US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[LurkTrawl]

If you had to be in charge of redesigning the american political system what would you do?

I made a post a while ago about this but the only fucking thing that matters is that the current power system:

Federal > state > local (county, municipality, etc.) needs to be reorganized.

The fed should be a skeletal structure purely for tending to matters of cohesion between the states as an intermediary, states should have returned to them the amount of power they enjoyed prior to the civil war, and counties/towns should in turn have a similar relationship with their states.

I want an america where abortion isn't a states-rights issue, it's a fucking town hall conference for your local ordinances on healthcare in the proud town of Lynchville.

It's very, very important to the powers that be for women to be dosed up with progesterone, because progesterone, the pregnancy hormone, makes you extra safety-inclined (protective evolutionary mechanism for pregnant women). It makes you want to let someone else take charge of things and protect you from the baddies.

I didn't know this, but now that I do, I will not stop telling other people about it.

More people should know this, that's unbelievably fucked up. How much of that passes through into the municipal water supply?

Trump has a big territory to defend and we’re not going to see the same level of enthusiasm in the rust belt that we saw in 2016.

You're tripping balls if you think the problem is "enthusiasm". I've never seen people more enthusiastic to get the fuck rid of Biden.

 

[invisibult plus+]

Sorry to burst the bubble but national popular vote doesn’t win you the presidency. Trump has a big territory to defend and we’re not going to see the same level of enthusiasm in the rust belt that we saw in 2016. Biden will win by a hair:
View attachment 6162877
This is my 2024 prediction and I look forward to another four years of the funniest administration in my lifetime.

We'll see how many ballots, all filled in perfectly just for Biden, that people ""find"" in battleground states and blue cities.

 

[FieldPiece]

The end of the sentence got aborted.


The fertility crisis is a complex issue with multiple factors at play, and birth control is just one of the many contributing elements. It's over simplistic to attribute the crisis solely to birth control, as other factors also play a significant role."

I'm not gonna blame it entirely on birth control, but it is a very important. I was an accident and I turned out only slightly retarded so maybe accident babies aren't all bad?

The real issue is that due to industrial society kids are no longer a net benefit to a household. It used to be that having a kid meant you had someone else to milk the cows, or later on another hand in the coal mine. Now it's just another mouth to feed. Not arguing for child labor but industrial society really do be a disaster for the human race.

 

[Garm]

If you had to be in charge of redesigning the american political system what would you do?
I would personally double the amount of senators and represenatives in each state so its harder for lobbyists to control government.

There is supposed to be around 11,000 people in the House of representatives.

Point this fact out to anyone that complains about the electoral college and watch how quickly they decide Democracy should be abandoned.

 

[StarkRavingMad]

i disagree. i think if the election was held today this would be the likely result. the uncolored states are true tossups right now. close enough that bad weather can determine the results. coin toss.
View attachment 6162937

Remember: Colorado made a dumbass law that their electoral votes go to whomever wins the popular vote (I believe this was done in 2019?). So if Trump pulls off the popular vote (which he will if the map you're sharing is accurate), you can give Colorado's electoral votes to him too.

 

[Dr J]

Sorry to burst the bubble but national popular vote doesn’t win you the presidency.

No Republican who's won the popular is losing the electoral college. Just not happening

 

[WhiskeyJack]

If only landowners could vote basically the only people in the entire country who could vote would be baby boomers, aka the people primarily responsible for the dismal state of a once great nation.

What an utterly retarded idea.

Land is not the same as a house. A plot of undeveloped land is about $3k/acre, farmland about $5.5k.

Anyway, I’m more in favor of a system where you can only vote if you are registered for the draft and anyone can opt out of registering for the draft. That should greatly limit voting to men overall, which would fix most modern political issues.

 

[quaawaa]

Remember: Colorado made a dumbass law that their electoral votes go to whomever wins the popular vote (I believe this was done in 2019?). So if Trump pulls off the popular vote (which he will if the map you're sharing is accurate), you can give Colorado's electoral votes to him too.

