Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Kamala Harris for President"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Here's the latest polls that make a Madame President seem far more likely... @MorningConsult battleground tracking among LVs: AZ: Harris 47%, Trump 49% GA: Harris 48%, Trump 48% MI: Harris 49%, Trump 46% NV: Harris 48%, Trump 48% NC: Harris 48%, Trump 48% PA: Harris 49%, Trump 46% WI: Harris 49%, Trump 46%[/quote] These are not great at all. [/quote] Why not? If she wins PA, her path to 270 i pretty easy.[/quote] PA is one of the biggest Trump states in the NE so don’t count on it. Biden only won by 1.4% and that’s his home state. PA is Pennsyltucky after all. Western PA and Ohio are all Trump Land. She has more of a shot in Georgia than PA.[/quote] You are believing your rural Pennsyltuckey friends and family far too much. With the exception of 2016, when Trump scored PA because the Clinton campaign manager screwed up, PA has not voted for a Republican for president since Bush in 1988--36 years. Trump scored a coup when the Clinton campaign essentially relied on Pennsylvania voting reliably blue and did not defend it. Trump's went and campaigned in rural PA and some of the smaller cities and managed to get just enough votes (barely 0.5%) to win the state. Note that Biden's campaign was wise to pay attention in 2020 and they won the state by 2.2%. Harris' campaign will do that again. The Philadelphia metropolitan area has 50% of the state voters and is reliably blue. Pittsburgh metropolitan area is blue in the most populous county, Allegheny county. The area is 20% of the state population and tends to vote about 75% Democratic, mostly in Allegheny county, the other counties tend to lean slightly red. Scranton, Allentown, Harrisburg, State College and Eric all lean blue. So the areas that you cite as Trump county add up to barely 1/3 of the state voter population. Trump has a very weak chance of taking Pennsylvania again as long as Harris and her surrogates campaign there, which they have been doing regularly throughout the campaign. It would be very unlikely that Trump takes PA.[/quote] +1 And Harris is not ignoring rural Pennsylvania voters. [twitter]https://x.com/axios/status/1838536753910607883?s=46&t=kf1qYlCXQnKgUhJWEIu2vg[/twitter][/quote] Rural Pennsylvania voters will not vote for this left-wing California socialist. [/quote] Saying that she wants to eliminate the filibuster will not help win over swing voters. [/quote] It will when you finish the sentence, which is the fact that she will get back the rights for women that the GOP gleefully stripped from us. [/quote] What right?[/quote] The right to have full autonomy to control one's own body, health and medical treatment.[/quote] Does that apply to the covid vaccine as well?[/quote] That was different. That was a case of public safety. A pregnancy does not endanger any other citizen's health or life. At the time the vaccines were mandated, there was no treatment. This was before Paxlovid was approved for medical use. Coronavirus was known to be an extremely infectious disease that was fatal for many vulnerable subgroups of the population. So, one unvaccinated person could expose many others to the virus that could be known to kill them because there was no way to treat them. Once paxlovid and other successful treatments (not H-ine or I-tin) were available, the vaccine mandates were dropped. But at the time, it was the only solution known to protect many in the community.[/quote] So, in the case of the covid vaccine, there are limits on full body autonomy due to a potential injury to another person from that autonomy. But, there should not be limits on full body autonomy due to an injury to another person from that autonomy, if the other person is a baby?[/quote] Fetuses aren’t babies[/quote] They will be if you leave them alone. [/quote] The ones we are talking about will not only be babies, but they'll be orphans. Republicans talk so much about the intact family unit and needing a father and a mother, but they are more than willing to kill the mother to force the birth of a baby that may not live more than a few days or weeks. They are also willing to allow a woman to be sterilized to avoid getting rid of a baby that will not live at all, let alone a few days. So, they want to force these women with ectopic pregnancies to be childless cat ladies because they aren't willing to allow the doctors to terminate a baby that has a heartbeat but will never have a functioning brain.[/quote] So we agree that they will be babies. [/quote] Some of them will. Others will not. The ectopic pregnancies will kill their mothers and still will not become babies. There are babies with heartbeats but no brain waves that will kill their mothers and never live. Some will become babies, some for hours, days or weeks and will destroy their parents ability to have other children. And none of them have rights until they are born. Whereas the mothers have rights as citizens of the US.[/quote] The vast majority of healthy babies will not get to be born because their mothers did not want to be inconvenienced. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
