🏳️🌈🖖🏽
The GOP-led House is in disarray and focused on all the wrong things. They couldn’t even get a bill to fund the Pentagon through a procedural vote because five of their far-right members revolted. And now Speaker McCarthy has pulled the continuing resolution to fund the government, one that was hammered out by the different factions this weekend, from any consideration because it also doesn’t have the votes.
Instead of doing their job and passing a budget—one they already agreed to earlier this year—they are preceding with an impeachment inquiry into President Biden because the Orange Guy insists he shouldn’t be the only impeached candidate up on stage. The hearing will now happen just two days before the government shuts down because they don’t have a budget in place.
This is the GOP in a nutshell, folks. Paralysis, political theatrics, and chaos.
🇳🇱
I have no love for the GOP my friend, but you are criticizing them for doing the one thing the democrats arent doing and should.... Vote their conscious rather than just agreeing with the group.
We **want** politicians who are there to vote whats right, not what their party tells them to vote.
@freemo @georgetakei
Lots of politicians did what they thought was right in the 1930s. Turns out xenophobic, racist fascists have different opinions of what that is than most folks. Also, no American has seen « the left » since the 1970s, center-right democrats don’t count.
Can you list what policies of Biden or Obama's that either of them took action to execute in some way, that is a right-leaning policy stance?
As far as I know every single one of their policy stances and actions have been left side of the fence:
* increased restrictions on guns
* push towards universal single payer healthcare
* pro-abortion
* pro equal oppertunity
* pro free education/loan forgivness.
Literally cant think of a single thing they pushed for that is right.
And yes, obviously we want people to follow their conscious and be a good person... funny that huh, its almost like having a conscious is important, but so are other things.
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakei Both Biden and obama never did anything but increase military spending. Obama ramped up drone bombing. Biden has continued the border policies of the trump administration, including family separations. GITMO is still open. There is little or no movement on major polluters, curbing drug company monopolies, and a net increase in fossil fuel land leases.
In many cases, it is a lack of action from the Biden and Obama administrations, but that isn't a left position either. It is a pretty far right position. Don't pass a law for federally protected abortion rights...
And I don't think Obama adopting Mitt Romney's healthcare plan is a left wing plan either, and there is no push from Biden for a single payer system. In fact, I believe biden took that off the table in the Dem primaries back in 2020.
I see both Obama and Biden as right wingers. I'm far from the only one (https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020) :
@Free_Idealist @pyranose @freemo @georgetakei
Reality sucks, eh?
Yea the reality that people believe this does indeed suck.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei , I am sure someone can come up with a counter to the argument. But I have yet to see it. And without any argument to the contrary, and what I have seen, I tend to agree with the placement of those people on that scale.
Just for an example, there are reasons Biden was called "The Senator from MBNA", a credit card company.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2008/08/senator-mbna-byron-york/
> I am sure someone can come up with a counter to the argument. But I have yet to see it.
Which argument? That the plot above sucks and isnt remotely accurate?
Of course someone has, we just spent quite a while doing line by line on policy and decisions and showing how virtually every vote Biden or Obama have ever made has been left leaning with very very few examples of right leaning ones.
Now you may not agree with the argument, which is fine your allowed to be wrong, but to claim you have never even seen an argument formulated, when we just got through with one, is clearly erroneous.
> And without any argument to the contrary,
Except the one I just spent quite some time laying out...
> and what I have seen
Which seems selective...
> I tend to agree with the placement of those people on that scale.
I would expect you would incorrectly draw that conclusion, given your selective eye sight :)
> Just for an example, there are reasons Biden was called "The Senator from MBNA", a credit card company.
Do you think in order to be left you have to be anti-large company or something? I mean sure that starts to develop at the very radicalized extreme ends of the left... but no hating large companies is not a strict requirement barrier to the left. Assuming of course those businesses are well regulated (an unregulated business would be more of a right thing)
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
I would say that you being in the thick of the forest your sight is blinded by the trees. As for selective eye sight, we all suffer from that. No exceptions to that rule.
No, I don't think to be left you have to be anti large company. I would suggest not being anti large company is a common feature for the right though. I would say being in favor of corporate government enforced monopolies is a strong indication you are pretty far right wing. With almost no room for exceptions to that rule. I would also argue that 'unregulated businesses is not a right wing position. The right loves mountains of regulations that support their major donors, and inhibit competition. That privatize profits, while socializing costs like pollution.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
"I think you are confusing the DNC and GOP with left vs right."
Nope, I am saying they are both right wing. And posted a link that I agree with, that shows they are testibly both right wing.
"how do you “enforce monopolies” "
Pretty easy. Licencing.
"Witht he right focusing on individual freedoms and the left focusing on collective welfare then yea."
The right stands firmly against individual freedoms. They are against body autonomy, and that is the very foundation of individual freedom. If you don't own yourself, and have the right to do what you want with your own body, you have no basic freedoms. And, I would say the 'left' in America is not far separated from the 'right.' Because there is no left wing in America.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
I should add that the left would be in favor of the collective welfare, absolutely true. So which part is aggressively addressing climate change, and basic living standards, and helping immigrants? Helping to end segregation, racism, etc? Income inequality? Affordable housing? Supporting the expansion of unions??
No American party is on the left.
> Nope, I am saying they are both right wing. And posted a link that I agree with, that shows they are testibly both right wing.
Yes that much is clear. That is also not the comment you made where i said you seemed to be confusing the two.
> Pretty easy. Licencing.
Ok so what act of licening did Obama carry out that explicitly forced the creation of a monopoly?
> The right stands firmly against individual freedoms.
yea, no.
> They are against body autonomy
Mostly no, though there are always exceptions from individual members.
For example on abortion (I am pro abortion myself).. the right usually focuses on preserving the bodily autonomy of BOTH the mother and the baby. Some go so far as to only care about the bodily autonomy of the baby by completely outlawing abortions. Others care about both by proposing extremely narrow abortion windows that garuntee the woman still has a right to abortion early on, but once nerves and braincells form in the baby that its own self-determination is also honored. Generally the left cares **only** about the mothers bodily autonomy and is perfectly fine violating the babies right to self-determination. They do this for the "greater good" because otherwise it would harm our communities and mothers. Meanwhile the right doesnt care too much about the community or the reprocussions so long as both the mother and childs life is protected.
Another example of bodily autonomy is vaccines, while the right generally sided strongly with personal freedom and allowing people to have the right to choose if they want to vaccinated or not, the left went the other way and sided with collective welfare and prefred to support vaccine passports, getting fired from jobs, and being denied service, all grossly intrustive to the individual forcing us to make public part of our medical history effectively. It is clear on this issue again the right sided with individual rights and freedoms while the left focused on collective welfare.
Even on issues of Drug use the right has focused more on personal freedom of late than the left. While Biden explicitly stated he would not legalize cannavis Trump claimed to support its legalization. While he never legalized it he did pass the farm bill which comes pretty damn close (its now legal in america to order psychadelic cannabis products across the whole country, though still with some restrictions).
> And, I would say the ‘left’ in America is not far separated from the ‘right.’ Because there is no left wing in America.
Well as established this is wrong, per the thread.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
"Ok so what act of licening did Obama carry out that explicitly forced the creation.."
Not sure he did create a monopoly, although I assume his administration oversaw the creation of a few. But without any doubt he continued the policies for existing monopolies, in the oil and gas industry, cable TV, internet service providers, pharmaceuticals, auto manufacturers, insurance companies (that is a HUGH one under Obama) and literally thousands of other monopolies licensed by the state.
"the right usually focuses on preserving the bodily autonomy of BOTH the mother and the baby."
If you have an abortion ban that says you can not remove a dead fetus from a mother, then you do not care about the body autonomy of the mother. Google up "abortion ban dead fetus" for examples where this is undeniably true. The right doesn't care about body autonomy. If they did, they would support drug use, prostitution, abortion, trans gender surgery, etc. And 'the left' doesn't support those things either. Which to me indicates that 'the left' is almost as far right as 'the right.' As for vaccines, I think American history is full of forced vaccines. The 1st forced vaccines were done by George Washington (innoculations). We have had vaccine passports since about WW I. Every school kid in public school has needed one since about 1950, Public health isn't a left or right issue, and there have always been ways to bypass vaccines.