Nope, that law, which is unconstitutional as it is an interstate compact, only takes effect after signees to the compact have a combined total of at least 270 electoral college votes.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

 

[Qtinterval]

Teachers have worker's comp and their body parts are given a price. When one of my mom's little mongrels wrenched her arm and tore her rotator she was assessed to have lost 5% of the use of her arm after surgery/rehab and was given a check based on the assigned value of an arm and the perceived loss. I don't see why they wouldn't do that where injuries are worth some level of taxation for the purposes of representation, if not just flat-out saying that service guarantees suffrage. If you're willing to put your life on the line I think you deserve to be able to vote for the people who'll be sending you to die

I agree. Just pisses me off to no end (will take the top hat), when stupid fucks throw hot takes like only those that contribute. I would give anything to not be one of those poor fucks that can't contribute because our government decided to use me as a fucking guinea pig and each fucking day is an exercise of fighting though the pain, trying to be a husband and dad, trying to keep motivated and keep fighting to not just end it (especially with my particular flavor of autoimmune disease the only thing that can be done is physical therapy to hopefully slow it down as it eats my muscles), considering it took a decade to even figure out what was going on thanks to the lovely VA system I'm fighting to maintain about 40% of the muscle I have....all while trying to not break down anymore muscle since that just tells my immune system it's dinner time. Luckily not all muscles are effected an it won't kill me (not directly) but end result is having my ass wiped since I won't be able to do it myself.

If the government pulled some shit as what was suggested then fuck it I can't think of a better way to redacted for fed posting.

 

[Dog-O-Tron 5000v5.0]

-Require all public officials to wear body cameras recording 24/7

Suddenly the internet is flooded with "AOC Pissing" video.

Clinton's Senate and Cabinet posts were given to her for her agreeing not to serve Bill with divorce papers during the sex scandals, and she has made hay with them. Obama doesn't even have that. They have no record of real accomplishments, but we're supposed to feel good about their candidacies because of the vibes, I guess.

Hey now, don't say Hillary has no real accomplishments! She did kill Vilerat.

 

[Chickin BBQ]

Hey now, don't say Hillary has no real accomplishments! She did kill Vilerat.

The EvE online community thanks her for her service.

 

[Larry David's Opera Cape]

As the 2020 presidential race comes to a close, many are already looking ahead to the future and asking: Who will be our next contender in four years? With President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump both well into their golden years, concerns about age and vitality linger. And among those vying for the position, there seems to be a dearth of truly compelling options.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has been mentioned as a potential Democratic nominee, along with Senator Kamala Harris and Representative Tulsi Gabbard. However, each faces significant obstacles on the path to victory. Meanwhile, the Republican Party remains divided, offering up only token minorities or retread politicians. The Democratic party is in a similar position.

The larger issue here is that neither major party appears to have a strong, dynamic candidate ready to step forward and lead the nation. Instead, Americans may once again face a choice between two less-than-ideal options. Only time will tell if new leaders emerge to challenge the status quo and bring fresh perspectives to the table. But for now, uncertainty looms large on the horizon.

The Democratic Party's strategy appears to be focused on getting Joe Biden across the finish line in the 2024 election, even if it's just barely. Once they secure a win, they can potentially pivot to Kamala Harris, who embodies the party's diversity and progressive ideals. At this point, it's clear that Biden's advanced age and health concerns make it unlikely he'll be able to withstand the rigors of another four-year term.

Given the immense stress and demands of the presidency, it's reasonable to expect that Biden's health could become a major concern in the coming years. As a result, the party may be motivated to find a way to transition to a new leader, with Harris being a likely candidate.

This election cycle is likely to be marked by intense political machinations, and it's likely that the Democratic Party will have resort to controversial tactics to achieve their goals. This will include efforts to manipulate voter turnout, exploit loopholes in election laws, or even engage in outright vote rigging. Additionally, they will use their influence in the media and other institutions to shape public opinion and sway the outcome of the election. As the stakes grow higher, it's essential to remain vigilant and scrutinize the actions of all parties involved to ensure the integrity of the electoral process."

Are you using Chat GPT to write these?

I'm not gonna blame it entirely on birth control, but it is a very important. I was an accident and I turned out only slightly retarded so maybe accident babies aren't all bad?

The real issue is that due to industrial society kids are no longer a net benefit to a household. It used to be that having a kid meant you had someone else to milk the cows, or later on another hand in the coal mine. Now it's just another mouth to feed. Not arguing for child labor but industrial society really do be a disaster for the human race.

"Accidental" or "unplanned" pregnancies, just like "unprotected" or "unsafe" sex, were known until 1970ish as "normal and natural human reproduction."

It was quite a coup convincing us that the only normal, natural sexual act (unobstructed heterosexual intercourse) was the "unsafe" option, and all the aberrant, abnormal, and actually risky acts are just choices on a menu where everything is equally valid.

