminalize pregnancy outcomes at any time in pregnancy because it causes delays in emergency care for women. Please tell me if this is correct?
I felt so disappointed by Biden, at the same time a little sorry for him. He actually said something like “in the first trimester a woman’s doctor, HE determines is that’s the best thing depending on her circumstances”… He gave no agency to women and assumed a woman’s doctor was a ‘he’. Biden just seems so out of touch. He’s not the right person to deal with the threat of Trumpism. Trump looked his usual smug, petulant and toxic self, spewing lies but confident about it.
After working in emergency medicine and OB (although now retired), what I interpret the anti-abortion crowd means by abortions "after birth" is actually emergency care when the delivery has major complications. In that case, both neonatal or pediatric providers are there, along with one or two obstetricians. For example, if the fetal head will not pass during labor (not as typical nowadays as when there weren't ultrasounds and more accurate ways to measure fetal head size as compared to the vaginal tract) and an emergency C-section has to be done, the time delay may cause anoxia in the fetus that can cause brain damage or death. I remember one C/S emergency that went so fast the Mom was not yet fully sedated when the abdomen was cut. Both she and the infant survived. At times, for other labor emergencies, a decision has to be made as to whether the mother or the fetus has the greater chance of survival. I've seen emergency deliveries where the mother dies, and also where the fetus dies prior to or just after delivery. Those who don't understand obstetrical emergency care don't get it. What happens after, just like so many passed-on hyperbolic stories and interpretations, is when some non-medical family member, not in the OR, will assume the medical team let the newborn die, or "killed it." The politicians run with it. They don't understand medicine cannot save everyone all the time. It's why legislators/politicians have no right to make laws regarding medical care. There's already medical boards and malpractice avenues to pursue if someone feels it is warranted. Politicians cannot make medical judgement laws. That has to be an ingrained topic into this battle. Whether it's for ambiguous genitalia surgery for a child, or the right to have an abortion, politicians have absolutely no business making those decisions.
Thank you so much for your response. I’m an RN in Texas but quickly realized hospital nursing was not for me. There is so much pressure on hospital staff, especially delivery units - which I did not work thankfully. Many times people working just above poverty level are uninsured in Texas and only get care once sick enough to end up in hospitals. I have a sinking feeling this might be true of L & D, as well.
Thank you for describing some of the complications I was not aware of. People such as yourself have such a wealth of experience and have spent their whole lives becoming skilled enough to make these complicated decisions. I am trying to research when emergency abortion care might be indicated through some online sources and have read some amicus briefs in the Idaho EMTALA case which gave me some insight. Maybe I just need to buy some medical/nursing books on the topic, too. I literally have a stack of abortion rights/philosophical discussions next to get to, but I’m determined to become fully educated on this. I wish the same could be said of loudmouths like Trump who make outrageous claims disparaging people in the medical profession who deal with enough stress already.
If you have access to a medical library, many of them subscribe to the ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) Journals and online information, which includes patient education info, etc. https://www.acog.org/clinical (their website but has a paywall)
The other thing that bothers me to no end is the anti-abortion crowd using the term "abortion" for any type of emergency termination. Abortion has always been the medical term for a natural or necessary interrupted pregnancy. It gradually changed to the term more so for a woman who wanted to terminate an early pregnancy and medicine started using other medical based terms for a necessary induction for when a pregnancy was in danger and the fetus possibly would not live. Since the brainless anti-abortion crowd co-opted the term for anything that caused a fetal demise, it's made it difficult for non-medical lay-people to understand that a small percentage of pregnancies will naturally need termination and not because a woman just "didn't want to be pregnant." As you would know as a RN, one of the stupidest is when they claim an ectopic pregnancy will result in a live birth. They can tell all the "wonder of wonder" stories they want but it does not happen! The ones that get me so angry are the rabid ones who say it's okay if the mother dies during an ectopic rupture medical emergency as the fetus will then go to heaven. I'd swear off any religion beliefs if that's truly what their God was about.
The reference to a male doctor hit like a ton of bricks. Thankfully, even that early into the debate, I was already flat on my ass with disbelief that this (Biden) is what stands between us and Trump/Project 2025. And what was the part about the third trimester being between a woman and the state?? Um, no. It’s still between a woman and her doctor (who just may also be female, Joe!).
Here’s the “tell” … Trump during the debate “Under Roe v. Wade, you have late term abortion. You can do whatever you want, depending on the state. You can do whatever you want. We don’t think that’s a good thing. We think it’s a radical thing.”
He claims to want states rights, but he really doesn’t.
Additionally, the “life of the mother” “exception” should be the “health of the mother.” I’m not sure Biden can handle this, but there’s a big difference. You can save a life after a pregnant person has lost a fallopian tube and a uterus, but her health will be forever altered.
Thank you for your clarifications. It’s hard for anyone to speak calmly when hit with a firehose of lies. I’m sure Trump planned this - he is not smart but he has a low cunning that has served him well so far. “Flood the zone with shit - that’s what he does. I know that despite President Biden’s reticence in speaking strongly about abortion, he favors bodily autonomy. He needs to make that clear.
Heather Cox Richardson identified the strategy today as "Gish galloping," while I'd never heard it called that, I am gobsmacked that Biden's team couldn't prepare him for that.