"Well as established this is wrong, per the thread."
Repetition is not proof. When the BLM candidates control even 25% of the government, when the Rent is Too Damn High Party has even NYC, when The ANTIFA party has 100 congressmen, and 30 senators... then their MIGHT be a left wing in this country. Right now we have the theocratic right, and the Senator from a credit card company.
> Not sure he did create a monopoly
Ok then this wasnt even a valid point then.
> although I assume his administration oversaw the creation of a few. But without any doubt he continued the policies for existing monopolies, in the oil and gas industry, cable TV, internet service providers, pharmaceuticals, auto manufacturers, insurance companies (that is a HUGH one under Obama) and literally thousands of other monopolies licensed by the state.
He isnt a dictator, he doesnt get to dictate the state of things. He can, at best, suggest a bill (this is rare), and he can veto bills, thats it.. You act like he can go in and change anything to whatever he wants... it doesnt work that way.
So all we can do if we are honestly evaluate if he is left or right, is not to look at the things he never had a decision to make on at all.. we look on the votes he did make the actions he did. This nonsense of "everything wasnt perfect when he left so he is right wing for not fixing everything" is so beyond absurd...
> If you have an abortion ban that says you can not remove a dead fetus from a mother, then you do not care about the body autonomy of the mother.
On this I agree, then you dont care.. however that is **not** the stance of the right as a whole, so you are just blowing hot air on that one. While they are generally against abortion, sure, but whether or not they can abort a dead fetus is not a left or right idea specifically.
> Google up “abortion ban dead fetus” for examples where this is undeniably true.
I just searched it... what I found was that an overwhelming majority (66%) of the GOP beleive abortion should be legal under extenuating circumstances such as a dead fetus, risk to the mother, rape, etc.
So yea thanks, the search confirmed this is **not** a majority held property of those on the right. More importantly it wouldnt be objectively either per my above comments.
> The right doesn’t care about body autonomy.
Seeing as you encouraged me to look it up and the actual data confirmed perfectly the scenario I said and debunked your own... seems this is clearly proven to be false if we are judging them based on their policy stance.
> If they did, they would support drug use, prostitution, abortion, trans gender surgery, etc.
Well as covered earlier they actually **do** support drug use, more so then the left anyway. While Biden actively said he would not legalize marijuana Trump said he would... and while Trump didnt fully achieve it he came pretty damn close with the Farm Bill passed.
Abortion we already covered too.
Prostitution I agree is a right-wing policy stance. The GOP, while being mostly right wing, is not synonymous with the right wing. On most issues they pick a right-wing stance on very few they pick a left-wing... this is one of the few the GOP picks a left wing stance by not supporting it.
> And ‘the left’ doesn’t support those things either. Which to me indicates that ‘the left’ is almost as far right as ‘the right.’
No you mean the DNC doesnt support it. the DNC is not the same as the left even though they as a party are on the left (a person can be on the left and hold some non-left view so long as the aggregate is clearly left). When you go down the policy list of the DNC 98% of it is all on the left, 2% might be right wing ideas.... most of the policy stance however is not a right or left principle and denotes a different metric (like authoritarianism, which is independent of left or right)
> s for vaccines, I think American history is full of forced vaccines. The 1st forced vaccines were done by George Washington (innoculations). We have had vaccine passports since about WW I. Every school kid in public school has needed one since about 1950, Public health isn’t a left or right issue, and there have always been ways to bypass vaccines.
This doesnt even address what was said... Whether forcing people to take a drug is common and has been done before has absolutely **no** relevance on if it is a left or right wing principle... To argue its been the normal since forever as some twisted argument that it is left or right wing is just nonsensical and does nothing to advance that point.
Being against forced drugging of people (personal freedom) is a right wing principle... force drugging people for the greater good is a left wing principle. The fact that it has been done before and isnt new has no bearing on that.
> Repetition is not proof.
I agree, and what you responded to was not me repeating myself, so also not relevant. I had pointed to the fact this was already proven and evidence laid out earlier in the same message.. that is not repetition, that is avoiding repetition and refering you to the original proof instead.
> When the BLM candidates control even 25% of the government, when the Rent is Too Damn High Party has even NYC, when The ANTIFA party has 100 congressmen, and 30 senators… then their MIGHT be a left wing in this country. Right now we have the theocratic right, and the Senator from a credit card company.
Yea this is also really disconnected from what is being discussed... we arent saying the country is a left-wing country... we are saying Obama and Biden were left wing... huge difference. It amazed me you cant see how poorly your arguing your point... like somehow the entire country having high rent or somethign proves Obama and Biden werent left wing.... i almost sprained my muscled rolling my eyes on this one.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
"He isnt a dictator"
Research what an executive order is, and how it works. This doesn't mean he is a dictator, and I never said or implied he was.
"majority (66%) of the GOP beleive"
I am talking the party, not individuals.
"Well as covered earlier they actually do support drug use"
There are several million young black men in prison who will be happy to hear of this policy change.
"No you mean the DNC doesnt support it"
Correct. The Dems are a right wing party. Individual members of the party can be far more liberal.
"When you go down the policy list of the DNC 98% of it is all on the left"
Is pro war a liberal policy? Increasing the police force? Border patrols? Crime bills? Give me an example of something the DO, not something they vaguely talk about. Show me that they are willing to fight for those things, and not just give lip service to perpetuate political theater.
"Whether forcing people to take a drug is common and has been done before has absolutely no relevance"
The relevance is that all sides of the issue agree in principle with some level of force to protect the public health. Neither side mandates it though, or pushes for absolute mandates.
"Yea this is also really disconnected from what is being discussed"
We are discussing the existence of left wing parties in America. I gave example that would show their existence. Examples that do not exist. Because, there is no left wing party in America.
"we are saying Obama and Biden were left wing… huge difference"
No, YOU are saying that. I say they are demonstrably right wing.
> Research what an executive order is, and how it works. This doesn’t mean he is a dictator, and I never said or implied he was.
I am very well aware of what an executive order is.
They are not legally binding, they are only commands by the president. While people who directly treat him as a boss are expected to follow it, they can not be used to pass laws, pass regulations, or dictate anything to any independent body (like the FDA, FCC, etc)... he can issue them, but they are at best suggestions.
It is also highly irresponsible and abusive to issue them beyond routine administrative issues, despite the fact that they have been abused this way recently.
Regardless as you point out, this doesnt change the equation, he isnt a dictator.
> I am talking the party, not individuals.
What does this even mean... The individuals who make up the party ARE the party.. unless you mean the party manifesto itself, which also does **not** state that abortion of dead fetuses must be illegal as a party stance.
> There are several million young black men in prison who will be happy to hear of this policy change.
Yes, sadly what they did was still illegal. Thankfully Obama pardoned a HUGE number of this group specifically for these reasons.
> Correct. The Dems are a right wing party. Individual members of the party can be far more liberal.
Nope, but good to hear you meant the dems and not the left and understand they arent the same.
> Is pro war a liberal policy?
Pro war is not a left or right wing principle, That exists on a different metric (authoritarianism, as does fascism)
> Increasing the police force?
Increasing the police force would be a left-wing policy stance because it is an attempt at addressing the public welfare by protected against crime... Of course the fact our police force is evil throws a wrench in that, but that isnt Obama's or Biden's choice to make them evil. But yea as a general principle investing in community security would be a left-wing principle, while pushing to make the police for less oppressive to the individual would be a right-wing principle.
> Border patrols?
This bring up an interesting point that wasnt addressed that is important. The GOP cares about individual freedom even if its contrary to community welfare, as I said, but to be more specific "individual freedom of american citizens"
So stronger borders would be a right-wing policy because it is an attempt to favor current citizens welfare by excluding foreigners to the USA where we would have to share our resources.
Soi yea border patrols is clearly a right wing policy since it is designed to protect existing individuals in america over the community welfare of the other countries or world.
> Crime bills?
That would depend specifically on the content of the bill.
> Give me an example of something the DO, not something they vaguely talk about.
Earlier in the thread (though im not sure you were tagged) I listed about a total of 20 specific things Obama and Biden have either voted on, or introduced that are clear left-wing stances
> Show me that they are willing to fight for those things, and not just give lip service to perpetuate political theater.
