2024 US Presidential Election

[Torillian]

IkePoR said:

Torillian said:

Asking for specific policies so that you can be snippy and dismissive about it. Wow.....shocker. 

1. More progressive supreme court tends to do things I agree with. For instance the progressives were against presidential criminal immunity and would have left roe v wade in tact. 

2. I value freedom over natalism. Just like I think it's ok that people can use contraception even if we're far below replacement rate. You want people to have more kids figure out how to convince them to do so other than taking away their freedom to not have them. 

3. I specified the SAVE plan. Google it and we can talk about it. Save me the platitudes. 

Any policies on the other end you like or is this just a way for you to be shitty about what other people are trying to accomplish?

Also, you mention "no moral reasoning for their candidate". What do you call saying that the other person is immoral so you want Kamala? Sounds like moral reasoning to me. One can hate Trump and still have perfectly valid reasons not to want him to be president again outside of that hatred. Like that he tried to ignore the results of the 2020 election and stay in power anyway. Can you pretend for a second you actually give a shit about any of these discussions and contend with what Trump did connected to Jan 6th? Why isn't that a good enough reason not to want to vote for him even if the price of grapes is higher? 

I'm happy to engage with this, not trying to be dismissive.  Sorry you feel that way.

1&2. I hope you don't mind but I'm combining these as they mostly refer to the same end.  First, would you say you're anti-natalist? Second, if contraception is fine and we have more reliable means of it than ever, why are we fighting for the most barbaric, monstrous form of it? It's not being snippy, it hedonism. Third, is the freedom of the baby we're aborting less valuable than the mothers?  Because that would be very dangerous rhetoric.  

3. You would agree with me that SAVE is an IDR correct?  And it has a cost attached to it correct?  I'm not sure what you want from me here.

1&2.

If you think Abortion is bad morally then just say that rather than giving me bullshit about replacement rates. I'm pro reproductive freedom, I have two kids but I don't have any desire to force others to have them just because I want to boost the replacement rate. 

It is being snippy because it has nothing to do with my position. Here I'll show you:

"Oh ok so you are anti-freedom and anti-education. Doesn't sound very American to me." Now what did those two statements add to the discussion other than being snippy little bullshit? Start treating others with respect and maybe they'll take the time to answer your snarky question in just the way you want while you ignore any questions you don't want to talk about (Jan 6th). 

I'm fighting for people to get the choice to abort if they feel they need it. We can talk about limitations on this as I'd be fine with limitations similar to the previous Roe v Wade viability standard, but an abortion ban after 6 weeks is ludicrous. 

The baby doesn't have any freedoms to worry about as it has no consciousness. In the contest between the freedoms of a conscious being and the hypothetical freedoms of a being that will have consciousness later I lean towards the currently conscious being. 

In the case of a raped 10 year old are you going to make them take the baby to term? I'm willing to bite the bullet on my end and say that before viability I don't think there are any restrictions on why one gets an abortion. Are you willing to bite the bullet on your end? 

3.

SAVE is an IDR, it is not "free stuff". Here are the costs associated with is via the CBO https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2023-03/58983-IDR.pdf 
I think those costs are fine because IDR's are an important part of giving people without the means to pay for college a way to get a degree and improve their earning potential over their lifetime (the American dream).