Let's not forget that Ronald Regan was in full blow cognitive decline from Alzheimer for the last year or more of his administration. The GOP holds him up like a GOD. Biden needs good sound bites on the issues and then needs to make many, many public appearances - on all the news outlets. Short, practiced, competent statements of progress, prosperity and constitutional rights. Along with that, he needs an another dozen or so facts repudiating Trumps oft repeated lies. Not up for discussion - facts, exposing Trump's lies to the voters. Over, and over and over again. Just like Trump does.
Reagan was actually in the midst of dementia as he was running for his second term. He had plenty of his people hiding it from the public. Cheney effectively was the functioning president during the last four years. I would be very happy with Kamala Harris running the government if Biden wins and does decline. Political ads, and the few competent people in the news media, need to point out that Trump currently has dementia and show his decline.
Question. Does the Comstock Act only apply to U.S. mail? Would other carriers and or courier services be subject too? I realize we have to fight to keep the MAGA force from enacting this restriction, but just wondering about the specifics and a back up plan.
Unfortunately yes any services would be covered, at least if they are interstate. Not sure about within a state. I don't have a source, I just remember reading this same question and the answer somewhere else.
If I’m remembering correctly, I thought to avoid Comstock, maybe mifepristone and misoprostol could be manufactured and distributed within each state by compounding pharmacies. Does anyone know if this would be possible? I guess I need a pharmacist and a lawyer’s perspective…
Excellent question. My guess is the fact that it _could_ be transported across state lines might make it 'interstate commerce' and still subject to regulation? What are the rulings on cannabis, for example? More to the point, how would this scotus rule? And even if it did rule against the administration - er, regime I mean, would they cease and desist enforcement?
At the end of the day it's all going to come down to enforcement. Their plans involve massive rollbacks of human rights and civil liberties, and whether it succeeds depends on if people obey, and if they don't, how many of us are they able and willing to throw in jail (or execute extrajudicially)? That's what it always comes down to with authoritarianism. I think the most important thing is for people not to comply. But fear is powerful, and no one wants to be the first to break the law.
I'm trying to be mentally prepared as best I can for this reality now, rather than panicking on January 20th. We're going to need people who are calm and wise and courageous, whose lead we can follow.
I'm pretty sure this came up with cannabis. A state said it was only grown and consumed within the state, but the government argued it still affects interstate commerce (and just like the medication and OBGYN instruments ! 🤦 the items would be illegal in other states and under federal law). Because the legal question just becomes can congress regulate it or not. So long as Comstock is on the books, and the administration intends to enforce it, I'm not sure the courts would rule that activity within state boundaries is exempt. It tends to come back to being a political question, because lawyers can make good-enough arguments to judges either way, as we've seen with recent supreme court decisions, where reasoning that doesn't get accepted in one scenario gets accepted in another, the only difference seeming to be ideological preference on the issue at hand. So if the question is how do these nine rule, I don't know. But I wouldn't be optimistic.
On both the mifepristone and EMTALA cases, the Supreme Court gave republicans cover to lie to low information voters, trump took full advantage, and Biden utterly failed us. The media has been complicit with misleading headlines about the pills or emergency abortion being “saved” making trumps job easier and ours harder. Last night’s disaster makes me physically ill. Biden’s team pulling him and claiming illness could hardly have been worse than sending him in so hoarse and still and deal looking. I don’t think the Democratic Party leadership has the will to save us, if indeed it isn’t too late. My mantra, repeated to anyone who will listen is: “You don’t elect a person, you elect an administration.” And Biden has a competent team that understands policy whereas trump has the MAGA clown car.
Yes, exactly. It doesn't matter nearly as much as people think who the head of the administration is. So the arguments for changing the candidate are stronger than the arguments for keeping him. But yes you're right we're looking for leadership.
One huge issue we need people to understand is the antiabortion use of "late term abortion" and the medical miscarriage/pregnancy related emergency use of "late term" differ greatly. "Late term" in obstetrics refers to a pregnancy post 40 weeks. (Trump's horrific lie about abortions up to 40 weeks and after. DOES. NOT. HAPPEN.) "Late term" should not be used related to the termination of a pregnancy because the actual medical term related to a pregnancy causes confusion--the confusion is absolutely intentional. Instead, we all need to help people understand the false use of the term and stop using it. Instead help people understand how infrequently abortions occur further in a pregnancy. (13-26 weeks is the 2nd trimester). Only 7.7% of abortions are between weeks 14 and 20. 1.2% happen at or after 21 weeks and those are not occurring because the pregnant individual sinly waited a long time to decide--these occur because of a medical issues for the mother and/or fatal fetal anomalies/medical conditions for the fetus. There are almost no pregnancy terminations in the third trimester.
Pres. Biden is an 80+ year old devout Catholic. He's never going to be the passionate fighter for abortion rates like Jessica here and other feminists. I honestly just wish he'd frame it and talk about it solely as an issue of freedom (which is what he was trying to do despite the additional garbled info). But he would also sign ANY protections that a Democratic Congress sent him, even if that went further than Roe. So I don't see we have any choice, if we care about this issue (or a whole host of others honestly...the felon is unacceptable).
I would agree 100% with the “Biden is toast!” contingent - if he were running against anyone except Donald Trump. I think some folks may be underestimating the American people’s desire to not be governed by a psychopath.