Yea I did that throught the thread as mentioned
> The relevance is that all sides of the issue agree in principle with some level of force to protect the public health. Neither side mandates it though, or pushes for absolute mandates.
What is left or right wing has **nothing** to do with what policies someone in the RNC or DNC follow... Yopu can not say "most people on the left hold these principles, therefore its a principle of the left" and then use that to define what hte left and right is.
The left and right is defined... if people who consider themselves on the left follow that definition strictly vs loosly
so all that means is when the DNC and the GOP agree on something it is one of three things 1) An issue that is neither left or right wing in nature 2) a left-wing ideology the GOP adopted 3) a right wing ideology the DNC adopted.
> We are discussing the existence of left wing parties in America. I gave example that would show their existence. Examples that do not exist. Because, there is no left wing party in America.
Which is exactly why your wrong. This is an invalid logical fallacy called the fallacy of composition. You can not assume that the parts must have the same properties as the whole.
In this sense the "whole" is "left-wing ideology" (or right) and the "part" is "someone who is on the left".. A liberal who is part of the left wing does **not** need to adopt the infinite number of potential left wing policies in the whole of the universe in order to qualify as being part of the left-wing.
> No, YOU are saying that. I say they are demonstrably right wing.
Yes what i meant by that is "this is what we are debating" you debating the opposite... and in this particular quote you were failing to argue the point.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
"like somehow the entire country having high rent or somethign proves"
I never made that argument.
> I never made that argument.
You said:
> ...when the Rent is Too Damn High Party has even NYC... then their MIGHT be a left wing in this country
So yea you implied that the rent being too damn high, and it not being addressed the way you want it to be, is somehow an argument in this thread where you are arguing that no (or at least almost no) left wing candidates exist.
This was absurd.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei The Rent is Too Damn High is the name of a left wing political party.
Thanks, yes that confirms what i said earlier, it is a single issue party whose focus is on the rent being too high in NY.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
“like somehow the entire country having high rent or somethign proves”
I never made that argument.
No but you did make the argument that not having fringe politicial group in power whose sole purpose is to lower rent prices is an point supporting your argument here (which is about if Obama and Biden are left or right)
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
My point was, and is, that there do exist some actual lefty parties. They are NOT in power. Only right wing parties have power in the United States. All left parties are out of power.
> My point was, and is, that there do exist some actual lefty parties. They are NOT in power. Only right wing parties have power in the United States. All left parties are out of power.
Seeing as all the evidence clearly showed the democrats are a left-wing party. Arguing some other left-wing party that is a joke and has no stance on any issue excpet one issue in one state, completely fails to make your point. An obscure non-functional left wing party not being elected but a different left wing party (DNC) being elected does nothing to advance your argument as to whether or not the DNC is left wing.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
"Seeing as all the evidence clearly showed the democrats are a left-wing party."
Except it doesn't clearly show that. Let me know when they have ANY left wing stance at all, like BLM, ANTIFA, defund the police, end wars, UBI, open borders, body autonomy, etc. Or even the rent being too damn high.
ahh there you are making the Fallacy of Composition yet again... yea this is why its clear your in the wrong, you lay into fallacies and even when they are explained to you you just ignore it and keep repeating it....
As stated, I listed over 20 specific votes and introduced bills by both Obama and Biden within the thread that are clearly left wing. So there is that but thats not the point.
You just listed a bunch of left wing things you want to see.. your upset because all the ideals adopted by the left in the USA are moderate left ideals rather than the more extreme left ideals you demand... Just because they arent as extreme as you in their leftism doesnt make them right... A person on the left doesnt have to adopt every single fathomable left-wing idea anyone can favricate in order to be considering ont he left... thats just absurd... That said there have been a ton of left wing stuff they DO support, so the point has been very well proven.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
"Clearly left wing".
Those words don't mean what you think they mean. They may be clearly left wing to YOU. But to me, they are all pretty far right. Go back to my statement about forests and trees.
No they are **objectively** left wing to anyone who is objective and knowledgable in the matter.
I do expect people who have strong biases (particularly those ont he extreme end of the spectrum) to think that though.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
I think you don't understand the range of the political spectrum. I don't feel you CAN understand it. I think it is remarkably astute of you to understand that a left party is fringe at all, but fail to understand why.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
That you consider an actual left party to be "fringe" is supporting of my position. The ARE fringe. Because they are actual lefties. Obama and Biden are not.
> That you consider an actual left party to be "fringe" is supporting of my position. The ARE fringe. Because they are actual lefties. Obama and Biden are not.
Jesus christ... no... they are fringe because they are a party that has no policy stance on anythign other than a single issue, rent, and in a single state, NYC... They are a joke of a party not because they are too left, but because they arent on the spectrum at all because they have no policy stance on anything other than one remote thing in one state.
Yes, one whose main focus is addressing the issue of the rent being too high (and other matters)... and thus my point
@freemo @JonKramer @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei I do not want to weigh in on what counts as "left" or "right", but just what is this: "(66%) of the GOP beleive abortion should be legal under extenuating circumstances such as a dead fetus" – no! Pretty much absolutely nobody wants to ban whatever surgery is indicated for miscarriages/etc. Yikes!
This reminds me of something. Awhile ago, there was a poorly-worded bill in CA that righties were saying was going to legalize infanticide. When this was pointed out, it was immediately fixed of course to clarify that it didn't do that. But this didn't stop some people from continuing to scaremonger about CA democrats wanting to kill children or whatever. That scaremongering is absurd, and a ridiculous thing to do.
Spreading this idea that republicans want to force women to carry dead fetuses is equally asinine. You all should stop doing it.
> I do not want to weigh in on what counts as “left” or “right”, but just what is this: “(66%) of the GOP beleive abortion should be legal under extenuating circumstances such as a dead fetus” – no! Pretty much absolutely nobody wants to ban whatever surgery is indicated for miscarriages/etc. Yikes!
I dont still have it in front me.. but only 4% of the GOP support banning abortions even when the mothers life is at risk or a miscarriage. 66% think abortion should only be allowed with extenuating circumstances... the rest think abortion should be allowed in all circumstances.
> This reminds me of something. Awhile ago, there was a poorly-worded bill in CA that righties were saying was going to legalize infanticide. When this was pointed out, it was immediately fixed of course to clarify that it didn’t do that. But this didn’t stop some people from continuing to scaremonger about CA democrats wanting to kill children or whatever. That scaremongering is absurd, and a ridiculous thing to do.
The one thing i realize is that people feel a **need* to misrepresent the facts... almost with everything they have an opinion on... its almost like any nuanced opinion is the same as being the evil guys on the other side.... its tiring and infantile.
@freemo @ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei what does THE PARTY, and in specific, the party leaders push?
66% of "THE PARTY" and its leaders, pushes for exceptions to abortion. 4% push for abortion being illegal under all circumstances... Thereis virtually no support across the whole or aggregate of the GOP to force women to carry dead babies.
@freemo @ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
"and its leaders"
That part isn't true. they support laws banning all abortions. The push for laws criminalizing women who would travel to other states to get a legal abortion. They require women to wait in parking lots until they are bleeding out before removing a dead fetus. In short, there is no argument that the leadership, leaders those 66% of the GOP members support, is in any way, shape or form in favor of body autonomy. By extension, if you vote for leaders who stand against body autonomy, YOU are against it. I see no grey here.
> That part isn't true. they support laws banning all abortions.
A blatant lie you pulled out your butt there buddy... You just spewed that without ever fact checking it.
Lets look at the real numbers:
Currently there are 22 red states banning abortion. Of those 22 states **every single one of them** has an exception for having an abortion when you have a dead fetus. Although some of may be challenged in court and be in flux, in none of them is the life exception being challenged itself.
In fact all 22 states go beyond this and allow exceptions on abortions when it threatens the life of the mother (which a dead fetus stuck in their whomb would qualify as).
How about the leaders themselves? Well of the whole of the GOP there are only about 5 in all my hours of research I could find who said they would create an abortion ban with no life-exception.. and only one of those people (rubio) would I consider a party leader.
> The push for laws criminalizing women who would travel to other states to get a legal abortion.
