ADVERTISEMENT

Will Abortion Right's Be Kamala's Russia, Russia, Russia?

Nov 28, 2010
86,327
40,638
113
Maryland
David Brooks on tonight's PBS News Hour argues that the Dems are putting all their eggs in the abortion rights basket. It's an excellent issue for them, but can they win if they neglect (or can be portrayed as neglecting) the other issues?

Hillary scaled back campaigning on most other issues to go all in on Russia in 2016. On the one hand, Hillary won the popular vote by a solid margin, so you might say that was a good strategy. But, on the other hand, she failed to become President.

Is Brooks right?
 

From what I know about Brooks, he's a lifelong commentator that makes a lot of predictions that have tended to be about how our societies social friction is largely behind us and that we are in/headed for an era of cool-headed and gentlemanly reform as a center-right nation. I believe that the rise of right-wing populism and seismic shift that the SCOTUS has undergone has poked holes in his stalwart vision of American politics. The electorate eschewing the single issue of abortion for a more broad view would back up his beliefs that we are a reasonable block of voter backing incremental reform, rather than a population with increasingly divergent views of the future.
 
I've been watching Brooks for years. He's smart but he gets a lot wrong. Back when he was with Shields, he often walked back his opinions after Shields gave his, because, frankly Shield opinions were better. But now with no Shields Brooks doesn't have that pushback.

That said, Harris is pushing abortion hard, which is smart, but as the debate showed, she also has an arsenal of other attack points against Trump. She can dice him up anyway she wants. And she has diced him up with other attack points.

So in that respect I have no idea what Brooks is talking about when he says that Harris is putting all her eggs in the abortion basket.
 
I just saw this, too. He sounds like a lunatic. This post has trad wife vibes written all over it. "Vote for me because you won't have to think. You can instead be happy while you are forced to raise state government babies, because that's how I view you. As a baby factory. And I should know. I have kids from three different women."
 
I just saw this, too. He sounds like a lunatic. This post has trad wife vibes written all over it. "Vote for me because you won't have to think. You can instead be happy while you are forced to raise state government babies, because that's how I view you. As a baby factory. And I should know. I have kids from three different women."
Why do you hate your mother?
 
Why are you avoiding the question? What right does the state have to force women to have babies?
NoIm not. Obviously I hut a nerve.

Why do you hate your mother? Why do you hate lufecand embrace death? How many aborted babies did you help create?
 
NoIm not. Obviously I hut a nerve.

Why do you hate your mother? Why do you hate lufecand embrace death? How many aborted babies did you help create?
You're still avoiding the question. In Iowa you can't have an abortion past 6 weeks. Most women don't even know they're pregnant by then. So you've forced them to become mothers against their will.

Stop with the personal insults and answer why forcing women to become mothers against their will is ok?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gohawks50
You're still avoiding the question. In Iowa you can't have an abortion past 6 weeks. Most women don't even know they're pregnant by then. So you've forced them to become mothers against their will.

Stop with the personal insults and answer why forcing women to become mothers against their will is ok?
Why do you hate your mother and hate babies so much? Go back and re examine your statement.

Do you have fetal alcohol impulse control issues? You want totally risk free sex .
 
NoIm not. Obviously I hut a nerve.

Why do you hate your mother? Why do you hate lufecand embrace death? How many aborted babies did you help create?


Funny part, he asked you a legitimate question, and your response is to NOT answer but say "I hut a nerve"... OR, he is looking for you to stop with the theater and drama e.g. "why do you hare lufeand embrace death?" and simply answer the Q.
 
Back to the OP, I don't think this is the same as Russia. Russia is a far away place, nebulous in impact on our daily lives. There are more and more examples of the negative impacts of the decision to remove RoevWade AND it is a regression of rights of women. How do you think black folks would respond if generational rights were removed? They'd refuse to go backwards. I think Harris can certainly find another topic to beat the drum with that appeals to other folks, but keeping the women involved and active against Trump is the right thing to do. It has legs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDSMHAWK
Funny part, he asked you a³ legitimate question, and your response is to NOT answer but say "I hut a nerve"... OR, he is looking for you to stop with the theater and drama e.g. "why do you hare lufeand embrace death?" and simply answer the Q.
Why do you hate love death so much?
 
What an inspirational leader!

I think somebody got some internal polling cut by gender and it didn’t look good for the adjudicated sexual assaulter, serial adulterer, and the guy that killed Roe.

But according to Northern, the Dem’s’ messaging against this is “beyond absurd”.

🤡
 
  • Like
Reactions: artradley
Funny part, he asked you a legitimate question, and your response is to NOT answer but say "I hut a nerve"... OR, he is looking for you to stop with the theater and drama e.g. "why do you hare lufeand embrace death?" and simply answer the Q.

You're talking to a published author, educator and general expert in US/Russo foreign affairs! Have a little respect...and please disregard the atrocious syntax and excessive typos.
 
I've been watching Brooks for years. He's smart but he gets a lot wrong. Back when he was with Shields, he often walked back his opinions after Shields gave his, because, frankly Shield opinions were better. But now with no Shields Brooks doesn't have that pushback.

That said, Harris is pushing abortion hard, which is smart, but as the debate showed, she also has an arsenal of other attack points against Trump. She can dice him up anyway she wants. And she has diced him up with other attack points.

So in that respect I have no idea what Brooks is talking about when he says that Harris is putting all her eggs in the abortion basket.
You don’t have any idea about anything in life. Except being a leech to society.
 
You're talking to a published author, educator and general expert in US/Russo foreign affairs! Have a little respect...and please disregard the atrocious syntax and excessive typos.
Whats absolutely funny is you live in a world of one opinion. And yes Ive been at Maidan demonstrations which Im sure you havent. You live in a world of death obsession. You are incapable of discussion with anyone having different opinions. Like a Nazi.
 
David Brooks on tonight's PBS News Hour argues that the Dems are putting all their eggs in the abortion rights basket. It's an excellent issue for them, but can they win if they neglect (or can be portrayed as neglecting) the other issues?

Hillary scaled back campaigning on most other issues to go all in on Russia in 2016. On the one hand, Hillary won the popular vote by a solid margin, so you might say that was a good strategy. But, on the other hand, she failed to become President.

Is Brooks right?
Brooks is spouting nonsense. He's a concern troll who at best is sub-consciously pro-Trump. See this famous viral tweet per inflation that he eventually apologized for:



Harris hasn't put all her eggs in the abortion basket and Hillary wasn't running on Russia in 2016.

Both Harris and Clinton properly heavily stressed Trump's unfitness for office along with other issues, the Russia stuff in 2016 was part of that effort and was legitimate and should have been stressed by Clinton as part of the overall critique of Trump's fitness for office during the 2016 campaign.

The Russia stuff at this point is an after-thought because in the intervening 8 years Trump has proven his unfitness for office in about a zillion other ways. He's a criminal, a rapist, tried to overthrow the legitimate government of the country, he's incompetent, a deranged nut (just go check his Truth Social posts from the last 24 hrs). Etc etc etc.....

Eff off David Brooks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sober_teacher
Whats absolutely funny is you live in a world of one opinion. And yes Ive been at Maidan demonstrations which Im sure you havent. You live in a world of death obsession. You are incapable of discussion with anyone having different opinions. Like a Nazi.
You have been everywhere and done everything .. except leaving your dorm room. I thought it was a night game?
 
Why do you hate letting women control their own bodies?
Honestly, I believe women should have control over their own bodies. Problem is, they don't do a very good job of it. If they had better control then abortions wouldn't be such an issue, I'd be used for health issues and incest, instead of birth control. Birth control is something that should be used prior to conception. I believe the vast majority of Americans believe that too.
 
Honestly, I believe women should have control over their own bodies. Problem is, they don't do a very good job of it. If they had better control then abortions wouldn't be such an issue, I'd be used for health issues and incest, instead of birth control. Birth control is something that should be used prior to conception. I believe the vast majority of Americans believe that too.

The problem is: you’ve got states that aren’t taking the mother’s health, incest, and rape into consideration. You’ve got healthcare workers petrified to care for the woman in the most restrictive states.

I get that many don’t want abortions to he allowed in their states, but by enacting such strict laws, they’re killing women. And looking like assholes along the way.
 
I've been watching Brooks for years. He's smart but he gets a lot wrong. Back when he was with Shields, he often walked back his opinions after Shields gave his, because, frankly Shield opinions were better. But now with no Shields Brooks doesn't have that pushback.

That said, Harris is pushing abortion hard, which is smart, but as the debate showed, she also has an arsenal of other attack points against Trump. She can dice him up anyway she wants. And she has diced him up with other attack points.

So in that respect I have no idea what Brooks is talking about when he says that Harris is putting all her eggs in the abortion basket.
By your own analysis, Harris has abortion and she can slice DonOld up. That's a strong issue - but only a single issue - and an effective style. I think what Brooks is talking about is that Harris needs more than one issue.

It's like monoculture or betting everything on a single stock.

What if (to pick a plausible example) Netanyahu widens the war just before the election, and abortion - however temporarily - takes a back seat?

Harris needs more than just abortion and a confident demeanor to run on.
 
The problem is: you’ve got states that aren’t taking the mother’s health, incest, and rape into consideration. You’ve got healthcare workers petrified to care for the woman in the most restrictive states.

I get that many don’t want abortions to he allowed in their states, but by enacting such strict laws, they’re killing women. And looking like assholes along the way.
Couldn't agree more. But the uses of abortion were abused so long, they far right pushed back on it and banned everything.

It's a matter of accountability and responsibility, abuse it and someone with make you be that way.
 
Couldn't agree more. But the uses of abortion were abused so long, they far right pushed back on it and banned everything.

It's a matter of accountability and responsibility, abuse it and someone with make you be that way.

Wait. So you’re blaming the women who previously had abortions for stirring up far-right, evangelical nut job legislators and Heritage Foundation judges for this?

Sounds like the far right hate women and are trying to put the back in their place if that’s the case. That’s not a good look, Sharky.
 
Wait. So you’re blaming the women who previously had abortions for stirring up far-right, evangelical nut job legislators and Heritage Foundation judges for this?

Sounds like the far right hate women and are trying to put the back in their place if that’s the case. That’s not a good look, Sharky.
I don't know any personally that hate women. I just think they don't like sluts.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT