pos 'pubs being complete pieces of crap

[DQ12]

But not against it that much.  Not enough to vote against those who want to do it.

True.

But it's so sad though huh?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocodile_tears

Yeah sometimes in a democracy you vote for people you don’t agree with on everything. 

[CHONGS]

Quite the pickle the single issue voter gets themselves into isn't it?

But then again if the ends justify the means who cares right?

[Rage Against the McKee]

But not against it that much.  Not enough to vote against those who want to do it.

True.

But it's so sad though huh?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocodile_tears

Yeah sometimes in a democracy you vote for people you don’t agree with on everything.

At least you agree on the only thing.

[Justwin]

i think the average joe doesn't really give a crap how much other people are taxed. 

median household income guy saw a pretty significant tax cut for himself in 2017.  shouting at him that the tax cut was actually bad for him because extremely wealthy people got a tax cut too is going to be a bit confusing for him.  i don't think the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" trope is actually very common.

Yeah, I kinda agree, it's in a different way the issue I have with the dems messaging on "taxing the billionaire's" or "making them pay their fair share" it plays too much into "well I don't like taxes so why would they" or "pay their fair share, they pay $XXXXX more than I do".

The real message should be, giving tax breaks to the billionaires destroys these social program millions of americans count on funding and then list all of them. WIC, SS, even ones that don't actually do that. The convo should be less making them pay their fair share, but that them avoiding taxes or getting a tax cut means your life as a poor person is going to be even poorer. And YOU have to pick up the bill or the bill doesnt get paid and you lose these services.

Explain to me how giving income tax breaks to billionaires affects Social Security.

Do you think that Musk is acting in good faith to find “fraud” in social security because he is interested in saving the program or do you think he is looking for reasons to justify eliminating or cutting it?

I'm not sure. My initial sense on him is that he thinks he can preserve Social Security in its current form without reforming the program or increasing Social Security taxes by finding fraud. I know that's simply not possible, but I don't think Elon knows that. When he finally realizes that even after all fraud is removed from Social Security, it still isn't solvent in the future, his instinct will be to eliminate it.

What does that have to do with income tax breaks for billionaires?

[CNS]

JW, didn’t you already cop to being a single issue voter, with abortion being that issue? 

[Justwin]

JW, didn’t you already cop to being a single issue voter, with abortion being that issue?

Yes, and...?

[DQ12]

Quite the pickle the single issue voter gets themselves into isn't it?

But then again if the ends justify the means who cares right?

I think every voter likely disagrees with the candidate they vote for on some issues.

[CNS]

JW, didn’t you already cop to being a single issue voter, with abortion being that issue?

Yes, and...?

I find it interesting that you would pay attention to anything political, especially enough to form an opinion on it, if you vote completely and solely on one issue.

[Dugout DickStone]

JW, didn’t you already cop to being a single issue voter, with abortion being that issue?

Yes, and...?

I find it interesting that you would pay attention to anything political, especially enough to form an opinion on it, if you vote completely and solely on one issue.

I think the goal of a single issue voter is to find other issues that they agree on/aren't inconsistent with that single issue of their candidate.  So, pay attention so you can reconcile.  That is why trump is quite a pickle for pro life/christian.  He is neither.

[DQ12]

I think the goal of a single issue voter is to find other issues that they agree on/aren't inconsistent with that single issue of their candidate.  So, pay attention so you can reconcile.

I don’t know what you mean by this.

[Dugout DickStone]

I think the goal of a single issue voter is to find other issues that they agree on/aren't inconsistent with that single issue of their candidate.  So, pay attention so you can reconcile.

I don’t know what you mean by this.

If your candidate has other redeemable issues you also agree on then bingo, you aren't a single issue voter.  You have found more than a single issue!

[CNS]

JW, didn’t you already cop to being a single issue voter, with abortion being that issue?

Yes, and...?

I find it interesting that you would pay attention to anything political, especially enough to form an opinion on it, if you vote completely and solely on one issue.

I think the goal of a single issue voter is to find other issues that they agree on/aren't inconsistent with that single issue of their candidate.  So, pay attention so you can reconcile.  That is why trump is quite a pickle for pro life/christian.  He is neither.

I think this is pretty close to the definition of being a multi issue voter.

[Dugout DickStone]

JW, didn’t you already cop to being a single issue voter, with abortion being that issue?

Yes, and...?

I find it interesting that you would pay attention to anything political, especially enough to form an opinion on it, if you vote completely and solely on one issue.

I think the goal of a single issue voter is to find other issues that they agree on/aren't inconsistent with that single issue of their candidate.  So, pay attention so you can reconcile.  That is why trump is quite a pickle for pro life/christian.  He is neither.

I think this is pretty close to the definition of being a multi issue voter.

mission accomplished!

[BIG APPLE CAT]

JW, didn’t you already cop to being a single issue voter, with abortion being that issue?

Yes, and...?

Personally, I would take all those surplus effs and give them somewhere else completely divorced from politics. How's the economy? Absolutely no reason to care. Your brown neighbor got rounded up by ICE? Why care about that when you can like, I dunno, really get into coin collecting? A (formally) trans student at your kids school committed suicide? Hakunamatata let’s bake some sourdough

[DQ12]

If you care about something a great deal, you’re not allowed to care about anything else.

[CNS]

How do you keep yourself from matching up those cares with a candidate if it’s not abortion?

[Rage Against the McKee]

Is there a place where it stops? Like do you watch The Handmaid's Tale and see that dystopia as an improvement over our current society?

[bucket]

Is there a place where it stops? Like do you watch The Handmaid's Tale and see that dystopia as an improvement over our current society?

I've also wondered where the line is. If you'd vote for someone like Trump. Would you also vote for Damien if he promised to make abortion illegal?

[BIG APPLE CAT]

If you care about something a great deal, you’re not allowed to care about anything else.

I’m not sure why you’d waste your energy? I mean by declaring you’re a single issue voter, is that not the signal you are sending? Do whatever else you want just so long as abortion is illegal. Just a hypothesis here, but if you do, in fact, care about those other issues, perhaps the optimal play would be to just privately admit to yourself that you’re a single issue voter, but outwardly let it be known that other issues matter too? Who knows? Maybe if the surveys and straw polls and whatever else they use for research showed that it is going to take more than just keeping abortion illegal to win your vote (now, keep in mind deep down you know that’s not true but they don’t know that!) then maybe they would have to follow through on some of those other items you care about?

[BIG APPLE CAT]

Or does that make you feel dishonest? Like this guy has already earned my vote, now I’m just being greedy trying to get other stuff too. I got what I want, no need to torture the poor politician and make him dance for me

[DQ12]

You guys are making this far more complicated than it needs to be.  For all intents and purposes, my rule of thumb is that I’m voting for the more anti-abortion candidate.  If candidate A said he’d institute the Holocaust but prohibit abortion, I wouldn’t vote for the candidate. 

If two politicians were both more or less equally anti-abortion, I’d vote for the one that more matches my views on other (lower order, in my view) things - which I have and I’m allowed to have. 

I don’t know why I wouldn’t be expected to have opinions on non-abortion things, even though the abortion question is almost always what’s going to win my vote

Is there a place where it stops? Like do you watch The Handmaid's Tale and see that dystopia as an improvement over our current society?

I've also wondered where the line is. If you'd vote for someone like Trump. Would you also vote for Damien if he promised to make abortion illegal?

No? 

[MakeItRain]

Kids again. This time it’s those with special needs. The floor is deep down I guess.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2025/02/13/17-states-sue-to-end-protections-for-students-with-special-needs/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3QEZZx3NseYCJZLrji-_VzeujRH-4ZIEvFgbgle5fUjhM2WGQto4LqH94_aem_FMjpmy18Yt6j-HE0qf-Lrg

Hey, at least they are alive and had the chance to be punched down upon! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bingo. Pro life my ass.

As a parent of special needs kids the recklessness of these really pisses me off.

FWIW, I’m very anti pulling funding from special needs education.

That matters eff all when you vote for those who are very pro pulling funding from special needs education.

I hope the pig faced, lying Iowa AG gets aborted after birth. Dumb bitch.

[catastrophe]

You guys are making this far more complicated than it needs to be.  For all intents and purposes, my rule of thumb is that I’m voting for the more anti-abortion candidate.  If candidate A said he’d institute the Holocaust but prohibit abortion, I wouldn’t vote for the candidate. 

If two politicians were both more or less equally anti-abortion, I’d vote for the one that more matches my views on other (lower order, in my view) things - which I have and I’m allowed to have. 

I don’t know why I wouldn’t be expected to have opinions on non-abortion things, even though the abortion question is almost always what’s going to win my vote

Is there a place where it stops? Like do you watch The Handmaid's Tale and see that dystopia as an improvement over our current society?

I've also wondered where the line is. If you'd vote for someone like Trump. Would you also vote for Damien if he promised to make abortion illegal?

No?

I think single issue voting is really just a conscience clearing exercise. Very few people seem to appreciate there is a very big difference between wanting to minimize the number of abortions and banning abortion.

If I believed a candidate truly wanted to eliminate abortions, then they would be talking a lot more about (1) sex education, (2) free birth control, (3) funding social welfare programs, and (4) promoting resources for kids who need it most (i.e., rough ridin' special needs kids and those facing serious trauma and mental health issues like trans).

All those things would lower the amount of unwanted pregnancies and encourage unsure parents that they will be able to care for their child  regardless of their current economic condition (or an obvious genetic issue like Downs).

But I can’t ever remember a candidate who vocally pushes to ban abortion while supporting any of the above. That’s enough to convince me that they don’t actually care about eliminating abortions. They’re either playing the “single issue voter” crowd as suckers or they’re really only interested in making minimal effort to solve a complex problem without any regard to the unintended consequences.

[michigancat]

I don't follow Kansas politics too closely but what are Kansas politicians actively doing to reduce/ban abortions after the amendment failed in 2022?

[cfbandyman]

You guys are making this far more complicated than it needs to be.  For all intents and purposes, my rule of thumb is that I’m voting for the more anti-abortion candidate.  If candidate A said he’d institute the Holocaust but prohibit abortion, I wouldn’t vote for the candidate. 

If two politicians were both more or less equally anti-abortion, I’d vote for the one that more matches my views on other (lower order, in my view) things - which I have and I’m allowed to have. 

I don’t know why I wouldn’t be expected to have opinions on non-abortion things, even though the abortion question is almost always what’s going to win my vote

Is there a place where it stops? Like do you watch The Handmaid's Tale and see that dystopia as an improvement over our current society?

I've also wondered where the line is. If you'd vote for someone like Trump. Would you also vote for Damien if he promised to make abortion illegal?

No?

I think single issue voting is really just a conscience clearing exercise. Very few people seem to appreciate there is a very big difference between wanting to minimize the number of abortions and banning abortion.

If I believed a candidate truly wanted to eliminate abortions, then they would be talking a lot more about (1) sex education, (2) free birth control, (3) funding social welfare programs, and (4) promoting resources for kids who need it most (i.e., rough ridin' special needs kids and those facing serious trauma and mental health issues like trans).

All those things would lower the amount of unwanted pregnancies and encourage unsure parents that they will be able to care for their child  regardless of their current economic condition (or an obvious genetic issue like Downs).

But I can’t ever remember a candidate who vocally pushes to ban abortion while supporting any of the above. That’s enough to convince me that they don’t actually care about eliminating abortions. They’re either playing the “single issue voter” crowd as suckers or they’re really only interested in making minimal effort to solve a complex problem without any regard to the unintended consequences.

Spracs and I went down this route a few years back (in agreement). I have reached that conclusion as well. I'd love for there to in general be less abortions. But there seems to be nothing to match the rhetoric of being pro life once the birth is done. No solutions to child care, education, healthcare, etc. It's pro birth. Seeing people want to defund special needs kids is about as low as it gets. You'd think that tree falling on Abbot would change his view on things. But he can just live wealthy knowing he's protected.