Now you just moved the goal post... we are discussing the GOP's stance on abortion when a woman has a dead fetus... not traveling, we can address that seperately but first lets both agree your wrong about the nonsense you spewed earlier before we address other stuff you said.
> In short, there is no argument that the leadership, leaders those 66% of the GOP members support, is in any way, shape or form in favor of body autonomy.
Except for the fact that everything single thing you said to try to argue that point turned out to be a bald face lie without any basis in a reality, and that was shown by both what is actual law, and stated policy
> By extension, if you vote for leaders who stand against body autonomy, YOU are against it. I see no grey here.
Sure, luckily thats not the case here as per the above proof.
There are arguments from some for killing the baby in special circumstances, rape, incest, threat to life of the mother - these are similar to arguments for using lethal force in self defense with adults. Sometimes the threat can be as helpless and innocent as a baby - e.g. a drowning swimmer, a schizophrenic. I remember watching a mentally ill person struggle with guards and bystanders and run past the checkpoint at NSA headquarters. The armed guards shot him dead. Yes, the guy was crazy, but innocent of evil intent. Yes, the guards felt terrible - but they had no choice, really.
What pro-life people all agree on prohibiting is abortion (or baby-murder, as they would call it) for convenience. "This baby will interfere with my studies. My schedule has no room for even a C-section. I'm trying to save money for <goal>. Giving birth will ruin my figure. etc"
@JonKramer
> I would say that you being in the thick of the forest your sight is blinded by the trees. As for selective eye sight, we all suffer from that. No exceptions to that rule.
I would argue quite the opposite. As someone who has spent his whole live living around the world, often moving from country to country every half a year or year or so... someone who has experienced, been a resident, dealt witht he healthcare and the taxes and almost every aspect of living, and done this in a vast array of different countries in different regions... if anything this gives a perspective outside "the forest" and makes my eyesight less selective.
In fact I'd say you, as someone I presume has mostly only ever lived in one country (or one region like europe) and has only ever heard one countries echo chamber and lived it... you ont eh other hand are more likely to be stuck int he forrest with selective vision so to speak.
That said im not saying I have no bias, clearly i have plenty, just as we all do. What I am saying is that of the two of us, given our expiernce, I am less likely to be indoctrinated to this stuff.
> No, I don’t think to be left you have to be anti large company. I would suggest not being anti large company is a common feature for the right though.
Something being a common property of the left or the right does not make it a proper of the left or the right, nor does beleiving it change where you are on the scale.
Generally the right is older and the left is younger. That doesnt mean I can argue that two people with identical opinions on policy the younger one leans more left than the older one.
I think you are confusing the DNC and GOP with left vs right. There are quite a few things people on either side tend to sharein common that has nothing to do with defining that side.
> I would say being in favor of corporate government enforced monopolies is a strong indication you are pretty far right wing.
I know what monopolies are... I know how lack of monopoly laws has a tendency to result in monopolies forming... but how do you "enforce monopolies" I have never heard of someone in the GOP actively forcing the creation of a monopoly by .. what... forcing smaller companies to merge until they become a monopoly.... I dont even know what this means.
That said I do agree that the left will generally be anti-monopoly, and the right tends to not care so much about monopolies. But just to be clear a monopoly is not a large company, and even when companies become megalarge that doesnt necceseraly mean its a monopoly. A monopoly is only tangentally related to the size of the company.
> I would also argue that ‘unregulated businesses is not a right wing position
Yes. Loosely speaking i would say the right is about individual/entity freedom, and the left focuses on collective welfare. This generally means the right prefers to put as few limitations on people and businesses as possible (unregulated) while the left usually forces (regulates) the individual to act for the greater good even if it harms them as an individual to do so.
> The right loves mountains of regulations that support their major donors, and inhibit competition.
Not really. I mean yea they are corrupt just like the democrats and will take pay to do things that help their corperate buddies, sure.. this is corruption and its on both sides. But in terms of policy they tend to be far less heavy on regulating their donors competition than the democrats would be willing to.
> That privatize profits, while socializing costs like pollution.
Witht he right focusing on individual freedoms and the left focusing on collective welfare then yea. Naturally the right is going to care more about an individuals right to do things that may cause pollution than they will care about the pollution, I'd agree with that.
@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei