• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The official consequences caused by the overturning of Roe thread

Page 22 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
fskimospy said:
I mean who cares what he does now. He was an incredibly valuable senator while he was in office but that’s basically over now so we should just thank him and move on.
Click to expand...

His "value" was entirely due to circumstances (numbers) outside of any action of his. He was only in that position because the senate was so close. And I don't know many that are thanking him considering he torpedoed just as many (if not more) pieces of legislation as he supported. Brett Kavanaugh thanks him, I guess.

He's basically Tuberville that gets along better with Saban.
 
Here’s a consequence, per this mornings news 20% of registered voters blame Biden for the restrictions.
Twenty Fucking Percent. Democrats need to get out there and explain whom brought the suit to the Court and whom appointed which Justices who voted.
 
Pens1566 said:
His "value" was entirely due to circumstances (numbers) outside of any action of his. He was only in that position because the senate was so close. And I don't know many that are thanking him considering he torpedoed just as many (if not more) pieces of legislation as he supported. Brett Kavanaugh thanks him, I guess.

He's basically Tuberville that gets along better with Saban.
Click to expand...
Well if people aren't thanking them then I suspect they have not thought the situation through. The question isn't if he was the most liberal senator, the question is always what Manchin was in contrast to any plausible replacement, which would nearly certainly be a Republican and probably a very right wing one.

If you want to say he only had value because the Senate was close I would still disagree but it seems that discussion is not necessary because the Senate WAS that close and without him Democrats don't organize the chamber, don't confirm lots of judges, have all the same legislation torpedoed and then some (all?). I think those things are very valuable and without Manchin they wouldn't have happened.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
Here’s a consequence, per this mornings news 20% of registered voters blame Biden for the restrictions.
Twenty Fucking Percent. Democrats need to get out there and explain whom brought the suit to the Court and whom appointed which Justices who voted.
Click to expand...
I would be very interested to see the cross tabs for that poll as that doesn't actually seem that high and I suspect a significant portion of that number are going to be Republican partisans who are just expressing their anger with Biden by saying things they know aret false.

Like if you ran a poll and asked if Joe Biden was responsible for 9/11 you'll get some non-trivial percentage of people who will say yes, not because they believe it, but because they want to signal disapproval.
 
Exactly, 20% is lower than I would have thought.

Republicans are very experienced at blaming Democrats for the thing they themselves did/the thing they hate, there is no shame and it doesn't matter what any amount of facts or evidence say, or how ludicrous it is. It's the Karl Rove approach, though he of course didn't invent it, just perfected it.

The only reason its that low is that a ton of Republicans think the restrictions are great and won't budge on them despite public majority sentiment, so they don't want to give "credit" to any damn dirty Democrat for them.

All the Democrats can do is keep hammering it. Those 20% aren't going to vote Democrat I reckon, they are the hardest core abortion banners. Need the mushy middlers to win the election.
 
Stokely said:
Exactly, 20% is lower than I would have thought.

Republicans are very experienced at blaming Democrats for the thing they themselves did/the thing they hate, there is no shame and it doesn't matter what any amount of facts or evidence say, or how ludicrous it is. It's the Karl Rove approach, though he of course didn't invent it, just perfected it.

The only reason its that low is that a ton of Republicans think the restrictions are great and won't budge on them despite public majority sentiment, so they don't want to give "credit" to any damn dirty Democrat for them.

All the Democrats can do is keep hammering it. Those 20% aren't going to vote Democrat I reckon, they are the hardest core abortion banners. Need the mushy middlers to win the election.
Click to expand...
If they are the hardest core anti abortion why would they cite Biden as being responsible for the new restrictions?
 
Fanatical Meat said:
If they are the hardest core anti abortion why would they cite Biden as being responsible for the new restrictions?
Click to expand...
Because they aren't the hardest core anti-abortion people. About 40% of Republicans say abortion should be legal in most or all cases.

www.pewresearch.org

Public Opinion on Abortion

While public support for legal abortion has fluctuated some in two decades of polling, it has remained relatively stable over the past five years.
www.pewresearch.org www.pewresearch.org

So the evangelicals are probably happily crediting Trump with overturning Roe but that still leaves a lot of Republicans who like abortion but hate Biden.
 
I somehow missed this earlier, but several of the scientific articles used by plaintiffs to successfully argue that mifepristone is unsafe in front of their hand-picked Christian Fundamentalist judge were retracted from publication just before the case was heard by the Supreme Court back in March.

Issues included both inaccurate and deceptive presentations, as well as material methodology errors that “demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor and invalidate the authors’ conclusions in whole or in part.” These handful of apparently fraudulent articles used to help bring the case were in stark contrast to the more than 100 other studies showing mifepristone to be safe, in fact safer than tylenol.

After further investigation, several of the "peer reviewers" and authors on these falsified studies that claimed mifepristone as unsafe were unsurprisingly found to be pro-life activists, with undisclosed connections and conflicts of interest (some apparently acquainted through their common pro-life advocacy group memberships).

Gifted Washington Post link:
 
Dave_5k said:
I somehow missed this earlier, but several of the scientific articles used by plaintiffs to successfully argue that mifepristone is unsafe in front of their hand-picked Christian Fundamentalist judge were retracted from publication just before the case was heard by the Supreme Court back in March.

Issues included both inaccurate and deceptive presentations, as well as material methodology errors that “demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor and invalidate the authors’ conclusions in whole or in part.” These handful of apparently fraudulent articles used to help bring the case were in stark contrast to the more than 100 other studies showing mifepristone to be safe, in fact safer than tylenol.

After further investigation, several of the "peer reviewers" and authors on these falsified studies that claimed mifepristone as unsafe were unsurprisingly found to be pro-life activists, with undisclosed connections and conflicts of interest (some apparently acquainted through their common pro-life advocacy group memberships).

Gifted Washington Post link:
Click to expand...
Oh yeah the ‘studies’ literally consisted of them reading posts on anti abortion message boards in one case. Lol.

Total hacks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top