General Discussion

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)

136. This language can be so muddy

Fri Aug 4, 2017, 02:11 PM

Aug 2017

Would we let anyone who supports abortion rights get away with calling themselves prochoice claim that mantle if they also support eliminating food assistance? It's an extreme example, but that is what a consistent Libertarian might look like. This is really convoluted when the nuance is exposed.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

183 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This may be unpopular, but I'm ok with running anti-choice Dems if it will win elections. [View all] DanTex Aug 2017 OP

Harry Reid was an anti choice Dem joeybee12 Aug 2017 #1

NO he was NOT. He was pro choice!!! boston bean Aug 2017 #2

He actually was/is Docreed2003 Aug 2017 #9

Not forcing his views, not voting to take away rights, makes him pro choice uppityperson Aug 2017 #22

That what I was thinking as well Proud Liberal Dem Aug 2017 #105

IIRC, this is also the case with Joe Biden. GoCubsGo Aug 2017 #12

Personally opposing abortion but not pushing his beliefs on others makes him pro-choice. DanTex Aug 2017 #13

Wrong, both Reid and Biden are pro choice obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #54

If an anti-choice Democrat wins a primary.... Weekend Warrior Aug 2017 #3

Agree, the only caveat to that is what about W VA and other places, where a pro choice person Eliot Rosewater Aug 2017 #76

Can't Win Me. Aug 2017 #83

Same here. awesomerwb1 Aug 2017 #4

How many Jim Justice democrats can we put resources into? delisen Aug 2017 #32

I would say none to as little as possible for people like Jim Justice. SharonClark Aug 2017 #40

Exactly Me. Aug 2017 #100

With the possible exception of folks like Jim Justice, who were only Dems out of convenience alarimer Aug 2017 #35

Justice played the Dems. awesomerwb1 Aug 2017 #45

Once again, from the DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM, which begs to differ from your stance: WinkyDink Aug 2017 #5

I don't see how that differs from my stance. I agree with that completely. DanTex Aug 2017 #7

The 2 concepts are not mutually exclusive. You can be a Democrat that doesn't believe Lil Missy Aug 2017 #119

This language can be so muddy loyalsister Aug 2017 #136

Any Dem candidate that's fallen for anti-choice propaganda is likely Johonny Aug 2017 #6

That thing about the choice between Republican and Republican-lite is silly. DanTex Aug 2017 #10

Human Rights are not silly. Manchin gets to be pro-coal and delisen Aug 2017 #29

It's not silly- multiple election cycles have proven this out Johonny Aug 2017 #96

No they haven't. Like I said, Joe Manchin and Heidi Heitkamp actually won seats in DanTex Aug 2017 #120

I beg to differ Sgent Aug 2017 #69

Abortion restrictions in LA oegthe Aug 2017 #112

NO Sgent Aug 2017 #145

I'm in no way OK with it, but for the moment I'm not going to do more than vote against them Squinch Aug 2017 #8

Pro-choice is and always has been a major plank in the Democratic platform. DK504 Aug 2017 #11

Steve Driehaus won the west side of Cincinnati once greymattermom Aug 2017 #14

Pyrrhic victories are short-sighted. LanternWaste Aug 2017 #15

Yeah, lets just turn our backs on the majority of people who have kept the Democratic Party alive randr Aug 2017 #16

I'd argue that women's rights are better protected by having a Democratic majority DanTex Aug 2017 #18

Nope, not if any of those people are anti choice obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #57

that is absurd dsc Aug 2017 #114

The problem is not running in red districts randr Aug 2017 #17

Senate seats don't have districts moose65 Aug 2017 #151

So which of YOUR rights are you willing to give up? n/t Coventina Aug 2017 #19

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #31

Nope. Saying that you don't think half of humanity get to decide about their lives and bodies Coventina Aug 2017 #85

The op was pretty clear Egnever Aug 2017 #162

Well, it's pretty easy for a man to elect an anti-choice Dem. Coventina Aug 2017 #167

And again the OP said any rights Egnever Aug 2017 #171

I didn't say only men were anti-choice. Coventina Aug 2017 #173

For what it's worth - I agree. TBA Aug 2017 #20

In Texas anyone who is anti-oil will have a very tough time LeftInTX Aug 2017 #21

Sure the gop would welcome u dembotoz Aug 2017 #23

If the vote is between a pro-choice Democrat versus an anti-choice Democrat LovesPNW Aug 2017 #24

Unfortunately... Oubaas Aug 2017 #25

If you find the anti-choice position morally abhorrent, DLevine Aug 2017 #26

I'm not, and I don't think abortion has much to do with our losing elections. MoonRiver Aug 2017 #27