 

[Damocles_Sword]

i disagree. i think if the election was held today this would be the likely result. the uncolored states are true tossups right now. close enough that bad weather can determine the results. coin toss.
View attachment 6162937

New Mexico is solid blue, the dems gerrymandered that state HARD.

 

[pwnest injun]

New Mexico is solid blue, the dems gerrymandered that state HARD.

Gerrymandering doesn't affect a statewide vote tho...

 

[Cherry Dude]

New Mexico is solid blue, the dems gerrymandered that state HARD.

...do you know how the presidential election works?

 

[Breadbassket]

It was quite a coup convincing us that the only normal, natural sexual act (unobstructed heterosexual intercourse) was the "unsafe" option, and all the aberrant, abnormal, and actually risky acts are just choices on a menu where everything is equally valid.

Thank the wonders of marketing and pharmaceutical industry for this.

Excerpts from the article How the Pill Became a Lifestyle Drug: The Pharmaceutical Industry and Birth Control in the United States Since 1960:

Marketing decisions, rather than scientific innovations, have guided the development and positioning of contraceptive products in recent years. I review the stalled progress in contraceptive development in the decades following the advent of the Pill in 1960 and then examine the fine-tuning of the market for oral contraceptives in the 1990s and 2000s. Although birth control has been pitched in the United States as an individual solution, rather than a public health strategy, the purpose of oral contraceptives was understood by manufacturers, physicians, and consumers to be the prevention of pregnancy, a basic health care need for women. Since 1990, the content of that message has changed, reflecting a shift in the drug industry's view of the contraception business. Two factors contributed to bring about this change: first, the industry's move away from research and development in birth control and second, the growth of the class of medications known as lifestyle drugs.

IN MARCH 2011, THE SAN Francisco Chronicle ran a front-page story on contraceptives. It began, “These days, choosing a form of birth control can seem as daunting as shopping for a new laptop computer – the technology is constantly changing and there are just so many options.”1 Even though scores of different brand-name and generic products are available on the American market, a closer inspection of the contraceptive landscape reveals a menu of birth control options that relies on science that is more than 50 years old. Since the Pill was first approved in 1960, birth control continues to work in only one of two ways: by preventing fertilization or by preventing ovulation. The barrier methods—condoms, diaphragms, cervical caps, and chemical spermicides—have existed for the better part of a century (and in the case of condoms, for centuries). The modern intrauterine devices (IUDs) became available in the early 1960s, but they merely improved on a method first introduced in the 1920s. Hormonal contraception—in which synthetic hormones, either progesterone alone or in combination with estrogen, prevent ovulation—was the truly innovative contribution made by the Pill. The newer methods that have come onto the market since 1990—the implant, the shot, the skin patch, and the vaginal ring—simply provide different delivery systems for the hormones to enter the bloodstream.2 Even the technologies behind these delivery systems (e.g., silastic capsules for the implant, transdermal materials for the patch) were developed in the 1960s and 1970s. In the world of contraception, scientific and technological innovation has been moribund for decades.

Why might women need new methods of contraception? A few statistics from 1990 confirm the inadequacy of available methods. An Institute of Medicine study3 of contraception that year reported that almost 3 million unintended pregnancies occurred annually in the United States as the result of contraceptive failure. Half of the 1.5 million abortions in the United States every year were performed to deal with pregnancies resulting from contraceptive failure. One million adolescent girls get pregnant each year. Of women younger than 50 years, 20% had been sterilized, with another 15% married to men who had vasectomies; these people chose to end their fertility rather than deal with contraceptive alternatives, but up to 10% of the women regretted their decision after remarriage or the death of a child.4 Although issues of affordability; cultural constraints; and access to health education, information sources, and contraceptives all influence the effective use of birth control, the physical aspects of existing contraceptive technologies also play a role in women's decisions about whether to use them.

Margaret Sanger recognized the importance of reliable birth control for public health 100 years ago. Fifty years later, her dream of a “magic pill” became a reality when the FDA approved Enovid, the first progestin-estrogen oral contraceptive.10 The birth of the Pill in 1960 dramatically altered the contraceptive landscape for women during its first decades. In 1955, more than half of the American women who used birth control relied on either condoms or a diaphragm. Twenty-seven percent reported using a condom most recently, and 25% reported using a diaphragm. Ten years later, those figures had changed radically. In 1965, five years after the Pill was approved, 27% of American women reported use of the Pill, 18% used condoms, and just 10% relied on a diaphragm. By 1973, more than a third of American women (36%) used the Pill for birth control; only 13.5% reported using condoms, and a mere 3.4% used a diaphragm.11

The first advertisement for the first oral contraceptive, G. D. Searle's Enovid, showed the image of the mythical persona Andromeda breaking free from manacles around her wrist to symbolize the liberation of women from the threat of pregnancy.

Although oral contraceptives were technically marketed only to physicians, consumers were deluged with information about the new pills in newspaper and magazine articles. As Jeremy Greene and David Herzberg have shown, drug companies employed public relations firms to ensure popular coverage of the latest prescription-only medications.17 In the decades before direct-to-consumer advertising, American women received ample exposure to news about this contraceptive breakthrough, and they went to their physicians to ask for prescriptions for the Pill. By the late 1960s, almost nine million American women were taking oral contraceptives to prevent pregnancy.

In recent decades, one trend in the marketing of birth control pills was the great expansion of the oral contraceptive marketplace. A dramatic increase in the number of different birth control pills available in the United States resulted from the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, also known as the “Hatch-Waxman Act,” which set up the modern system of generic drug approval and regulation. By 2007, more than 90 brand-name and generic oral contraceptive products were on the market in the United States.28 Physicians, pharmacists, and women could choose pills based on price because the action of these contraceptives, or their therapeutic equivalence, was essentially the same.29 Brand-name manufacturers had to find a way to make their products stand out from the generic crowd.

The newest brands of birth control pills are not being marketed solely for the primary indication of family planning. For example, advertisements for Seasonale and its more recent iteration, Seasonique, promote freedom from menstruation, not freedom from pregnancy.42 Yaz's slogan, “Beyond Birth Control,” signaled that its real purpose was to deal with the miseries resulting from menstruation, such as headaches, irritability, and pimples.43 Pharmaceutical manufacturers are not selling contraception per se as a lifestyle option; rather, they pitch menstruation as an annoying condition to be ameliorated by their products. The emphasis on secondary effects instead of the primary indication in advertisements represents an attempt to differentiate products in a crowded field because no one brand can claim superior efficacy in the prevention of pregnancy.44 When the contraceptive aspect takes a back seat, the Pill appears to be a veritable lifestyle drug.

Fast forward to today and here is where the USA is when it comes to the pill.




If you are very pro-life, addressing abortion is an uphill battle. Dealing with birth control at this point, as entrenched in society as it is, even in a mild way such as attempting to change the narrative around it would realistically be a very difficult to accomplish task.

 

[kosmikulduzbok]

@Larry David's Opera Cape
I primarily only use AI for grammar and punctuation; however, I don't use ChatGPT.

 

[Bakarina]

Anecdotal experience, when I got on birth control (after 3 children) I was given several pamphlets about every option I had available when it came to contraceptions and the pros and cons of each choice. I also discussed with my doctor how quickly I could cease a hormonal regiment if it ended up turning me crazy because that was the hubby's main concern. Doctor also wanted me to discuss options with my husband (which he did during all of my pregnancies).

A lot of girls get put on birth control to help regulate their monthlies and some of my acquaintances in high school were mad that their doctors didn't want to put them on it because lack of sexual activities.

Question for people smarter than me: is it possible to OD on birth control pills like you can on other OTC medications?

 

[StarkRavingMad]

Nope, that law, which is unconstitutional as it is an interstate compact, only takes effect after signees to the compact have a combined total of at least 270 electoral college votes.

View attachment 6163161View attachment 6163170

I stand corrected! Thanks for the info.

 

[Jet Fuel Johnny]

I agree. Just pisses me off to no end (will take the top hat), when stupid fucks throw hot takes like only those that contribute. I would give anything to not be one of those poor fucks that can't contribute because our government decided to use me as a fucking guinea pig and each fucking day is an exercise of fighting though the pain, trying to be a husband and dad, trying to keep motivated and keep fighting to not just end it (especially with my particular flavor of autoimmune disease the only thing that can be done is physical therapy to hopefully slow it down as it eats my muscles), considering it took a decade to even figure out what was going on thanks to the lovely VA system I'm fighting to maintain about 40% of the muscle I have....all while trying to not break down anymore muscle since that just tells my immune system it's dinner time. Luckily not all muscles are effected an it won't kill me (not directly) but end result is having my ass wiped since I won't be able to do it myself.

If the government pulled some shit as what was suggested then fuck it I can't think of a better way to redacted for fed posting.

Remember everyone telling you to take the Clot Shot after you went through those fucking Anthrax shots?

"Oh, it's totally different THIS TIME, we swear!"

Right up there with: "I totally won't come in your mouth."