Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arabs/Muslims along with 3rd parties will hand the state to Trump.

Muslims have basically nothing in common with the D party, no common beliefs or values. The only thing that the D party can offer is some kind of broad validation of their minority status, but no validation of their actual views or goals. If you look at Pew polling of Muslims, support for Ds have been declining since 2014. The only thing the left has going for it is the race hustle, but current events call the actual ROI for Muslims of that approach into question. Most people don't see themselves as being "minority" first. They see their identity as being interwoven with their beliefs and culture, and the D party isn't exactly traditional or religious.

You and pp have short memories if you think Muslims favor Trump who issued the 2017 executive order blocking refugees and travelers with passports from seven Muslim-majority countries. They live here in America with the same rights, benefits, and where their vote counts. They fled from countries where they had no freedom. Some will use Gaza as a threat to vote for Stein or whoever or sit it out. Some are still grateful enough to be here and many will vote, but not for Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris and Walz have both said they want to codify Roe. The "abortion should be between a woman and her doctor" is because the right insists on constantly portraying this narrative that women are waking up 8 or 9 months pregnant going "welp, changed my mind" or that people are killing babies after they are born which are just lies that show how the right views women.

0% chance Trump codifies Roe. He has consistently backed its overturn by saying "everyone wanted it to go back to the states" (obviously a lie).

Difficult to codify laws that no longer exist

Roe never existed as a law, simply precedent. And it's not difficult at all to codify laws that don't exist, you just...write them. Literally every law doesn't exist until it does.

If you were at all familiar with the US system of government you'd know that. This is basic stuff. Do a little research and your trolling might be slightly more believable comrade.

wrong, wrong, and wrong

Imagine being this proud of being this ignorant.

Show me the current Roe related law that could be codified? You can't codify laws that don't exist. You do understand that Roe V Wade was overturned, don't you? Idiots everywhere

Are you somehow under the impression that new laws can't be made, or do you not understand that ehen people say the government will codify Roe, they are saying that the law will be created. Are you really just arguing these stupid semantics? Christ, what a tiring chode you are.

Some people suggests Roe V Wade needs to be codified as if it were still in existence. There are a few steps that have to be completed before any Federal abortion related laws can be codified. Let's focus on those steps first.

Why? SCOTUS will justifiably shut down any “codified national abortion law” as federal overreach and therefore unconstitutional. That was the entire point of the overturn. It’s a state matter. You’re wasting your time.

SCOTUS did no such thing. They didn’t “send it back to the states” like Trump and other liars keep telling you. They left the issue up to “the people and their representatives” which includes Congress.

DP. Yes they did.

Read the tenth amendment.

Read the decision.

It doesn’t matter what the decision said, the forced birthers’ bloodlust for women suffering and dying must be satisfied.

The cognitive dissonance here is just wild. You think it is the pro-lifers who have "bloodlust." Wow, just wow.

Yes, what do you think GOP want when they send women back to 1931?

Wow, yourself!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris and Walz have both said they want to codify Roe. The "abortion should be between a woman and her doctor" is because the right insists on constantly portraying this narrative that women are waking up 8 or 9 months pregnant going "welp, changed my mind" or that people are killing babies after they are born which are just lies that show how the right views women.

0% chance Trump codifies Roe. He has consistently backed its overturn by saying "everyone wanted it to go back to the states" (obviously a lie).

Difficult to codify laws that no longer exist

Roe never existed as a law, simply precedent. And it's not difficult at all to codify laws that don't exist, you just...write them. Literally every law doesn't exist until it does.

If you were at all familiar with the US system of government you'd know that. This is basic stuff. Do a little research and your trolling might be slightly more believable comrade.

wrong, wrong, and wrong

Imagine being this proud of being this ignorant.

Show me the current Roe related law that could be codified? You can't codify laws that don't exist. You do understand that Roe V Wade was overturned, don't you? Idiots everywhere

Are you somehow under the impression that new laws can't be made, or do you not understand that ehen people say the government will codify Roe, they are saying that the law will be created. Are you really just arguing these stupid semantics? Christ, what a tiring chode you are.

Some people suggests Roe V Wade needs to be codified as if it were still in existence. There are a few steps that have to be completed before any Federal abortion related laws can be codified. Let's focus on those steps first.

Why? SCOTUS will justifiably shut down any “codified national abortion law” as federal overreach and therefore unconstitutional. That was the entire point of the overturn. It’s a state matter. You’re wasting your time.

SCOTUS did no such thing. They didn’t “send it back to the states” like Trump and other liars keep telling you. They left the issue up to “the people and their representatives” which includes Congress.

DP. Yes they did.

Read the tenth amendment.

Read the decision.

It doesn’t matter what the decision said, the forced birthers’ bloodlust for women suffering and dying must be satisfied.

The cognitive dissonance here is just wild. You think it is the pro-lifers who have "bloodlust." Wow, just wow.

Anonymous wrote:I’m in Michigan right now. Whitmer doesn’t reflect the voters. All the state’s billionaires are behind her, so the Lansing duopoly agreed to let her win in 2022. She basically ran unopposed. GOP’s candidate was a tomato can bimbo basically paid to take a fall. There is also zero right of center media outlet in the entire state, so crap like this Detroit smear will go “viral” statewide but it’s fake. Nobody is really bothered by this. Everyone knows Detroit is a dangerous dump. Everyone raised in Detroit wishes they could move away — including Lizzo who moved to California. And his supporters know this is out of context, like everything is.

Lizzo said Harris would make the entire country like Detroit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump has as much chance of winning this election as he has of winning Michigan. It's unlikely, but possible.

Despite what the very partisan and biased junk polls like Trafalgar want to make you think, Trump is not gaining and is not leading. Harris is holding steady and slightly ahead, but within the margin of error. The fake polls that are out there are laying the groundwork for what Trump does best, lie and cheat. His internal polling shows that he is losing and he is seeding the media so that he can claim the election was stolen (it wasn't, he's just a terrible candidate) and give him what he believes are plausible reasons to do what he did in 2020, which is try to steal the election himself. He will fail just like he did in 2020. 62 court cases and people like Kemp and Raffensperger will continue to tell the truth, that he lost and that he doesn't have any grounds to contend that he won.

I'd love to believe you, but facts from today say otherwise. There has been a slight uptick in Trump support in swing states. Nate Silver has a piece about it, and the NYT and 538 have registered the same effects. These are credible sources, PP.

Everything is still within the margin of error... but the trend is not in Harris' favor.

Nate Silver is no longer impartial. Earlier this year, he went to work for PolyMarket which is owned and run by Peter Thiel, the billionaire who is extremely conservative and MAGA. Thiel spends a lot of his time trying to manipulate the political landscape, such as bankrolling JD Vance and spend a lot of money on conservative Super PACs. Thiel has a great deal of influence on Nate Silver now and since his employment at PolyMarket, Silver has leaned much further right than he ever has.

538 is also no longer a reliable source. It's based on polls and they have allowed a lot of junk polls. Close to 50% of the polls currently in the 538 averages are right-leaning partisan polls that have been submitted to try and tilt the 538 results. As another PP said in another thread, garbage in, garbage out. When the data that is used to compile the aggregate is tainted and biased, then the aggregate no longer has accurate meaning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m in Michigan right now. Whitmer doesn’t reflect the voters. All the state’s billionaires are behind her, so the Lansing duopoly agreed to let her win in 2022. She basically ran unopposed. GOP’s candidate was a tomato can bimbo basically paid to take a fall. There is also zero right of center media outlet in the entire state, so crap like this Detroit smear will go “viral” statewide but it’s fake. Nobody is really bothered by this. Everyone knows Detroit is a dangerous dump. Everyone raised in Detroit wishes they could move away — including Lizzo who moved to California. And his supporters know this is out of context, like everything is.

It’s not Whitmer’s fault that the Michigan state GOP is a bankrupt train wreck which nominates insane candidates with no chance in general elections and couldn’t pay their bills to the point that their headquarters building was left open to potential squatters. And the Detroit News is absolutely a right of center media outlet.

Republicans always want to blame someone else for their self manufactured crises.

Anonymous wrote:I’m in Michigan right now. Whitmer doesn’t reflect the voters. All the state’s billionaires are behind her, so the Lansing duopoly agreed to let her win in 2022. She basically ran unopposed. GOP’s candidate was a tomato can bimbo basically paid to take a fall. There is also zero right of center media outlet in the entire state, so crap like this Detroit smear will go “viral” statewide but it’s fake. Nobody is really bothered by this. Everyone knows Detroit is a dangerous dump. Everyone raised in Detroit wishes they could move away — including Lizzo who moved to California. And his supporters know this is out of context, like everything is.

It’s not Whitmer’s fault that the Michigan state GOP is a bankrupt train wreck which nominates insane candidates with no chance in general elections and couldn’t pay their bills to the point that their headquarters building was left open to potential squatters. And the Detroit News is absolutely a right of center media outlet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris and Walz have both said they want to codify Roe. The "abortion should be between a woman and her doctor" is because the right insists on constantly portraying this narrative that women are waking up 8 or 9 months pregnant going "welp, changed my mind" or that people are killing babies after they are born which are just lies that show how the right views women.

0% chance Trump codifies Roe. He has consistently backed its overturn by saying "everyone wanted it to go back to the states" (obviously a lie).

Difficult to codify laws that no longer exist

Roe never existed as a law, simply precedent. And it's not difficult at all to codify laws that don't exist, you just...write them. Literally every law doesn't exist until it does.

If you were at all familiar with the US system of government you'd know that. This is basic stuff. Do a little research and your trolling might be slightly more believable comrade.

wrong, wrong, and wrong

Imagine being this proud of being this ignorant.

Show me the current Roe related law that could be codified? You can't codify laws that don't exist. You do understand that Roe V Wade was overturned, don't you? Idiots everywhere

Are you somehow under the impression that new laws can't be made, or do you not understand that ehen people say the government will codify Roe, they are saying that the law will be created. Are you really just arguing these stupid semantics? Christ, what a tiring chode you are.

