Alert: Abortion rights are on the ballot August 2nd in Kansas

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
24,330
2,560
126
*KNOCK KNOCK*

*WHO IS THERE*

...


*MIDTERMS BITCHES*
The only way this will do anything is if Democrats really put together something like a small government bill of rights. Something like this that applies to all levels of government:
  • The government shall not force you to give birth.
    • The government will not force you to get sicker because of a miscarriage.
    • The government will not force you to die because of an ectopic pregnancy.
    • The government will not ban any form of birth control deemed safe by the FDA.
  • The government shall not get involved with consensual adult relationships.
    • The government shall not deny you from marrying any other adult.
    • The government shall not prevent interracial relationships.
    • The government shall not interfere with consensual adults in the bedroom.
  • The government shall not interfere with your right to vote.
  • The government shall not take away freedom of speech in school.
  • The government shall not interfere between you and your doctor.
    • The government shall not ban surgeries deemed necessary by a licensed doctor and deemed safe by the FDA.
    • The government shall not ban drugs or other substances deemed necessary by a licensed doctor and deemed safe by the FDA.
  • The government shall not retaliate against businesses that it does not agree with (Disney anyone).
  • The government shall not place one religion over another.
    • The government shall not legislate their form of morality.
    • The government shall not ban religious clothing.
  • Etc.
Hammer out that message incessantly. Say nothing but that message until the midterms are over.
 
Last edited:

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
20,674
10,340
136
The only way this will do anything is if Democrats really put together something like a small government bill of rights. Something like this that applies to all levels of government:
  • The government shall not force you to give birth.
  • The government shall not deny you from marrying any other adult.
  • The government shall not prevent interracial relationships.
  • The government shall not interfere with consensual adults in the bedroom.
  • The government shall not interfere with your right to vote.
  • The government shall not take away freedom of speech in school.
  • The government shall not interfere between you and your doctor.
  • The government shall not retaliate against businesses that it does not agree with (Disney anyone).
  • The government shall not legislate their form of morality.
  • Etc.
Hammer out that message incessantly. Say nothing but that message until the midterms are over.
"Democrats for small government"

I love it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
23,550
18,731
136
The only way this will do anything is if Democrats really put together something like a small government bill of rights. Something like this that applies to all levels of government:
  • The government shall not force you to give birth.
  • The government will not force you to get sicker because of a miscarriages
  • The government will not force you to die because of an ectopic pregnancy
  • The government shall not deny you from marrying any other adult.
  • The government shall not prevent interracial relationships.
  • The government shall not interfere with consensual adults in the bedroom.
  • The government shall not interfere with your right to vote.
  • The government shall not take away freedom of speech in school.
  • The government shall not interfere between you and your doctor.
  • The government shall not retaliate against businesses that it does not agree with (Disney anyone).
  • The government shall not legislate their form of morality.
  • Etc.
Hammer out that message incessantly. Say nothing but that message until the midterms are over.
Added a couple of specific ones
 

SteveGrabowski

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 2014
5,152
3,979
136
A lot of republicans don't even know what republicans stand for. I've had extremely pro-union mechanics talk me about how Obama was going to destroy unions. My extremely republican aunt and cousins were worried if Hillary won she would get rid of Obamacare.

They basically run on "Dems be Evil" and a ton of their base fills the "evil" part with whatever they want to believe.
But yeah this vote kind of tells me what we already knew. That it's not about issues, it's more just white supremacy and the culture war that matters to GOP voters. Just like the evangelicals were never really about religion, as that took a back seat to white supremacy, as we saw with their full throated embrace of Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo and Zorba

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
13,602
5,709
136
But yeah this vote kind of tells me what we already knew. That it's not about issues, it's more just white supremacy and the culture war that matters to GOP voters. Just like the evangelicals were never really about religion, as that took a back seat to white supremacy, as we saw with their full throated embrace of Trump.

When the Repubs got stripped of that "family values, small gov't., religious piety, conservative fiscal policies" bullshit facade they were hiding behind, what was left bare nekkid for all to see is exactly what you're referring to. Trump, being the Putin dick licking/narcissist/adulterer/tax cheat/racist/pseudo bible thumping religious messiah and all-around useful idiot hit a grand slam on exposing the Repub party for what it really is and who their most ardent supporters are without actually trying to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
11,614
9,070
146
That is the roots of how the democratic party started. The concept changes over decades, but Democrats used to be the small government party.
Maybe do the reverse of the Republican 'government small enough to fit in your bedroom', a 'government big enough to not be concerned with what happens in the bedroom'.
 

MtnMan

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2004
7,934
6,561
136
Anyone expecting Kansas, the state that mandated teaching of biblical/Christian evolution in public schools to vote pro-choice in ANY way is severely deluded.

In the 22 mid-terms Roe v. Wade will make A difference but I doubt it will be enough to turn the tide with the ancient out-of-touch id10t's we have running the media show for the Democrats.

:confused:
When you posted this, had you forgotten that women still have the right to vote in that red state?

2016 vote KS was 56.16% Trump
2020 vote KS was 56.2% Trump
2022 vote KS was 58.8% NO to restrictions on abortion.

Republican strategists are probably scratching their ass trying to figure out why their dark ages policies weren't embraced by Trump loyalists. I'm sure discussions on how to repeal the 19th amendment have been started.
 

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
28,140
8,948
136
When you posted this, had you forgotten that women still have the right to vote in that red state?

2016 vote KS was 56.16% Trump
2020 vote KS was 56.2% Trump
2022 vote KS was 58.8% NO to restrictions on abortion.

Republican strategists are probably scratching their ass trying to figure out why their dark ages policies weren't embraced by Trump loyalists. I'm sure discussions on how to repeal the 19th amendment have been started.
Apparently.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
31,992
21,017
136
When you posted this, had you forgotten that women still have the right to vote in that red state?

2016 vote KS was 56.16% Trump
2020 vote KS was 56.2% Trump
2022 vote KS was 58.8% NO to restrictions on abortion.

Republican strategists are probably scratching their ass trying to figure out why their dark ages policies weren't embraced by Trump loyalists. I'm sure discussions on how to repeal the 19th amendment have been started.
You mean they just discovered they were lying to themselves?? And they believed themselves.

Sign of a good liar
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

MtnMan

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2004
7,934
6,561
136
You mean they just discovered they were lying to themselves?? And they believed themselves.

Sign of a good liar
They ain't figured that part out yet...

Any wagers that the voting machines were changing votes... in 3... 2... 1...
 

allisolm

Elite Member
Administrator
Jan 2, 2001
24,472
3,120
136

eelw

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 1999
7,568
2,808
136
And, as usual, no real reason for a recount. Only the usual gobbledygook "I have seen data in the week following our election in Kansas that there were irregularities the night of August 2." No actual data produced.
I get it, it’s the principle that matters. It’s always been the case, if someone wants to put up the money, they are allowed to request a recount. But when they have only raised 4% of what’s required, it’s going no where.
 
Feb 4, 2009
32,957
13,812
136
And, as usual, no real reason for a recount. Only the usual gobbledygook "I have seen data in the week following our election in Kansas that there were irregularities the night of August 2." No actual data produced.
Just read about this and yes she cites “irregularities” but nothing specific or even beyond irregular. Seems the State allows nearly anything to be recounted if enough people want a recount however they need to pay for that recount, my numbers may be off a little, I think I remember the recount costing $300-ish thousand and she has raised $8,000. Recount doesn’t happen until that money is bonded or secured in some way.
 

allisolm

Elite Member
Administrator
Jan 2, 2001
24,472
3,120
136
Just read about this and yes she cites “irregularities” but nothing specific or even beyond irregular. Seems the State allows nearly anything to be recounted if enough people want a recount however they need to pay for that recount, my numbers may be off a little, I think I remember the recount costing $300-ish thousand and she has raised $8,000. Recount doesn’t happen until that money is bonded or secured in some way.
They SHOULD have to produce the money AND the "data" before a recount could go through, but SHOULD doesn't always prevail. :(:mad:
 
Feb 4, 2009
32,957
13,812
136
They SHOULD have to produce the money AND the "data" before a recount could go through, but SHOULD doesn't always prevail. :(:mad:
In a perfect world I 100% agree. The world we have now I have to ask the question “Who decides what data is relevant or deems a successful recount”
We both know some shithead is going to say yes recount everything I want recounted an no to everything they do now want recounted.
The way their system appears to work is fine, get enough voters interested in a recount and fund that recount from voter donations and you’ve got your recount.
**this is a little speculation I think voters need to pay into the recount fund not companies or out of state folks**
 

MtnMan

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2004
7,934
6,561
136
And, as usual, no real reason for a recount. Only the usual gobbledygook "I have seen data in the week following our election in Kansas that there were irregularities the night of August 2." No actual data produced.
... and the recount has been completed... no change to the results, including the fact the bitching from the republicans continues...


color me shocked... not
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS