ChiGoose

Partisanship, failure of the news industry, and a lack of shared facts.

I generally try not to react to them because they are the singular dumbest person on PPP, but sometimes they say something so stupid, I cannot help myself.

Ashli Babbitt died because she was a terrorist who was stopped by the police with lethal force.

The thing that has struck out to me so far is that everyone was asking Trump to make a statement to tell everyone to go home but he refused all of them. Then, the national guard was deployed and he changed his mind and made the video and told people to go home.

That's because you're a sheep. This is clearly a ploy to hide him from the public and test run Kamala as the candidate in 2024. The Deep State has not been satisfied with Sleepy Joke's performance so they made a deal with the reverse vampires in the KHive to boost Kamala for the next two years for the eventual take over. In the meantime, Pelosi is working with the woke liberal law enforcement across the country to rig ballots for the election to ensure the Dems win. I also saw from a secret government insider that AOC is planning on going to Guantanamo to use the anti-adrenochrome they extracted from the terrorists to age herself enough so that she will be 35 and can join as the VP on Kamala's ticket. Then, once Kamala is inaugurated after the stolen election, she will immediately step down and AOC will take over and enact socialism across the entire country. It's all so obvious. /s

I think a scenario in which a third party candidate gets so powerful they can dictate to their voters to hold off on supporting another party until they get certain concessions and then, once they give the signal, all of their voters will support that major party in acknowledgement of the concessions seems... almost impossible. Years ago, I stumbled upon CGP Grey's video on FPTP and it changed how I viewed elections and electoral systems. There is vast room for improvement, but even something as simple as a referendum to change to ranked choice would make a tremendous difference. Personally, I would love us to move to multimember districts with STV for the House, but baby steps... Bonus points: Twitter HATES him. Twitter ain't real life, people.

We can get around it through voter referendums like Alaskans did in 2020 with Measure 2. I think NYC recently adopted it as well. I think people are so fed up with the status quo and the partisanship that if we can find a way to put the question to them and not the politicians, there's a chance to get something done. You're right that if the politicians have a say, they will not willingly give up their power. So we need to work around that.

This has to be fake right? He's not *this* loony, is he?

Criminal probe opened into deletion of Secret Service Jan. 6 text messages Ok, I am officially revising my assumption from Option 2 to Option 3.

It all depends on the kind of electoral reform that is enacted. Personally, I think the simplest fix that has the biggest potential to make a difference is ranked choice voting (nothing will solve everything, there is no panacea, but we can make steps to a better system). In ranked choice voting, voters rank the candidates according to their preference. If a single candidate gets 50%+1 of the vote, they win. If no candidate does, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their votes are redistributed to the voters' second preference. This process repeats until either a candidate gets 50%+1 or there's just one candidate left. This helps break the "us vs. them" mentality because Candidate A will want to try to convince Candidate B's supporters to select them as their #2 choice in case Candidate B is eliminated. At first, it'll probably just be different flavors of Dems and Republicans running with multiple candidates from the same party in the race. But eventually, it should pave the way for viable third parties. You could have people pick the Libertarian candidate at #1 and the GOP as #2, or the Green Party as #1 and Dems as #2. Those third parties will no longer play the spoiler roll and will have an easier time getting supporters.

We have a first past the post electoral system that suffers from the spoiler effect. It is nearly impossible for a third party to emerge in such a system because it tends to compete with the party that is more ideologically aligned to it and therefore benefits the party less ideologically aligned. If we truly want to break the stranglehold of the two current parties, we need to reform how we do elections.

It was the dumbest rallying cry of a very vocal minority of people. No police have been defunded, many police budgets went up. It's not surprising that Biden supports increased funding for police.

It honestly doesn’t seem that way. It seems more like people pointing out the problems with Dobbs and you hand-waving them away, assuming they’ll eventually be fixed.

One of my friends works for the local Dems. They have been texting me quotes from GOP senators supporting the legislation all day. They are hoping against hope that there are enough GOP votes to get this to pass. I guarantee you that if you polled Dems, they would much rather the GOP helps them pass this than it tank.

I don't understand how someone can hold this view and also say this will all be ok if we trust the process that elected officials will fix these problems.

We should all be advocating for non-partisan electoral reforms like ranked choice voting. That would get rid of the spoiler effect that prevents third parties from succeeding and give a real chance for better options to emerge.

Almost impossible in a First Past the Post system like ours. We haven't had a successful third party in more than 170 years. If we really want to break the stranglehold of the two party system and end both parties, we need to advocate for electoral changes that make a third party viable. Simplest of this would be something like ranked choice voting or approval voting.

#1 sign you're about to read some idiotic whataboutism BS in an attempt to derail the topic at hand.

Doctors to woman while waiting for her health to deteriorate to the point where she is almost dying so they can help her: Trust the process! JFC, what a pathetic response.

It's literally in the headline of the NYT article @The Frankish Reich posted.

Since there are people out there who think that Dobbs v. Jackson Woman's Health Organization will only impact people seeking abortions for unwanted pregnancies, I thought it might be a good idea to see what is actually happening on the ground now that states are passing more restrictive abortion laws. Doctors report compromising care out of fear of Texas abortion law 1. Doctors have postponed care until a patient's health or pregnancy complication had deteriorated to the point that their life was in danger, including being sent home and returning with sepsis 2. Doctors struggled to get nurses or anesthesiologists to assist on procedures when patient qualified for an abortion because of fear of prosecution under abortion law 3. Unsure if they can use standard medical interventions, doctors are using less common or outdated procedures to avoid violating abortion law 4. Hospitals prohibit multifetal reduction that would preserve the health of the pregnancy 5. Woman who received significant fetal diagnosis could not get abortion options from her doctor 6. Patient whose water broke at 19 weeks flew to another state to get treated Have you recently had an abortion? Australian transiting through the US questioned then deported 7. Australian woman detained at US airport and interrogated about whether she was pregnant or had had an abortion Abortion laws spark profound changes in other medical care 8. Patient started to miscarry and developed a dangerous infection, but there was still a heartbeat, so doctors had to wait to treat her, during which time her health deteriorated 9. Multiple women with dangerous pregnancies develop severe complications due to abortions being delayed because of new abortion law 10. Sexual assault victim gets sterilized to avoid the risk of getting pregnant by another rapist 11. OB-GYN sees surge of patients seeking sterilization since the Dobbs decision 12. Woman has six different OB-GYNs decline to sterilize her 13. Lupus patient is told bey her doctor that she can no longer take her medication because it can be used to induce an abortion They Had Miscarriages, and New Abortion Laws Obstructed Treatment 14. Patient who received care for a miscarriage before Texas abortion law, was denied same care for a miscarriage after the abortion law was passed. She is no longer trying to conceive due to the risks 15. Pharmacies are asking for additional documentation or outright denying prescriptions for misoprostol to treat a miscarriage 16. Patients who are denied misoprostol return to their doctors days later still retaining pregnancy tissue or experiencing significant bleeding 17. Miscarriage patients have been turned away by doctors who worry that they may have actually taken abortion pills that did not expel the pregnancy With abortion access on the line in Louisiana, lawyers debate in court if ban is ambiguous 18. Woman's water breaks at 16 weeks and doctors wanted to perform a D&C but their lawyer advised against it. The patient was forced to go through labor for a dead fetus and hemorrhaged nearly a liter of blood. Woman says Texas abortion law prevented her from getting timely miscarriage care 19. Doctor refused to treat woman experiencing miscarriage until she has multiple transvaginal ultrasounds, risking infection. She is no longer trying to get pregnant. Patients head to Indiana for abortion services as other states restrict care 20. 10 year old rape victim has to travel out of state for an abortion Texas hospitals are putting pregnant patients at risk by denying care out of fear of abortion laws, medical group says 21. Afraid of violating the abortion law, several hospitals have turned away pregnant patients or delayed care, leading to complications. 22. Physician was allegedly instructed to not treat an ectopic pregnancy until a rupture occurred, which puts the patient's health at serious risk 23. Two hospitals have been accused of telling doctors to turn away pregnant patients and send them home to expel the fetus if their water broke too soon, which puts them at risk of infection Maternal morbidity and fetal outcomes among pregnant women at 22 weeks’ gestation or less with complications in two Texas hospitals after legislation on abortion 24. 57% of patients in Texas study experienced serious maternal morbidity compared to 33% of similar patients in states without laws like the Texas' abortion law Post-Roe, many autoimmune patients lose access to ‘gold standard’ drug 25. Pharmacist denied medication to 8 year old with juvenile arthritis because she was of "child bearing potential" As abortion ban is reinstated, doctors describe 'chilling effect' on women's care 26. Pharmacy denied prescription to assist with IUD insertion Because of Texas abortion law, her wanted pregnancy became a medical nightmare 27. Patient's water broke at 18 weeks and they began experiencing cramps, vomiting, and passing clots of blood and discharge. The pregnancy was given a 0% chance of viability but she was denied an abortion. The patient had to wait until the symptoms got worse before the hospital would induce her so she could deliver stillborn College-shopping students have a new query: Is abortion legal there? 28. High school students are changing where they apply to college to ensure access to abortion while in college Women with chronic conditions struggle to find medications after abortion laws limit access 29. Insurance company told patient they would no longer cover her medicine for Crohn's disease because it might be used for an abortion 30. Pharmacy stops prescription for patient with rheumatoid arthritis because it could be used for abortion 31. Pennsylvania doctor has had multiple patients who were unable to get refills of their rheumatoid arthritis medication Texan has out-of-state abortion to end heartbreaking and dangerous pregnancy, she says 32. Patient whose pregnancy was nonviable and could put her at serious risk had to travel out of state for an abortion ‘A scary time’: Fear of prosecution forces doctors to choose between protecting themselves or their patients 33. Doctor had to delay care and go to an ethics board for approval to treat an ectopic pregnancy 34. Doctors have been told to wait until patients with ectopic pregnancies are unstable before treating them Doctors in abortion-ban states fear prosecution for treating patients with life-threatening pregnancies 35. Patient at 19 weeks of pregnancy was going septic but treatment was delayed while the doctor obtained second opinions and final approval from a hospital lawyer. When Can Dying Patients Get a Lifesaving Abortion? These Hospital Panels Will Now Decide. 36. Hospitals are now using panels to determine whether a patient who is suffering a medical emergency may lawfully obtain an abortion. ‘They’re Just Going to Let Me Die?’ One Woman’s Abortion Odyssey 37. Patient whose fetus did not develop a skull and was leaking brain matter into the umbilic sac had abortion cancelled even though continuing with the pregnancy would risk her life. She had to travel out of state in order to obtain care Woman unable to get abortion may be forced to give birth to headless baby 38. Woman whose fetus is missing the top of its head and has no skull is denied abortion. Florida court rules teenager ‘not mature enough’ to have abortion 39. Court determines that pregnant teenager is not mature enough to obtain an abortion SC legislative hearing 40. 19 year-old's fetus is non-viable but because it has a heartbeat, she is refused treatment and sent home. ‘I’m Carrying This Baby Just to Bury It’: The Struggle to Decode Abortion Laws 41. Louisiana's abortion law is causing doctors to refuse to perform abortions even when they are medically necessary out of fear of losing their medical licenses or facing criminal charges 42. Louisiana doctors fear that the threat of prosecution will hinder their judgment or delay emergency care for pregnant women. One questioned whether they might be prosecuted for treating patients with meds used to treat other conditions that could harm a pregnancy Affidavit in Lawsuit Against Louisiana Law 43. The language in Louisiana's abortion law is confusing, contradictory and unclear from a medical perspective, leading to concerns from doctors that they will may face fines or even jail time if they make the "wrong" decision or interpret the law incorrectly. In order to comply, doctors may have to delay or forgo standard treatment, increasing their patients' risks of severe morbidity or even death 44. Pharmacies refused to disperse misoprostol because they did not know whether they were allowed to under the new abortion law. Even large corporations are unsure what is and is not permitted. 45. Exceptions under the abortion law are unclear, leading doctors to fear they may be prosecuted for providing the standard of care for lethal fetal anomalies 46. Patient who became pregnant on birth control told doctor she hoped the pregnancy was ectopic so she would not have to travel out of state 47. The decision for how to move forward with premature rupture of the membranes needs to be made quickly between the patient and her doctor. The abortion law will cause confusion and delay treatment during the critical time 48. The abortion law's lack of clarity could impact treatment for non-pregnancy conditions that use drugs like methotrexate, which can cause abortions. This can cause a chilling effect on the proper treatment for these illnesses 49. "Abortion" is regularly used in a medical context to refer both to the spontaneous loss of pregnancy (miscarriage) and an elective abortion. Under the abortion law, doctors will likely have to delay care to seek legal advice on what treatment they are allowed to provide 50. Post-Dobbs, doctors have begun to delay treatment out of fear of potential prosecution. This delay can cause irreparable harm 51. Louisiana's abortion law requires doctors to wait until a pregnant woman is extremely sick, even on the verge of death, before terminating a life-threatening pregnancy Doctors speak out: Idaho’s ‘cruel’ abortion laws will cause harm to their patients 52. Under Idaho's abortion law, doctors may be prosecuted for providing abortions to cancer patients so they can receive chemo treatment 53. Idaho's abortion law's vague language will result in confusion for what treatments doctors can provide and when, which can negatively impact patient health States with the toughest abortion laws have the weakest maternal supports, data shows 54. Since states with stricter abortion laws also have less access to health care and worse health outcomes, "...there's going to be not only more hardship, but greater health problems and maternal deaths..." 55. The 14 states with the most restrictive abortion laws had the worst maternal and child health outcomes in the country 56. Women living in states with the least restrictive abortion laws have a 7% lower chance of having a child with low birth weight. Black women in those states have an 8% lower risk 57. States with abortion restrictions also tend to have the highest infant mortality rates 58. States that enacted laws to restrict abortion based on gestation age increased their maternal mortality rate by 38% This never should have happened,': Doctor alleges pharmacy denied woman medication for miscarriage 59. Pharmacy denied medication to help patient during miscarriage A Mother, a Daughter and an Unusual Abortion Prosecution in Nebraska 60. Facebook provided chat records to police who used them to prosecute a mother and daughter for facilitating an abortion Affidavits: 2 more pregnant minors who were raped were denied Ohio abortions 61. Two Ohio children who became pregnant due to rape were forced to leave the state for care 62. Two Ohio women with cancer are not allowed to terminate their pregnancies nor can they get cancer treatment while pregnant 63. Three Ohio women whose fetuses have severe abnormalities or conditions that make a successful pregnancy impossible cannot get abortions OP-ED: Abortion bans actually deter women from having babies 64. Patient with wanted pregnancy was diagnosed with cancer but was told the doctor would not provide an abortion until she was on the cusp of death due to the law 65. Patient suffering miscarriage with vomiting and pain was denied treatment and went to another hospital which made her wait three days for an ethics committee to decide her case Teen girl denied medication refill under AZ’s new abortion law 66. Minor with debilitating rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis was denied a life-saving prescription because of Arizona's new abortion law Can rape victims access abortion in Mississippi? Doctors, advocates say no. 67. Due to concerns about prosecution, no doctors in Mississippi say that they would perform an abortion on a rape victim 68. Woman experiencing miscarriage was asked to prove she was having a miscarriage in order to obtain the medicine her doctor prescribed Some women say they’re having trouble getting prescriptions filled because of Georgia abortion law 69. Pharmacy requires additional information from doctor to provide woman with drug she had been receiving from them for years 70. Many members (but only women) of a healthy living foundation are reporting they are being asked to provide additional information for existing prescriptions. Woman With Severe Chronic Pain Was Denied Medication for Being ‘Childbearing Age’ 71. Woman was denied medication for a painful chronic condition that had previously caused her to consider suicide because she was of childbearing age Some Abortion Bans Put Patients, Doctors at Risk in Emergencies 72. Doctors report seeing treatment for ectopic pregnancies being stalled until they rupture and become life-threatening; people with broken water and fetal parts stuck in their ***** sent home until fetal demise or the patient ends up in the ICU Abortion bans complicate access to drugs for cancer, arthritis, even ulcers 73. After 20 years of trying to conceive, Tennessee woman decided to get sterilized after her doctor told her it was the only way she could stay on her current treatment for rheumatoid arthritis Kentuckians demand control over their bodies as doctors navigate abortion law gray areas 74. Physician's assistant refuses to fill medicine or patient experiencing miscarriage because they did not want their name on the order. 75. Kentucky sees surge in people seeking sterilization after Dobbs decision Chattanooga doctor sends pregnant patient to North Carolina for abortion 76. A pregnant patient in Tennessee was experiencing a dangerous pregnancy but her doctor had to send her out of state for treatment. The doctor herself is now moving out of the state Texas Woman Nearly Loses Her Life After Doctors Can't Legally Perform an Abortion: 'Their Hands Were Tied' 77. Texas Woman whose water broke at 18 weeks but doctors refused to treat her until she developed sepsis three days later. Her condition was bad enough that friends and family rushed to her bedside, fearing she was dying. Stories of the consequences of Dobbs 78. Multiple stories of the consequences of abortion bans (some may already have been included in the list, so I'm just including the video as one item) Missouri Woman Denied Emergency Abortion Called a State Senator for Help. He Sent Her to an Anti-Abortion Clinic. 79. Missouri woman's water broke at 17 weeks and the fetus was non-viable but doctors refused to treat her. She had to travel out of state for care What Happens When Doctors Don’t Learn How to Do Abortions? 80. Ohio woman's water broke too early and the pregnancy was non-viable. Doctors had to wait hours to treat her. Even then, the resident at the hospital had never performed the procedure due to the state's ban A Young Victim Of ***** Was Denied An Abortion In Florida And Forced To Travel For Care, Planned Parenthood Said 81. A child victim of ***** was denied an abortion in Florida and was forced to travel out of state for treatment