Some people suggests Roe V Wade needs to be codified as if it were still in existence. There are a few steps that have to be completed before any Federal abortion related laws can be codified. Let's focus on those steps first.

Why? SCOTUS will justifiably shut down any “codified national abortion law” as federal overreach and therefore unconstitutional. That was the entire point of the overturn. It’s a state matter. You’re wasting your time.

SCOTUS did no such thing. They didn’t “send it back to the states” like Trump and other liars keep telling you. They left the issue up to “the people and their representatives” which includes Congress.

+1000 which means congress has the authority to pass new bills and at that point codification is possible! One step at a time. Let's go congress. Then we can talk codification.

The lack of education on this board is shocking sometimes. By all means, waste your time just to get slapped down as expected.

Codification is possible. You just need some faith and patience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris and Walz have both said they want to codify Roe. The "abortion should be between a woman and her doctor" is because the right insists on constantly portraying this narrative that women are waking up 8 or 9 months pregnant going "welp, changed my mind" or that people are killing babies after they are born which are just lies that show how the right views women.

0% chance Trump codifies Roe. He has consistently backed its overturn by saying "everyone wanted it to go back to the states" (obviously a lie).

Difficult to codify laws that no longer exist

Roe never existed as a law, simply precedent. And it's not difficult at all to codify laws that don't exist, you just...write them. Literally every law doesn't exist until it does.

If you were at all familiar with the US system of government you'd know that. This is basic stuff. Do a little research and your trolling might be slightly more believable comrade.

wrong, wrong, and wrong

Imagine being this proud of being this ignorant.

Show me the current Roe related law that could be codified? You can't codify laws that don't exist. You do understand that Roe V Wade was overturned, don't you? Idiots everywhere

Are you somehow under the impression that new laws can't be made, or do you not understand that ehen people say the government will codify Roe, they are saying that the law will be created. Are you really just arguing these stupid semantics? Christ, what a tiring chode you are.

Some people suggests Roe V Wade needs to be codified as if it were still in existence. There are a few steps that have to be completed before any Federal abortion related laws can be codified. Let's focus on those steps first.

Why? SCOTUS will justifiably shut down any “codified national abortion law” as federal overreach and therefore unconstitutional. That was the entire point of the overturn. It’s a state matter. You’re wasting your time.

SCOTUS did no such thing. They didn’t “send it back to the states” like Trump and other liars keep telling you. They left the issue up to “the people and their representatives” which includes Congress.

+1000 which means congress has the authority to pass new bills and at that point codification is possible! One step at a time. Let's go congress. Then we can talk codification.

The lack of education on this board is shocking sometimes. By all means, waste your time just to get slapped down as expected.

Anonymous wrote:I’m in Michigan right now. Whitmer doesn’t reflect the voters. All the state’s billionaires are behind her, so the Lansing duopoly agreed to let her win in 2022. She basically ran unopposed. GOP’s candidate was a tomato can bimbo basically paid to take a fall. There is also zero right of center media outlet in the entire state, so crap like this Detroit smear will go “viral” statewide but it’s fake. Nobody is really bothered by this. Everyone knows Detroit is a dangerous dump. Everyone raised in Detroit wishes they could move away — including Lizzo who moved to California. And his supporters know this is out of context, like everything is.

So you're suggesting the great state of Michigan will go for another 80 year old jerk? Doubt it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris and Walz have both said they want to codify Roe. The "abortion should be between a woman and her doctor" is because the right insists on constantly portraying this narrative that women are waking up 8 or 9 months pregnant going "welp, changed my mind" or that people are killing babies after they are born which are just lies that show how the right views women.

0% chance Trump codifies Roe. He has consistently backed its overturn by saying "everyone wanted it to go back to the states" (obviously a lie).

Difficult to codify laws that no longer exist

Roe never existed as a law, simply precedent. And it's not difficult at all to codify laws that don't exist, you just...write them. Literally every law doesn't exist until it does.

If you were at all familiar with the US system of government you'd know that. This is basic stuff. Do a little research and your trolling might be slightly more believable comrade.

wrong, wrong, and wrong

Imagine being this proud of being this ignorant.

Show me the current Roe related law that could be codified? You can't codify laws that don't exist. You do understand that Roe V Wade was overturned, don't you? Idiots everywhere

Are you somehow under the impression that new laws can't be made, or do you not understand that ehen people say the government will codify Roe, they are saying that the law will be created. Are you really just arguing these stupid semantics? Christ, what a tiring chode you are.

Some people suggests Roe V Wade needs to be codified as if it were still in existence. There are a few steps that have to be completed before any Federal abortion related laws can be codified. Let's focus on those steps first.

Why? SCOTUS will justifiably shut down any “codified national abortion law” as federal overreach and therefore unconstitutional. That was the entire point of the overturn. It’s a state matter. You’re wasting your time.

SCOTUS did no such thing. They didn’t “send it back to the states” like Trump and other liars keep telling you. They left the issue up to “the people and their representatives” which includes Congress.

DP. Yes they did.

Read the tenth amendment.

Read the decision.

It doesn’t matter what the decision said, the forced birthers’ bloodlust for women suffering and dying must be satisfied.