But shame on anyone spreading Republican framing. And double shame on anyone who abandons Joe Biden after everything he’s done for you. I don’t even LIKE Joe Biden and didn’t vote for him, but I’m absolutely appalled at the ingratitude. Biden has been FAR better than my cynical old ass ever expected. I’ve been forced to pay him grudging respect any number of times.
But you know what REALLY burns me? Letting Donald Trump push you around and bully you into changing candidates. He’s got to be laughing his ass off at how easy this was..Tell Donald Trump AND his enablers to take a hike.
Remember (and I can’t believe I’m saying this) Roger Stone? “Fuck you! WE win!” Yield nothing. Don’t give an inch. Ever.
Yes, there is so much we could learn from the GOP/MAGA play book. Never roll over, never say uncle, never give up. "Fuck you. We're the answer. We're the hope for a better America. We are the way to progress and prosperity, Keep the faith. The alternative is a vengeful dictator who doesn't hesitate to take away your rights and freedoms. Vote Blue. Vote Biden." Fight fire with fire, do what MAGA does.
I think accepting it as Republican framing is exactly the trap Republicans want us to fall into. These guys are psychopaths but they're devious as fuck. They have a plan for winning the election, it's working, and they have no desire to see us throw a wrench into it.
The GOP "think" their plan is working. I honestly believe women have this one. They know Kamala is there if something happens to Biden. Many women may not be vocal about it, especially on the GOP female side, but women are not happy about losing rights and adequate obstetrical health care. Talk to every woman you know and offer to take them to vote if necessary, especially the older women who may need transportation to vote. They understand what is was like prior to Roe. They still care. GOTV.
If Biden is elected and then doesn’t make it a full term, I’ll get to see the first black woman president. I’m totally on board for that. If Trump and whatever cowardly sycophant he picks for VP are elected, I’ll be watching the accelerated slide from democracy to dictatorship/theocracy. Biden could have had a stroke on live TV, I’m still voting blue.
OMG my spouse told me Biden has a speech impediment. Stuttering. I didn’t know. Oh goodness I believe stress makes it worse. Jeepers! I’m not defending his poor performance but I now know why sometimes he fumbles over words. Am I the only one who didn’t know that? I had a lisp when I was young and had speech therapy to correct it. 😕
It's okay to be scared as fu*k right now, but we (I) need to put this in perspective. I really appreciated this from Gavin Newsom last night in response to a question about all the panic setting in after the debate: Gavin Newsom: “well, I think it’s unhelpful, and I think it’s unnecessary. we’ve got to go in, we’ve got to keep our heads high — and as I say, we’ve got to have the back of this president. you don’t turn your back because of one performance. what kind of party does that? it’s been a master class. 50.6 million jobs. that eight times more than the last three Republican presidents combined. the only thing the last three Republican presidents have in common is recessions. Democrats delivered. this president has delivered. we need to deliver for him, at this moment. with all due respect, the more time we start having these conversations go down these rabbit holes, it’s unhelpful to our democracy, the fate and future of this country, and the world. they need us right now to step up, and that’s exactly what I intend to do.”
As you said, Jessica, and THANK YOU FOR SAYING THIS: "But I also know what’s done is done; so I’m giving myself a few hours to freak out, and then I’m getting back to work. Because the alternative is unthinkable." The alternative IS unthinkable so I'll keep doing what I can to prevent it. I couldn't live with myself if I stopped. 💕🙏
I am surprised by MSNBC's coverage last night and this morning going full throat about replacing Biden. McCaskill was visibly angry and raging (her blinking eyes are so irritating). I agree with what Gavin Newsom said. Whatever panic we feel is not helpful and is unnecessary and the silver lining is that trump has not suddenly become more acceptable. Understandably people are nervous for a repeat of 2016. But we just have to redouble our efforts to get out the votes. I hope the campaign gets a rude awakening from this. IMHO they didn't serve Biden well and prepped him for a different debate than the one with a serial liar. And, why did CNN take more than 30 minutes to get to the most important stuff like his big lie, insurrection, his conviction and so on. The irony of the times is that we have a fabulous deep bench of young and dynamic Democrats and here we are stuck with these two (I would love a Harris presidency but let us be honest, this country shamefully is not ready for that now more than ever). But Biden has been a good president (old but still with all his marbles more than the other guy) and we honor his work through our support and not weaken him further.
Remember that Newsom wants the job. Of course he said what he said. He's smart enough to know not to stab Biden in the back. It would be completely counterproductive to his goals. What he wants is to be able to gracefully thank the president for his 50+ years of service to this country, and then to move forward.
Newsome will be there in 4 years, possibly as a VP candidate first, but I don't think he in any way is trying to move in for this next cycle. If anything medical does happen to cause Biden to back out, he may volunteer to be Harris's VP choice.
Newsom is also contemplating that he will be the chief executive of the state poised to be the biggest source of opposition to the regime. Hopefully he and his staff are war gaming that, because the Republicans are coming ready to sideline every blue state government.
He can't be the VP unless one of them establishes residence in another state, otherwise California can't cast its electoral votes for both of them.
If the Republicans win this election, there is very serious question whether we have free and fair elections going forward. Having planned this for decades, they are very unlikely to give power back at the ballot box without doing everything possible to thwart it. So it would be irresponsible for any Democrat to be thinking about 2026 or 2028.
A 2028 election won't happen if the GOP takes power, except in the most nominal sense.
Today's SCOTUS decision taking a sledgehammer to the doctrine of Chevron deference means that California is going to matter a lot going forward. If federal regulatory agencies are so weakened, then it's going to be up to the states that can lead to do so. God help those of us in red states, who are doomed to live in polluted, theocratic oligarchies.
Yes, and I would be OK with a president Newsom. However, this cycle, it may too disruptive to change horses mid race. No? If it were not for having Harris on the ticket, I don't think Biden would have run.
And at this point Harris is a much better shot than Biden. Still an underdog, probably, but not by nearly as much as Biden is now. But it doesn't absolutely have to be Harris either.
Staying the course is a higher risk than making a change. We're thisclose to a fascist dictatorship. It's an emergency, and disruptive is exactly what we need. And the polls should confirm this over the next month.
Last night was bad. Real bad. I suspect Biden’s advisors spent too much time throwing the book at him and not enough time letting him rest. The man is 81 and handling the presidency very well - but that’s an exhausting job even for someone who is in their physical prime. And Biden has a history of nervous stuttering and honestly has never been a great debater.
I was definitely left with a sick feeling after the debate thinking about how the media and others would cover this. But we have to recognize that very few people are swayed by debates and this debate is absurdly early in the cycle. There is zero chance he’s going to step down but there is time to recover.
. I would vote for Biden if he was half dead. I’d vote for Biden if he died and came back as a vampire. Bc when the alternative is Trump/the modern Republican Party, there is no alternative. Democrats and sane Republicans have to keep making this clear. Holding your nose to vote for someone who is too old but who will fight for everything you care about (reproductive rights, gun control, saving the planet, affordable housing, healthcare, affordable childcare, a pluralistic society) is in no way comparable to voting for a racist, bigoted, treasonous, immoral felon who cares only about accumulating power to protect himself.
There were two choices before the debate and there’s still only two choices today. I’ll take comfort in”holding my nose” to vote for a decent old fart who’s got my back while Republicans convince themselves voting for their immoral, dictatorial orange clown of a felon is somehow “presidential” material.
From Politico..Right wing conservatives around the world (including Trump) are using (completely made up) immigrant violence against women to rally women voters. Distracting in this country from the mess the Republicans have made of the abortion issue...
"Around the world, the far-right is using anti-immigrant rhetoric around protecting women to woo female voters. Men tend to vote more conservatively than women do, but this tactic is starting to gain some traction among women, potentially closing the political gender gap.
In France, where far-right politicians have sought to link women’s rights and safety to immigration, that’s proving to be an effective strategy. Earlier this month, Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella’s National Rally party won 33 percent of the women’s vote in this year’s Parliamentary election, outpacing 30 percent of men — a 12 percentage point increase from women voters over five years, according to an election day poll by OpinionWay.
On Sunday, French citizens will cast their ballots in the first round of voting in the snap election that will determine whether Le Pen’s party takes control of Parliament. (There will be another round of voting next month.) If the National Rally wins, Bardella, a protégé of Le Pen, could become prime minister of France, making him the leader of Parliament with Macron as president until 2027. Le Pen then could run for president against Macron in 2027.
There are parallels across the pond. Le Pen’s populist, anti-immigration rhetoric is often compared to that of former President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, the approval rating for incumbent President Emmanuel Macron is at 26 percent, mirroring that of President Joe Biden’s, at 36 percent.
Will France’s election serve as a preview for the U.S. in November?
“There could be women who have very right-wing views that will be watching [Le Pen], to see how successful and maybe they can mimic some of that same rhetoric elsewhere,” says Amanda Hunter, executive director of the Barbara Lee Foundation, a nonprofit which advocates for women’s equality and representation in politics.
During the European parliamentary elections on June 9, amidst the surge of far-right wins across the continent, Le Pen’s National Rally party sweeped the French election, crushing Macron’s Renaissance party by more than two to one. Macron responded by dissolving the National Assembly and calling for a high-risk snap vote in a last-ditch effort to prove Le Pen’s party cannot win on a national level. (Keep up with the French snap election results here.)
Throughout their campaign, Bardella and Le Pen have made a concerted effort to appeal to women, mainly through hard-hitting messages about safety and protection. Immigrants, they say, are the problem.
“There isn’t a single woman watching us tonight who, when she goes out in the streets of our country … isn’t afraid for her safety because she worries that … she will be harassed, insulted and sometimes assaulted,” by immigrants, Bardella said at a political debate in Paris Tuesday night.
Last week, Bardella posted a “message to all the women of France” on X, saying he’d be a “prime minister who guarantees the rights and freedoms of every woman and girl in France.”
He has also said he would deport “foreign delinquents and criminals” and introduce stricter sentences for violence against women.
In the U.S., the Republican Party has applied similar tactics in efforts to woo the women’s vote, mainly through the narrative that Latino immigrants commit violent crimes against women. (And typically, they showcase white women victims.)
At the State of the Union speech in March, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) wore a T-shirt emblazoned with “Say Her Name,” a reference to Laken Riley, a Georgia nursing student killed in February by a man who authorities say was an undocumented immigrant.
“Laken Riley would be alive today if Joe Biden had not willfully and maliciously eviscerated the borders of the United States and set loose thousands and thousands of dangerous criminals into our country,” Trump said.
At campaign events in April, Trump attempted to tie the death of Riley to the death of Ruby Garcia, a 25-year-old in Grand Rapids, Michigan, who was allegedly killed by Brandon Ortiz-Vite, a Mexican citizen.
Trump asserted that his administration had kicked Ortiz-Vite “out of the country and crooked Joe Biden took him back and let him back in and let him stay in and he viciously killed Ruby.”
Riley and Garcia are the latest in a string of womens’ deaths, linked to immigrant men, that have been used in Republicans’ anti-immigration policy push. Often, the victims are white and their killers are not: Kate Steinle in 2015, Sarah Root in 2016 and Mollie Tibbetts in 2018.
Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics, notes another example of this strategy in Republicans’ restrictions on transgender athletes, referencing how efforts to ban transgender girls from women’s sports teams are often angled as a precaution to protect young girl athletes.
Italy’s first female Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has employed the same strategy in her country to further her nationalist, anti-immigration policies.
After congratulating police officers for dismantling a Nigerian-run trafficking network in April 2019, Meloni said “the fight against illegal immigration involves saving trafficked women from the hands of their traffickers.”
Meloni’s party, Fratelli d'Italia, won 28.8 percent of the vote this year, up almost 3 percent from the 2022 legislative elections, and Fratelli d’Italia now intends to engage in dialogue with France's National Rally party to form majorities in the European Parliament."
Sigh.
I have been reading about abortion rights, as much as I have been able to daily since Dobbs. I have also seen MORE comments from Trump supporters repeating the “abortion until the moment of birth” line. I realize there’s no such thing as “after birth abortion”.
The best I have been able to understand is that abortion care given past 24-28 weeks is extremely rare and for reasons of fetal abnormalities incompatible with life or emergencies for the life of the mother, wanted pregnancies that go wrong. If someone could please explain this to me or provide a link for me to understand these situations more, I would really appreciate it. I personally do not believe the government has any moral authority to regulate or criminalize pregnancy outcomes at any time in pregnancy because it causes delays in emergency care for women. Please tell me if this is correct?
I felt so disappointed by Biden, at the same time a little sorry for him. He actually said something like “in the first trimester a woman’s doctor, HE determines is that’s the best thing depending on her circumstances”… He gave no agency to women and assumed a woman’s doctor was a ‘he’. Biden just seems so out of touch. He’s not the right person to deal with the threat of Trumpism. Trump looked his usual smug, petulant and toxic self, spewing lies but confident about it.
After working in emergency medicine and OB (although now retired), what I interpret the anti-abortion crowd means by abortions "after birth" is actually emergency care when the delivery has major complications. In that case, both neonatal or pediatric providers are there, along with one or two obstetricians. For example, if the fetal head will not pass during labor (not as typical nowadays as when there weren't ultrasounds and more accurate ways to measure fetal head size as compared to the vaginal tract) and an emergency C-section has to be done, the time delay may cause anoxia in the fetus that can cause brain damage or death. I remember one C/S emergency that went so fast the Mom was not yet fully sedated when the abdomen was cut. Both she and the infant survived. At times, for other labor emergencies, a decision has to be made as to whether the mother or the fetus has the greater chance of survival. I've seen emergency deliveries where the mother dies, and also where the fetus dies prior to or just after delivery. Those who don't understand obstetrical emergency care don't get it. What happens after, just like so many passed-on hyperbolic stories and interpretations, is when some non-medical family member, not in the OR, will assume the medical team let the newborn die, or "killed it." The politicians run with it. They don't understand medicine cannot save everyone all the time. It's why legislators/politicians have no right to make laws regarding medical care. There's already medical boards and malpractice avenues to pursue if someone feels it is warranted. Politicians cannot make medical judgement laws. That has to be an ingrained topic into this battle. Whether it's for ambiguous genitalia surgery for a child, or the right to have an abortion, politicians have absolutely no business making those decisions.
Thank you so much for your response. I’m an RN in Texas but quickly realized hospital nursing was not for me. There is so much pressure on hospital staff, especially delivery units - which I did not work thankfully. Many times people working just above poverty level are uninsured in Texas and only get care once sick enough to end up in hospitals. I have a sinking feeling this might be true of L & D, as well.
Thank you for describing some of the complications I was not aware of. People such as yourself have such a wealth of experience and have spent their whole lives becoming skilled enough to make these complicated decisions. I am trying to research when emergency abortion care might be indicated through some online sources and have read some amicus briefs in the Idaho EMTALA case which gave me some insight. Maybe I just need to buy some medical/nursing books on the topic, too. I literally have a stack of abortion rights/philosophical discussions next to get to, but I’m determined to become fully educated on this. I wish the same could be said of loudmouths like Trump who make outrageous claims disparaging people in the medical profession who deal with enough stress already.
If you have access to a medical library, many of them subscribe to the ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) Journals and online information, which includes patient education info, etc. https://www.acog.org/clinical (their website but has a paywall)
If you're looking for general info on what patients without adequate medical access should know, check things like the patient hand-outs at Cleveland Clinic and others. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/24442-pregnancy-complications
The other thing that bothers me to no end is the anti-abortion crowd using the term "abortion" for any type of emergency termination. Abortion has always been the medical term for a natural or necessary interrupted pregnancy. It gradually changed to the term more so for a woman who wanted to terminate an early pregnancy and medicine started using other medical based terms for a necessary induction for when a pregnancy was in danger and the fetus possibly would not live. Since the brainless anti-abortion crowd co-opted the term for anything that caused a fetal demise, it's made it difficult for non-medical lay-people to understand that a small percentage of pregnancies will naturally need termination and not because a woman just "didn't want to be pregnant." As you would know as a RN, one of the stupidest is when they claim an ectopic pregnancy will result in a live birth. They can tell all the "wonder of wonder" stories they want but it does not happen! The ones that get me so angry are the rabid ones who say it's okay if the mother dies during an ectopic rupture medical emergency as the fetus will then go to heaven. I'd swear off any religion beliefs if that's truly what their God was about.
Correction - an ectopic pregnancy is not yet a "fetus". It's still an embryo. Although, the anti-abortion crowd would call it a "baby" regardless!
Excellent explanation.
"Politicians cannot make medical judgement laws!"
Tully for President!!!!!!!!
The reference to a male doctor hit like a ton of bricks. Thankfully, even that early into the debate, I was already flat on my ass with disbelief that this (Biden) is what stands between us and Trump/Project 2025. And what was the part about the third trimester being between a woman and the state?? Um, no. It’s still between a woman and her doctor (who just may also be female, Joe!).
Here’s the “tell” … Trump during the debate “Under Roe v. Wade, you have late term abortion. You can do whatever you want, depending on the state. You can do whatever you want. We don’t think that’s a good thing. We think it’s a radical thing.”
He claims to want states rights, but he really doesn’t.
Red states' rights to be theocratic oligarchies--yes, he supports those.
Additionally, the “life of the mother” “exception” should be the “health of the mother.” I’m not sure Biden can handle this, but there’s a big difference. You can save a life after a pregnant person has lost a fallopian tube and a uterus, but her health will be forever altered.
Thank you for your clarifications. It’s hard for anyone to speak calmly when hit with a firehose of lies. I’m sure Trump planned this - he is not smart but he has a low cunning that has served him well so far. “Flood the zone with shit - that’s what he does. I know that despite President Biden’s reticence in speaking strongly about abortion, he favors bodily autonomy. He needs to make that clear.
Heather Cox Richardson identified the strategy today as "Gish galloping," while I'd never heard it called that, I am gobsmacked that Biden's team couldn't prepare him for that.
Trump also projects what he does onto anyone else, and last night it was Biden.
Let's not forget that Ronald Regan was in full blow cognitive decline from Alzheimer for the last year or more of his administration. The GOP holds him up like a GOD. Biden needs good sound bites on the issues and then needs to make many, many public appearances - on all the news outlets. Short, practiced, competent statements of progress, prosperity and constitutional rights. Along with that, he needs an another dozen or so facts repudiating Trumps oft repeated lies. Not up for discussion - facts, exposing Trump's lies to the voters. Over, and over and over again. Just like Trump does.
Reagan was actually in the midst of dementia as he was running for his second term. He had plenty of his people hiding it from the public. Cheney effectively was the functioning president during the last four years. I would be very happy with Kamala Harris running the government if Biden wins and does decline. Political ads, and the few competent people in the news media, need to point out that Trump currently has dementia and show his decline.
Yes, true. I did say full blown cognitive decline but the dementia certainly predated that.
Question. Does the Comstock Act only apply to U.S. mail? Would other carriers and or courier services be subject too? I realize we have to fight to keep the MAGA force from enacting this restriction, but just wondering about the specifics and a back up plan.
Unfortunately yes any services would be covered, at least if they are interstate. Not sure about within a state. I don't have a source, I just remember reading this same question and the answer somewhere else.
If I’m remembering correctly, I thought to avoid Comstock, maybe mifepristone and misoprostol could be manufactured and distributed within each state by compounding pharmacies. Does anyone know if this would be possible? I guess I need a pharmacist and a lawyer’s perspective…
Excellent question. My guess is the fact that it _could_ be transported across state lines might make it 'interstate commerce' and still subject to regulation? What are the rulings on cannabis, for example? More to the point, how would this scotus rule? And even if it did rule against the administration - er, regime I mean, would they cease and desist enforcement?
At the end of the day it's all going to come down to enforcement. Their plans involve massive rollbacks of human rights and civil liberties, and whether it succeeds depends on if people obey, and if they don't, how many of us are they able and willing to throw in jail (or execute extrajudicially)? That's what it always comes down to with authoritarianism. I think the most important thing is for people not to comply. But fear is powerful, and no one wants to be the first to break the law.
I'm trying to be mentally prepared as best I can for this reality now, rather than panicking on January 20th. We're going to need people who are calm and wise and courageous, whose lead we can follow.
No, what I mean is if it’s manufactured and distributed only within the state it’s manufactured, does that skirt Comstock’s restrictions?
I'm pretty sure this came up with cannabis. A state said it was only grown and consumed within the state, but the government argued it still affects interstate commerce (and just like the medication and OBGYN instruments ! 🤦 the items would be illegal in other states and under federal law). Because the legal question just becomes can congress regulate it or not. So long as Comstock is on the books, and the administration intends to enforce it, I'm not sure the courts would rule that activity within state boundaries is exempt. It tends to come back to being a political question, because lawyers can make good-enough arguments to judges either way, as we've seen with recent supreme court decisions, where reasoning that doesn't get accepted in one scenario gets accepted in another, the only difference seeming to be ideological preference on the issue at hand. So if the question is how do these nine rule, I don't know. But I wouldn't be optimistic.
Yes, but I can still get cannabis in MA and other places…
Good question actually!
On both the mifepristone and EMTALA cases, the Supreme Court gave republicans cover to lie to low information voters, trump took full advantage, and Biden utterly failed us. The media has been complicit with misleading headlines about the pills or emergency abortion being “saved” making trumps job easier and ours harder. Last night’s disaster makes me physically ill. Biden’s team pulling him and claiming illness could hardly have been worse than sending him in so hoarse and still and deal looking. I don’t think the Democratic Party leadership has the will to save us, if indeed it isn’t too late. My mantra, repeated to anyone who will listen is: “You don’t elect a person, you elect an administration.” And Biden has a competent team that understands policy whereas trump has the MAGA clown car.
Yes, exactly. It doesn't matter nearly as much as people think who the head of the administration is. So the arguments for changing the candidate are stronger than the arguments for keeping him. But yes you're right we're looking for leadership.
One huge issue we need people to understand is the antiabortion use of "late term abortion" and the medical miscarriage/pregnancy related emergency use of "late term" differ greatly. "Late term" in obstetrics refers to a pregnancy post 40 weeks. (Trump's horrific lie about abortions up to 40 weeks and after. DOES. NOT. HAPPEN.) "Late term" should not be used related to the termination of a pregnancy because the actual medical term related to a pregnancy causes confusion--the confusion is absolutely intentional. Instead, we all need to help people understand the false use of the term and stop using it. Instead help people understand how infrequently abortions occur further in a pregnancy. (13-26 weeks is the 2nd trimester). Only 7.7% of abortions are between weeks 14 and 20. 1.2% happen at or after 21 weeks and those are not occurring because the pregnant individual sinly waited a long time to decide--these occur because of a medical issues for the mother and/or fatal fetal anomalies/medical conditions for the fetus. There are almost no pregnancy terminations in the third trimester.
Pres. Biden is an 80+ year old devout Catholic. He's never going to be the passionate fighter for abortion rates like Jessica here and other feminists. I honestly just wish he'd frame it and talk about it solely as an issue of freedom (which is what he was trying to do despite the additional garbled info). But he would also sign ANY protections that a Democratic Congress sent him, even if that went further than Roe. So I don't see we have any choice, if we care about this issue (or a whole host of others honestly...the felon is unacceptable).
*abortion rights...that was supposed to say "abortion rights."
I would agree 100% with the “Biden is toast!” contingent - if he were running against anyone except Donald Trump. I think some folks may be underestimating the American people’s desire to not be governed by a psychopath.
But shame on anyone spreading Republican framing. And double shame on anyone who abandons Joe Biden after everything he’s done for you. I don’t even LIKE Joe Biden and didn’t vote for him, but I’m absolutely appalled at the ingratitude. Biden has been FAR better than my cynical old ass ever expected. I’ve been forced to pay him grudging respect any number of times.
But you know what REALLY burns me? Letting Donald Trump push you around and bully you into changing candidates. He’s got to be laughing his ass off at how easy this was..Tell Donald Trump AND his enablers to take a hike.
Remember (and I can’t believe I’m saying this) Roger Stone? “Fuck you! WE win!” Yield nothing. Don’t give an inch. Ever.
Yes, there is so much we could learn from the GOP/MAGA play book. Never roll over, never say uncle, never give up. "Fuck you. We're the answer. We're the hope for a better America. We are the way to progress and prosperity, Keep the faith. The alternative is a vengeful dictator who doesn't hesitate to take away your rights and freedoms. Vote Blue. Vote Biden." Fight fire with fire, do what MAGA does.
^THIS
I think accepting it as Republican framing is exactly the trap Republicans want us to fall into. These guys are psychopaths but they're devious as fuck. They have a plan for winning the election, it's working, and they have no desire to see us throw a wrench into it.
The GOP "think" their plan is working. I honestly believe women have this one. They know Kamala is there if something happens to Biden. Many women may not be vocal about it, especially on the GOP female side, but women are not happy about losing rights and adequate obstetrical health care. Talk to every woman you know and offer to take them to vote if necessary, especially the older women who may need transportation to vote. They understand what is was like prior to Roe. They still care. GOTV.
If Biden is elected and then doesn’t make it a full term, I’ll get to see the first black woman president. I’m totally on board for that. If Trump and whatever cowardly sycophant he picks for VP are elected, I’ll be watching the accelerated slide from democracy to dictatorship/theocracy. Biden could have had a stroke on live TV, I’m still voting blue.
OMG my spouse told me Biden has a speech impediment. Stuttering. I didn’t know. Oh goodness I believe stress makes it worse. Jeepers! I’m not defending his poor performance but I now know why sometimes he fumbles over words. Am I the only one who didn’t know that? I had a lisp when I was young and had speech therapy to correct it. 😕
It's been common knowledge since he took the national stage as V.P.
I’m not sure it’s common knowledge in some R circles or with those who don’t watch the news.
It's okay to be scared as fu*k right now, but we (I) need to put this in perspective. I really appreciated this from Gavin Newsom last night in response to a question about all the panic setting in after the debate: Gavin Newsom: “well, I think it’s unhelpful, and I think it’s unnecessary. we’ve got to go in, we’ve got to keep our heads high — and as I say, we’ve got to have the back of this president. you don’t turn your back because of one performance. what kind of party does that? it’s been a master class. 50.6 million jobs. that eight times more than the last three Republican presidents combined. the only thing the last three Republican presidents have in common is recessions. Democrats delivered. this president has delivered. we need to deliver for him, at this moment. with all due respect, the more time we start having these conversations go down these rabbit holes, it’s unhelpful to our democracy, the fate and future of this country, and the world. they need us right now to step up, and that’s exactly what I intend to do.”
As you said, Jessica, and THANK YOU FOR SAYING THIS: "But I also know what’s done is done; so I’m giving myself a few hours to freak out, and then I’m getting back to work. Because the alternative is unthinkable." The alternative IS unthinkable so I'll keep doing what I can to prevent it. I couldn't live with myself if I stopped. 💕🙏
I am surprised by MSNBC's coverage last night and this morning going full throat about replacing Biden. McCaskill was visibly angry and raging (her blinking eyes are so irritating). I agree with what Gavin Newsom said. Whatever panic we feel is not helpful and is unnecessary and the silver lining is that trump has not suddenly become more acceptable. Understandably people are nervous for a repeat of 2016. But we just have to redouble our efforts to get out the votes. I hope the campaign gets a rude awakening from this. IMHO they didn't serve Biden well and prepped him for a different debate than the one with a serial liar. And, why did CNN take more than 30 minutes to get to the most important stuff like his big lie, insurrection, his conviction and so on. The irony of the times is that we have a fabulous deep bench of young and dynamic Democrats and here we are stuck with these two (I would love a Harris presidency but let us be honest, this country shamefully is not ready for that now more than ever). But Biden has been a good president (old but still with all his marbles more than the other guy) and we honor his work through our support and not weaken him further.
Remember that Newsom wants the job. Of course he said what he said. He's smart enough to know not to stab Biden in the back. It would be completely counterproductive to his goals. What he wants is to be able to gracefully thank the president for his 50+ years of service to this country, and then to move forward.
Newsome will be there in 4 years, possibly as a VP candidate first, but I don't think he in any way is trying to move in for this next cycle. If anything medical does happen to cause Biden to back out, he may volunteer to be Harris's VP choice.
Newsom is also contemplating that he will be the chief executive of the state poised to be the biggest source of opposition to the regime. Hopefully he and his staff are war gaming that, because the Republicans are coming ready to sideline every blue state government.
He can't be the VP unless one of them establishes residence in another state, otherwise California can't cast its electoral votes for both of them.
If the Republicans win this election, there is very serious question whether we have free and fair elections going forward. Having planned this for decades, they are very unlikely to give power back at the ballot box without doing everything possible to thwart it. So it would be irresponsible for any Democrat to be thinking about 2026 or 2028.
A 2028 election won't happen if the GOP takes power, except in the most nominal sense.
Today's SCOTUS decision taking a sledgehammer to the doctrine of Chevron deference means that California is going to matter a lot going forward. If federal regulatory agencies are so weakened, then it's going to be up to the states that can lead to do so. God help those of us in red states, who are doomed to live in polluted, theocratic oligarchies.
Yes, and I would be OK with a president Newsom. However, this cycle, it may too disruptive to change horses mid race. No? If it were not for having Harris on the ticket, I don't think Biden would have run.
And at this point Harris is a much better shot than Biden. Still an underdog, probably, but not by nearly as much as Biden is now. But it doesn't absolutely have to be Harris either.
I think she'll get to audition, definitely.
Staying the course is a higher risk than making a change. We're thisclose to a fascist dictatorship. It's an emergency, and disruptive is exactly what we need. And the polls should confirm this over the next month.
He was great in NC today.
https://x.com/jeffstorobinsky/status/1806745499837386816
Well everybody's going to wait on the polls, so we'll see.
Last night was bad. Real bad. I suspect Biden’s advisors spent too much time throwing the book at him and not enough time letting him rest. The man is 81 and handling the presidency very well - but that’s an exhausting job even for someone who is in their physical prime. And Biden has a history of nervous stuttering and honestly has never been a great debater.
I was definitely left with a sick feeling after the debate thinking about how the media and others would cover this. But we have to recognize that very few people are swayed by debates and this debate is absurdly early in the cycle. There is zero chance he’s going to step down but there is time to recover.
. I would vote for Biden if he was half dead. I’d vote for Biden if he died and came back as a vampire. Bc when the alternative is Trump/the modern Republican Party, there is no alternative. Democrats and sane Republicans have to keep making this clear. Holding your nose to vote for someone who is too old but who will fight for everything you care about (reproductive rights, gun control, saving the planet, affordable housing, healthcare, affordable childcare, a pluralistic society) is in no way comparable to voting for a racist, bigoted, treasonous, immoral felon who cares only about accumulating power to protect himself.
There were two choices before the debate and there’s still only two choices today. I’ll take comfort in”holding my nose” to vote for a decent old fart who’s got my back while Republicans convince themselves voting for their immoral, dictatorial orange clown of a felon is somehow “presidential” material.