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #42

absolutely G_j Aug 2017 #73

I think you are wrong. I know a LOT of people who staunchly use that to make decisions around here. jmg257 Aug 2017 #81

My religious mother is liberal in most ways but always voted R because abortion. TacoD Aug 2017 #159

Good for your mom! MoonRiver Aug 2017 #160

That is silly Egnever Aug 2017 #163

Is there any evidence the anti-choice position sweeps elections? leftstreet Aug 2017 #28

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #34

But your link says abortion isn't even a voter priority issue leftstreet Aug 2017 #39

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #47

I'm ok with running pro-segregation Dems if it wins elections. LexVegas Aug 2017 #30

Yep! johnp3907 Aug 2017 #33

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #36

Your marginalizing of women's civil rights is gross. LexVegas Aug 2017 #38

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #61

lulz obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #63

Thanks for the mansplanation. LexVegas Aug 2017 #64

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #70

.... LexVegas Aug 2017 #75

Legalize Lonnie Anderson's hair. H2O Man Aug 2017 #78

Actually, the comparison is spot on. nt DLevine Aug 2017 #43

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #46

You obviously haven't seen what happens to women DLevine Aug 2017 #48

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #51

I would never support a candidate who was anti-civil rights, DLevine Aug 2017 #55

Same argument those against LGBT rights use obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #62

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #72

If you happen H2O Man Aug 2017 #80

Right. All the way up to 1972 RandomAccess Aug 2017 #125

Just stahppppp, you are wrong obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #60

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #79

You sound like a dude trying to tell a woman they're not being a misogynist LexVegas Aug 2017 #92

You are 100% wrong -- it is exactly the same obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #59

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #66

Before abortion was legal, an aunt, who I never met, died because of an illegal abortion. MoonRiver Aug 2017 #82

No, they are just dying in other manners. Might want to check out death rates of pregnant DoodAbides Aug 2017 #89

Women are killed different ways mercuryblues Aug 2017 #91

Many women have died because they were denied access to legal abortions. yardwork Aug 2017 #106

Outstanding! H2O Man Aug 2017 #37

+1 leftstreet Aug 2017 #41

Cosign obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #65

+100. (n/t) FreepFryer Aug 2017 #50

Exactly -- this is literally no different obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #56

That was basically the way FDR and Truman felt. Were they wrong? DanTex Aug 2017 #98

And if they won... it would be GOOD for the Democratic majority. JoeStuckInOH Aug 2017 #103

Is there a district somewhere that is so red treestar Aug 2017 #165

Please tell me what mercuryblues Aug 2017 #44

You have it backwards. Failure to elect Democrats is what causes civil rights to be lost. DanTex Aug 2017 #49

Yeah, the German Parliament thought the same obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #67

Actually they didn't, and that was the problem. DanTex Aug 2017 #90

so YOU aren't willing to give up anything mercuryblues Aug 2017 #93

I'm not willing to have women give up anything, particularly not the right to control DanTex Aug 2017 #94

No. just stop mercuryblues Aug 2017 #97

Actually, with 52 Dems, and 6 of them anti-choice, women's rights are much DanTex Aug 2017 #101

As long as you get to keep your rights. mercuryblues Aug 2017 #104

Purposefully obtuse? Egnever Aug 2017 #172

I understand mercuryblues Aug 2017 #177

Clearly not Egnever Aug 2017 #179

so you aren't willing to mercuryblues Aug 2017 #182

. Egnever Aug 2017 #183

Your last sentence says it treestar Aug 2017 #168

What red state Republican agrees with that? treestar Aug 2017 #166

So electing MORE people who won't stand up for civil rights RandomAccess Aug 2017 #123

Huh? Where do you get "MORE" from? DanTex Aug 2017 #126

Really? RandomAccess Aug 2017 #137

Yes, really. And, sorry the real world is not "irrespective of Republicans." DanTex Aug 2017 #138

Apparently you DO need a lecture about abortion rights RandomAccess Aug 2017 #139

No, I really don't, and yes, I fully support reproductive choice. DanTex Aug 2017 #142

It depends on the district treestar Aug 2017 #164

I'm not OK with it in the least herding cats Aug 2017 #52

"Dan" not your reproductive right you are giving away obamanut2012 Aug 2017 #53

How exactly do you think you'll win elections without the votes of women? BainsBane Aug 2017 #58

