General Discussion

uppityperson

(115,991 posts)

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

Reply to PoliticAverse (Reply #154)

Tue Aug 8, 2017, 09:11 PM

Aug 2017

If you can reply to a question with only a different question, I can reply with the original question.

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