Stocks A to Z / Stocks S / Stryker Corporation (SYK)
No. of Recommendations: 5
It is funny watching Trump (and his minion Vance) try and negate the negativity around abortion for his chances to win the upcoming election. He keeps trying to pretend that he would not go for a nationwide abortion ban and that he wants reasonable access to abortion. Yet, when he gets in front of extreme conservative groups, he brags about his Supreme Court Justice appointments and their overturning of Roe V. Wade. He is trying to have it both ways.
Here is what makes it so funny: No one is falling for it. Among women who think healthcare access and abortion should be between a woman and her doctor are high priority issues are not falling for Trump's flip flop. They are not stupid, they know he is lying, and they are not going to vote for him no matter what he says he will do on abortion.
On the opposite side, those who think any type of abortion is murder and are completely against any and all abortion still generally support Trump, but they are nervous and less enthralled with Trump. Their support is wavering ever since he flipped flopped. More than a few might find reasons not to come out and vote for him in November.
So his flip flops haven't really won him any new supporters but are weakening his base.
It will be very, very interesting how Trump navigates abortion questions during the debates. He will need to be clear and concise in his support for some sort of timeframe for legal abortion if he even hopes to win new supporters, but any clear and concise statement will turn of much of his Evangelical base.
No. of Recommendations: 1
He will need to be clear and concise in his support for some sort of timeframe for legal abortion if he even hopes to win new supporters, but any clear and concise statement will turn of much of his Evangelical base. - Umm
-----------------
The Evangelicals are already outraged over Trump's statement about Florida's six week limit being too short. A complete ban is the only thing that will appease these religious zealots...
No. of Recommendations: 2
A complete ban is the only thing that will appease these religious zealots...
And if he attempts a complete ban based on Presidential powers, what does that mean Mike?
No. of Recommendations: 8
A complete ban is the only thing that will appease these religious zealots..”
My favorite Barry Goldwater quote:
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”
No. of Recommendations: 7
Politics and governing demand compromise.
Remember the Tea Party started out as the "no compromise" party and then *COMPROMISED* on Social Security to get the bigger tent?
What's the difference between "no compromise" and "we're going to shove this up your @ss?" - very little in most cases.
So one party has been telling us they are going to shove their views up our @sses and wonder why we don't like it.
No. of Recommendations: 1
>>A complete ban is the only thing that will appease these religious zealots...<<
And if he attempts a complete ban based on Presidential powers, what does that mean Mike? - Lapsody
-----------------
That seems like a pointed question....
Suggesting I am unaware that legislation would be required.
No. of Recommendations: 2
There’s no ‘federal abortion ban’ absent legislation, which would never pass. But they need to keep the fear factor high.
No. of Recommendations: 2
..A complete ban is the only thing that will appease these religious zealots..”<<
Goofy: My favorite Barry Goldwater quote:
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”
-----------------------------
AuH2O was right about that.
No. of Recommendations: 1
So one party has been telling us they are going to shove their views up our @sses and wonder why we don't like it. - Lambo
------------
You must be talking about the Green New Deal.
No. of Recommendations: 2
The Evangelicals are already outraged over Trump's statement about Florida's six week limit being too short. A complete ban is the only thing that will appease these religious zealots...
It doesn't matter. He won't lose their support because they will NOT be voting for Harris. It seems that group has antipathy for Dems, no matter whom the Rep candidate is. As albaby has said recently, "negative partisanship". So the convict can say what he likes.
No. of Recommendations: 6
And if he attempts a complete ban based on Presidential powers, what does that mean Mike? - Lapsody
-----------------
That seems like a pointed question....
Suggesting I am unaware that legislation would be required.
Yes, it is a pointed question. But at least Dope thinks it can all be done with Executive Orders alone - Congress need not apply. Are you willing to go with the compromise that will occur in Congress, if it occurs? The last bill had review after three years built in. "No compromise" is one of the positions of some of the people in your party. Are you willing to tell them to compromise even if the bill is not as good as the one recently killed?
No. of Recommendations: 4
My favorite Barry Goldwater quote:
Ah, Barry Goldwater.
Today he would be considered a RINO.*
I still have a Goldwater/Miller bumper sticker in my political paraphernalia collection along with some John Kennedy posters and a boxful of buttons going back to Adlai Stevenson (that one is from my dad).
The Republicans have moved to far into crazy land that their only position is it grab power by any means necessary, including an insurrection.
What’s the difference between a terrorist and a Republican? You can negotiate with a terrorist.
* Republican In Name Only (I don’t want to upset Mike. 😁 And, BTW**, I think BOD stands for Board of Directors, too.)
**By The Way or Bacon Tomato ‘Wich IYH***
*** If You’re Hungry
No. of Recommendations: 1
Are you willing to go with the compromise that will occur in Congress, if it occurs? The last bill had review after three years built in. "No compromise" is one of the positions of some of the people in your party. Are you willing to tell them to compromise even if the bill is not as good as the one recently killed? - Lapsody
-----------------
You should recall my posting at the time that I favored taking the bill up in the house, improve it, and working out a compromise with the Senate.
But you ask in advance, if I am willing to go with a future compromise. Sure, compromise is good as a general principle.
But that doesn't mean I will guarantee now that I will endorse whatever is spit out later. Reminiscent of the old Pelosi ploy of, "You have to pass it to find out what's in it."
No. of Recommendations: 2
You must be talking about the Green New Deal.
Never took the Green New Deal seriously. But Trump has the ability to interfere a lot, and has no compunction against interfering in abortion after elected.
No. of Recommendations: 1
* Republican In Name Only (I don’t want to upset Mike. 😁 And, BTW**, I think BOD stands for Board of Directors, too.) - AW
----------------
Thank you Alpha for respecting my delicate nature.
No. of Recommendations: 0
But Trump has the ability to interfere a lot, and has no compunction against interfering in abortion after elected. - Lapsody
--------------------
I dunno, after he is elected, I don't see any benefit to him wading into this swamp. a swamp that he created. He doesn't have to appease the Evangelicals since he won't be running in 2028.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Oops, got sidetracked into immigration.
So people are talking Comstock, and, let's face it, the picture we have now is ugly. There seems to be blocks of states together that enact legislation against abortion so women will have to travel 800-1000 miles to get an abortion. And at least one state has enacted laws that punish a person if they leave, get an abortion, and come back.
Are we now going to have fights over mailing pills in this area? Are we going to have other fights? Are we going to be reviewing manifests for pills being shipped through the state to another state? (illegal, but what's the penalty?)
This will go on forever. While I don't see a Federal ban on abortion, I do see that there is plenty that can be interfered with.
No. of Recommendations: 1
You should recall my posting at the time that I favored taking the bill up in the house, improve it, and working out a compromise with the Senate.
No, Mike. I recall your position as being - Why couldn't the President shut the border for the entire three years? Six months shut down then shorter periods? NFG. <--- :) It's a terrible bill. Sucks. Then Albaby explained to us why the bill looked that way, and both of us had to follow it all the way back to the Geneva Convention
No. of Recommendations: 12
There’s no ‘federal abortion ban’ absent legislation, which would never pass.
The shitcanning of RoevWade is, in effect, a federal abortion ban in which only pro-choice states afford women full rights.
But they need to keep the fear factor high.
Sheesh... the opinion of an old, disgruntled, partisan misogynist denigrating the value moral people put on equal rights and privacy rights. .
No. of Recommendations: 8
There’s no ‘federal abortion ban’ absent legislation, which would never pass. But they need to keep the fear factor high.
Dope, you are one who thinks it all can be done by Executive Order - Congress need not be consulted.