I think you've nailed what will be the most common objection to it: that it's not immediately necessary. I think Romney and Rubio just made similar statements. It's not entirely wrong: SCOTUS's term has ended so there isn't a danger in the next couple of months. I have not read through all of the cases they granted cert to, so I do not know if there is a case on point for Obergefell in there. If there is, Obergefell might be gone by next summer. If not, it's probably safe for another year. However, we know at least one justice who believes Obergefell should be overturned and the holding in Dobbs is that unenumerated rights only exist if they are deeply rooted in our history, which gay marriage (and interracial marriage) obviously is not. Given the fact that the Dems are likely to lose control of Congress and that GOP congressmembers generally do not support gay marriage, there is a very real scenario where the GOP takes control of one or both houses of Congress, SCOTUS overturns Obergefell, but Congress does not act to ensure marriage rights. That is an utterly chaotic scenario in which millions of couples in many states will no longer know if their marriages are valid or if they will retain all of their rights (adoption, legal benefits, tax breaks, etc). So a quick fix like this bill to just ensure that we're all set on this and avoid that very real potential scenario makes sense to me. It obviously is also beneficial for the Dems if the GOP largely votes against it, but ultimately I think it's more important that it passes and I'm glad that many GOP members of Congress seem to support it.

Here's the text: A BILL To repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect for State regulation of marriage, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the “Respect for Marriage Act”. SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SECTION ADDED TO TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, BY SECTION 2 OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT. Section 1738C of title 28, United States Code, is repealed. SEC. 3. FULL FAITH AND CREDIT GIVEN TO MARRIAGE EQUALITY. Chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, as amended by this Act, is further amended by inserting after section 1738B the following: “§ 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof “(a) In General.—No person acting under color of State law may deny— “(1) full faith and credit to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State pertaining to a marriage between 2 individuals, on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals; or “(2) a right or claim arising from such a marriage on the basis that such marriage would not be recognized under the law of that State on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals. “(b) Enforcement By Attorney General.—The Attorney General may bring a civil action in the appropriate United States district court against any person who violates subsection (a) for declaratory and injunctive relief. “(c) Private Right Of Action.—Any person who is harmed by a violation of subsection (a) may bring a civil action in the appropriate United States district court against the person who violated such subsection for declaratory and injunctive relief. “(d) State Defined.—In this section, the term ‘State’ has the meaning given such term under section 7 of title 1.”. SEC. 4. MARRIAGE RECOGNITION. Section 7 of title 1, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: “§ 7. Marriage “(a) For the purposes of any Federal law, rule, or regulation in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual’s marriage is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State. “(b) In this section, the term ‘State’ means a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any other territory or possession of the United States. “(c) For purposes of subsection (a), in determining whether a marriage is valid in a State or the place where entered into, if outside of any State, only the law of the jurisdiction applicable at the time the marriage was entered into may be considered.”. SEC. 5. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, or the application of such provision to any person, entity, government, or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, or any amendment made thereby, or the application of such provision to all other persons, entities, governments, or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.

Straw Man: Liberals think good guys with guns never stop shootings. Here's an example! Reality: Good guys with guns rarely stop mass shootings. It happens about 3% of the time: https://www.fox13news.com/news/how-often-does-a-good-guy-with-a-gun-stop-a-shooting It happens, and it makes the news when it happens because it's so rare. But the reason we don't see more stories about it is because it just doesn't happen very often.

You don’t see the “good guy with a gun stops bad guy with a gun” story very often because it’s exceedingly rare that it happens.