Awwww...where's the fun in that!
Printers won't have access to this. It's a draft. I'm sure it was just emailed through the SCOTUS intra-web.
Not yet. The Justice she's replacing hasn't actually stepped down yet.
SCOTUS Getting Shade Over Roe v Wade
- Thread starter The Original Sixth
- Start date
Doubtful. Leakers do one thing really well, they try and cover their asses. If it was a clerk, I'm betting they had the approval of their Justice.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
This may be the most out-of-touch thing I've ever seen you post on this forum.
You really think that Pro-Life voters, especially single-issue-voters, are going to just not vote when they now need to ensure appropriate laws are passed on a state level?
Sure, a handful will, but you really think those won't be outnumbered by people who go 'hey, maybe we actually *can* change things for the better, I'm going to bother voting now?'
Are you not aware of how the American public in general has steadily been shifting further and further away from fanatical pro-abortion positions, into more pro-life and limited-abortion positions?
And, as others on this thread have said, do you really think that the abortion fanatics weren't already voting straight-line Dem every election anyways?
It was almost certainly leaked in order to try and pressure the majority into reversing course and keeping Roe. If they wanted maximum engagement, leaking it doesn't help, they could have just sat back and let the ruling itself fire up D voters when it was supposed to be announced in June.
Blasterbot
Well-known member
one thing to point out is about 25 states have laws set to trigger when roe V wade falls. also this is a great way to keep Californians and leftists from moving to your state. keep in mind this has been promised since the 80s to republican voters and we have finally made progress on it. if anything this might be used as fodder to help show that McConnel's plan of just nominate justices is an actually effective strategy and we don't need to safari the RINOs during the primaries.
King Arts
Well-known member
Why should there be? Abortion should only be banned if you think the baby in the womb is a real person. Is it ok to kill the family of rapists? We usually don’t punish people for crimes done by others. As for incest can I kill products of incest that are already born? I know you want to purify the gene pool my fuhrer but we don’t do that it’s not 1930. Being against abortion is not to punish women for being sluts it’s because you want to save the lives of babies.
Agent23
Ни шагу назад!
Lol, and just before the Midterms, too.
This stinks like a provocation.The leftards know they will lose badly, so they must pull all the stops and mobilize all their support down to the last purple-haired land-whale and reeing NPC soyboy.
Not that they would ever be affected by something like this, anyway.
This stinks like a provocation.The leftards know they will lose badly, so they must pull all the stops and mobilize all their support down to the last purple-haired land-whale and reeing NPC soyboy.
Not that they would ever be affected by something like this, anyway.
This will backfire hard.Lol, and just before the Midterms, too.
This stinks like a provocation.The leftards know they will lose badly, so they must pull all the stops and mobilize all their support down to the last purple-haired land-whale and reeing NPC soyboy.
Not that they would ever be affected by something like this, anyway.
The riots that WILL happen will hurt them.
The lunacy, the outrage and the general ridiculous way they will act, will push people to the right.
And Republicans, knowing they just got a victory 40-50 years in the making, are going to be out at the polls in HUGE numbers to secure that win.
I really think this will just serve to fuel the red wave further. Those of us non Republicans who are voting for Republicans knew ahead of time that they don't want abortions, and have decided that it's still worth voting for them even if we aren't in total agreement on that issue.
It's not a make or break for us. For those who it was, they were absolutely never voting Republican anyways.
This is good news all around for the GOP.
Someone did the printing.
Man, I hope so. I want to be out of touch here. But you missed that this motivates dems. Yes, they would never vote red, but they also probably wouldn't have voted. Now they will.
On top of this, there are moderate voters who were willing to vote red because of crt who now might not.
If abortion was a make or break for us independents, we would have never considered voting R in the first place.
I'm saying it wasn't make or break until it happened. They might have been fine with overruling Casey, for example, in a compromise saying X weeks, but not this.
Again, I hope I'm proved wrong this November.
Republicans have openly been coming for abortion for decades. They've been passing more restrictions nationwide. If it was a make or break, we would have already hit the whole break thing.
There are prochoice Republicans though, especially in bluer states/places. Massachusetts' governor and Susan Collins, for example. It's more frequent than you'd think.
Like I, in the absence of a decent libertarian candidate, would vote Red for a candidate against gay marriage, cause there's no chance that gets overturned. Until it does, then I really got to consider voting blue
Maybe I'm more hopeful than you, but I think the GOP voters this brings out will outweigh whatever pro choice republicans get scared away.
Last edited:
49ersfootball
Well-known member
FBI is working on finding out who the leaker was: most likely one of the clerks, who's likely to be losing his or her job & facing criminal prosecution.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
'Pro-choice' Republicans barely exist outside of areas completely controlled by the left, and even there, they're not exactly common.
From an ideological perspective, actual conservatives are not going to court them on this issue, because we're not compromising on murdering babies.
From a tactical perspective, sacrificing a core constituency to court a small sliver of votes in districts that are basically impossible to win without that constituency is beyond stupid.
I'm curious as to what you consider more important than legalized infanticide.
From an ideological perspective, actual conservatives are not going to court them on this issue, because we're not compromising on murdering babies.
From a tactical perspective, sacrificing a core constituency to court a small sliver of votes in districts that are basically impossible to win without that constituency is beyond stupid.
I'm curious as to what you consider more important than legalized infanticide.
King Arts
Well-known member
No it does not distract the right from more important things. Honestly what kind of retard argument is this, you might as well say that kid grooming and trannies, and sodomy all distracts the right from more important things. If the right does not move forward to push it's morals then the left will.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
I tend to think food shortages increased cost of living more expensive fuel degenerate weirdo's teaching propaganda in school ect will have far far far more of an impact on the mid terms than abortion.