I couldn't agree more. SharonClark Aug 2017 #84

Thats' the policical calculation at hand, though. JoeStuckInOH Aug 2017 #110

anecdote is not data BainsBane Aug 2017 #116

On a district-by-district and state-by-state basis. DanTex Aug 2017 #124

I think a program of mandatory castration BainsBane Aug 2017 #133

I'm pretty sure there are no districts where mandatory castration is a winning issue. DanTex Aug 2017 #134

This message was self-deleted by its author BannonsLiver Aug 2017 #146

Wait there are no women that are anti abortion? Egnever Aug 2017 #170

I vote in the Democratic Party BainsBane Aug 2017 #174

"All issues should be on the chopping block." CrispyQ Aug 2017 #68

Here's my take: other CDs are not my circus, not my monkeys. politicat Aug 2017 #71

Bargaining away women's reproductive rights is not OK. The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2017 #74

How about pro-segregation Democratic candidates? I mean, as long as we're talking hypotheticals. WhiskeyGrinder Aug 2017 #77

I'm not okay with it, but I'm much less okay with letting the Republicans control Congress nt geek tragedy Aug 2017 #86

Why Do Democrats SDJay Aug 2017 #87

Is that different then allowing a KKK member to represent our people? nt DoodAbides Aug 2017 #88

I agree. We have too many primadona my-way-or-the-highway types who want their way on everything. nt Binkie The Clown Aug 2017 #95

So nice of you Dan. Dan the man! boston bean Aug 2017 #99

The Democrats have retake the House in 2018 Gothmog Aug 2017 #102

I'm not OK with that Progressive dog Aug 2017 #107

Going out on a limb here but guessing you're a male? nt Laffy Kat Aug 2017 #108

And? BannonsLiver Aug 2017 #122

Nothing. That covers it. nt Laffy Kat Aug 2017 #130

Yeah, I'd say it does. BannonsLiver Aug 2017 #132

Then we *ALL* need to work outside the (tainted) election process as much as in it ck4829 Aug 2017 #109

You came out of the gate as a conservative Dem, so what's new. Lars39 Aug 2017 #111

I'm a liberal Dem, no idea where you got the idea that I was conservative. DanTex Aug 2017 #121

so, women's rights are not important? only winning is? got it. niyad Aug 2017 #113

Winning is required in order to protect women's rights. And also to protect DanTex Aug 2017 #127

as I said, got it. niyad Aug 2017 #128

"Winning is required in order to protect women's rights." musette_sf Aug 2017 #141

Only if they also believe in mandatory blood, bone marrow donations and organ transplants for men KitSileya Aug 2017 #115

I don't care about their personal opinions. How do they vote? ecstatic Aug 2017 #117

I absolutely would. But again, there would be the same purists refusal to vote for the Democratic Lil Missy Aug 2017 #118

They typically MFM008 Aug 2017 #129

Those kinds of Dems are still conservatives. tenderfoot Aug 2017 #131

Or you can vote for republicans rock Aug 2017 #135

This may be unpopular to "some", but I will NEVER align with gestational slavery advocates musette_sf Aug 2017 #140

Compromise seems to be out of the question on this issue? johhnydrama Aug 2017 #143

what other rights beyond women's right to autonomy and health care do you wish more uppityperson Aug 2017 #148

"Compromise" seems to have worked well for women's health in 2009... PoliticAverse Aug 2017 #152

what other rights beyond women's right to autonomy and health care do you wish more compromise on? uppityperson Aug 2017 #153

You didn't answer the question. Did you support anti-choice Casey winning... PoliticAverse Aug 2017 #154

You are ccorrect, I didn't answer the question in your non-answer to my question. uppityperson Aug 2017 #156

You want to avoid reality with a hypothetical. This is about actual candidates with actual positions PoliticAverse Aug 2017 #157

You give a non answer again, show no indication you will answer. uppityperson Aug 2017 #158

I think most anyone reading this thread can see who is avoiding the real issue. n/t PoliticAverse Aug 2017 #161

It's very clear. Egnever Aug 2017 #180

I agree with you Dan. liquid diamond Aug 2017 #144

Fight It, not each other ck4829 Aug 2017 #147

Anti-choice refers to a political idealogy that seeks to enact laws that deny Ninsianna Aug 2017 #149

Great post, and I'll add, no matter how you frame it.. JHan Aug 2017 #150

"An anti-choicer period who wins will be a vote against women's rights and women's lives" - really? PoliticAverse Aug 2017 #155

Of course not. Egnever Aug 2017 #181

It's perfectly OK for you to hold that opinion. Apparently not OK to voice it, however. WillowTree Aug 2017 #169

What makes them Dems if they are anti-choice? LisaL Aug 2017 #175

Agree. ffr Aug 2017 #176

I'm ok with not letting GOP set debate. JNelson6563 Aug 2017 #178