NYT:Harris Struggles to Win Over Latinos, While Trump Holds His Grip, Poll Shows(Black Men's Fault)

[bnew]

I don't even care about this issue for one particular reason. The Democrats had control over all three branches of the government multiple times and chose not to use that power to codify it. They rather it remained a wedge issue they could use every election than actually fixing it for women. So this problem is their fault, because they could have fixed this long ago.

There would be no fear, if they had actually done what they promised to do when they had the chance. Now, even if they win the presidency, they do not have control over the other branches to fix this problem.

black women are dying because of these fukked up laws, you should care.

 

[UpNext]

Will Latinos get the Obama "tough talk"

 

[Uachet]

Harris has carved out 9% of the Republican base iirc. I don't think she's losing this race at this point.

I hope that gain was in those states she needs it. We have to remember numbers are not the only criteria, the electoral college is a concern. Hillary won with numbers, but lost because of electors. She needs to be deep in those purple states and even red ones, to increase the number of states she can pull to her side.

 

[Uachet]

black women are dying because of these fukked up laws, you should care.

The Democrats did not care, that is my point. I am not going to worry over something they allowed to fester for years, lied about resolving multiple times, but when they had the opportunity refused to do it. You want to rail at someone, rail at the party that allowed this to happen, knowing all these years what the Republicans were trying to do. You won't though, because you seem to be incapable of actually calling out the BS being done by the side you vote for. Well, unfortunately for your feelings, I can.

Let's be honest about this, it is not like the Republicans made it a secret on what they wanted and the Democrats were caught off-guard.

 

[bnew]

The Democrats did not care, that is my point. I am not going to worry over something they allowed to fester for years, lied about resolving multiple times, but when they had the opportunity refused to do it. You want to rail at someone, rail at the party that allowed this to happen, knowing all these years what the Republicans were trying to do. You won't though, because you seem to be incapable of actually calling out the BS being done by the side you vote for. Well, unfortunately for your feelings, I can.

Let's be honest about this, it is not like the Republicans made it a secret on what they wanted and the Democrats were caught off-guard.

sounds like you didn't care either way?

 

[Clayton Endicott]

Latinos gonna vote for trump only to get that work if he wins the election

fukk em

 

[KidJSoul]

Who's going to lecture Latino men about this

 

[Captain Crunch]

Spoiler: full text

1/1
The monitoring, prosecution, and jailing of women for exercising their own bodily autonomy - this will be our reality if Trump wins and enacts his Project 2025 agenda.




To post tweets in this format, more info here: https://www.thecoli.com/threads/tips-and-tricks-for-posting-the-coli-megathread.984734/post-52211196

Come on nikka if you believe this bullshyt

 

[T’Challa’s Heir]

I don't even care about this issue for one particular reason. The Democrats had control over all three branches of the government multiple times and chose not to use that power to codify it. They rather it remained a wedge issue they could use every election than actually fixing it for women. So this problem is their fault, because they could have fixed this long ago.

There would be no fear, if they had actually done what they promised to do when they had the chance. Now, even if they win the presidency, they do not have control over the other branches to fix this problem.

1) Since 1973, when Roe came down, can you tell me exactly what years the Democrats controlled, the executive, legislature, and judicial branches.

2) I’ll assume you’re arguing in good faith, and meant both houses of congress and the presidency. If it’s codified; what stops the current Supreme Court from just being like, nah and striking it down anyway

 

[Uachet]

Party control in Congress and State Legislatures (1978-2016) | Nick Hillman

	Senate			House
	Dem	Rep	Other	Dem	Rep	Oth	Dem	Rep	Split+NE
1978​	58​	41​	1​	277​	158​	0​	31​	11​	8​
1980​	46​	53​	1​	242​	192​	1​	28​	15​	7​
1982​	46​	54​	0​	269​	166​	0​	34​	10​	6​
1984​	47​	53​	0​	253​	182​	0​	28​	10​	12​
1986​	55​	45​	0​	258​	177​	0​	27​	9​	14​
1988​	55​	45​	0​	260​	175​	0​	29​	8​	13​
1990​	56​	44​	0​	267​	167​	1​	29​	6​	15​
1992​	57​	43​	0​	258​	176​	1​	26​	7​	17​
1994​	48​	52​	0​	204​	230​	1​	22​	15​	13​
1996​	45​	55​	0​	207​	226​	2​	20​	17​	13​
1998​	45​	55​	0​	211​	223​	1​	20​	17​	13​
2000​	50​	50​	0​	212​	221​	2​	16​	18​	16​
2002​	48​	51​	1​	205​	229​	1​	16​	21​	13​
2004​	44​	55​	1​	202​	231​	2​	19​	20​	11​
2006​	49​	49​	2​	233​	198​	4​	23​	16​	11​
2008​	57​	41​	2​	256​	178​	1​	27​	14​	9​
2010​	51​	47​	2​	193​	242​	0​	27​	14​	9​
2012​	54​	45​	1​	201​	234​	0​	15​	27​	8​
2014​	44​	54​	2​	188​	246​	1​	19​	26​	5​
2016	46​	52​	2​	194​	241​	0​	14​	32​	4​

Jimmy Carter President in 1978
Barack Obama President in 2009

The year Roe V Wade was decided
Justice Vote: 7-2

In 1978: Jimmy Carter had the Senate and House backing him, 58 Dem to 41 Rep in Senate, 277 Dem to 158 Rep in House
Majority: Blackmun (author), Stewart (concurrence), Douglas (concurrence), Burger (concurrence), Brennan, Marshall, Powell
Dissent: White (author), Rehnquist (author)


The Justices when Jimmy Carter had both the House & Senate in 1978

Voted For Roe V Wade:
Burger, Powell, Blackmun, Brennan, Marshall, Stewart

Voted Against Roe V Wade:
White, Rehnquist


Was not on the court:
Stevens (Good chance he would vote against)

So between the Roe V Wade decision that 7 - 2 vote for, and 1978 when Jimmy Carter had both the House and Senate on lock down, they could have done and had 6 Justices supporting vs 3 against.

The Green Papers: Historical Data

United States Supreme Court Justices (by Term of Court)

www.thegreenpapers.com

In 2009: Obama had the Senate and House majority behind him: 57 Dem to 41 Rep in Senate and 256 Dem to 178 Rep in House.

2009 Court makeup


Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, Stevens, Thomas, Ginsburg, Alito, Scalia

Broken down via leanings:

8 being most conservative and -8 being most liberal around 2009

Stevens -3
Thomas 3
Ginsburg -2
Kennedy Slightly below 0 (so balanced)
Breyer -1
Roberts 1
Scalia 2
Sotomayor -2
Alito 1.5
Kennedy about 1

Going by what is above, any attempt to stop the President, House & Senate from codifying Roe V. Wade would have shaken out in a 5 to 4 at worst. More than likely they would have not even taken up the case, because many of the conservatives were not deep conservatives according to the graph above. Still, I admit I am wrong about the time period of Obama, he did not have the Court completely behind him. Though, he could have still tested the Court to see, by pushing through the codification of Roe V Wade since the Democrats had a significant majority when he came into office. Add also the fact that the two independents caucused with the Democrats, he could have easily sought to codify Roe V Wade.

U.S. Senate: Party Division

Party Division

www.senate.gov

111th Congress (2009–2011)

Majority Party: Democrats (57 seats)

Minority Party: Republicans (41 seats)

Other Parties: 1 Independent; 1 Independent Democrat (both caucused with the Democrats)

Total Seats: 100

Note: Senator Arlen Specter was reelected in 2004 as a Republican, and became a Democrat on April 30, 2009. Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut was reelected in 2006 as an independent candidate, and became an Independent Democrat. Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont was elected in 2006 as an Independent.

 

[Uachet]

Oh, I forgot Bill Clinton. He had a Democratic majority in both the House and Senate too in 1993.

57 Dem to 43 Rep in Senate and 258 Dem to 176 Rep in the House. I knew I was a forgeting one President.

 

[JLova]

Will Latinos get the Obama "tough talk"

Latinos will turn right around and say...worry about your own people who won't even oppose a white supremacist.

 

[BeeCityRoller]

That poll where 67% say "I do not feel like he is talking about me" regarding immigration is telling. Trump/Vance changed their rhetoric to make Haitians the scapegoat...FBA, ADOS, or Immigrant, they look at us as the common enemy.

I would not be surprised if the polls are 2-3 points off like in 2016, with Latinos being part of that margin of error. Seems like every non-black minority is striving to be more white-adjacent. And those suburban TikTok/Influencers will portray themselves one way online and vote for Trump on November 5th too.

 

[Black Magisterialness]

I don't even care about this issue for one particular reason. The Democrats had control over all three branches of the government multiple times and chose not to use that power to codify it. They rather it remained a wedge issue they could use every election than actually fixing it for women. So this problem is their fault, because they could have fixed this long ago.

There would be no fear, if they had actually done what they promised to do when they had the chance. Now, even if they win the presidency, they do not have control over the other branches to fix this problem.

That's not how it works. There's only a simple majority and not a supermajority. The GOP, red state Dems (and many minority Christian legislators) would have stymied it until it went to the same Supreme Court that struck Roe down. At this point, the only way abortion is codified is that enough states (the important ones at least.) do so at the state level to give legislative credence to make it a national law. It's on the States now. The issue was that people didn't vote down ballot nation wide. So now not only did the Supreme Court strike down Roe, but now Federal and State judges/Supreme Courts will ultimately have the final say.

This isn't about Washington anymore. And it wasn't the moment Roe ended.

Right now the only states that have protected it are Michigan and Ohio. Purple states.

 

[DaHNIC82]

If not more. The "black male inroads" are a fukking smokescreen. Black men are just as much a part of the Dem coalition as they ever have. Online rhetoric ain't real life. That's not even talking about blue collar brehs that fukk with unions heavy.

That shyt is shilled to make it look like her base is bifurcating when really, there's some fringe c00ns and contrarians, but no organized true effort to abandon the party.

You nikkas really live in a bubble.. Why are the democrat party(including Roland Martin) in Panic mode about losing black males?