We’re a nation of moderate fiscal conservatives and moderate social liberals though. You summarize the strong left view, and that’s fine, but Lois’ point here is that your view isn’t the dominating one and our system is set up for moderate compromise and shared power. It works best when that is understood and voted…

I’m a Democrat but a lot of MSNBC shows were too far Left for me, so I don’t watch them. This includes Perry, O’Donnel and Maddow. If they’re going more moderate that would be a welcome change, since CNN kind of sucks lately.

I’m not arguing they aren’t Republicans or aren’t against programs to help poor or working women. I’m saying being pro-life doesn’t mean you’re on an anti-woman crusade. Almost half of American women are pro-life. Some people genuinely think it’s murder and fight it on that basis. I can’t dismiss them all out of hand…

Rubio doesn’t. A lot of them don’t. The ones that do probably do so to make it politically palpable. I don’t think any of things are clear cut, their stance or ours, but we all do each other a disservice when we dismiss the other side instead of trying to understand it.

Not saying I disagree with you, but if they truly think abortion is murder (which they do) then simply not having one themselves isn’t very satisfying. It’s a crusade for them and a divisive issue because (from their perspective) other people murdering babies isn’t something they can say “well agree to disagree” about.

The real problem is Bernie is going to be too far Left for many and Hillary has horrible negatives in polls and a lack of trust. Getting out the Dem vote or expecting it to be loyal is going to be a tough call this year.

Whoever isn’t there should be.

I was saying Trump can’t win for months and so were the pundants. Yet here he is, winning. I really think the Democrats are GREATLY underestimating his general election chances. He’s actually pretty centrist outside of immigration and the vast majority of people don’t care about the offensive comments (or find them…

Yeah, I kind of see it as a test of conviction. If you really think it’s murder then this makes sense. If it’s more touting the Republican party line and political then you want to “say the right thing” and obviously be for it in special cases.

I didn’t cry but man did I feel happy.

While I disagree with Rubio entirely, if you think it’s murder then I could see not wanting any baby murdered, no matter the father. Again, not my position, but if you see it from the “baby murder” perspective then it makes a sick kind of sense.

He appeals to a lot of blue collar democrats. He appeals to me on the surface, though I am sure if I dove more deeply into his record it would turn me off. I’d choose Hillary over him either way so the point is kind of moot anyway.

Is he anti-women for reasons other than abortion? Genuine question,’cause I don’t know.

If you think abortion is murder, which they do, then funding a company that “murders kids” is heinous whether that money directly funds the murder or not.

Not 100% sure what you mean but we can agree to disagree, no problem. I just understand that if you really see it as ending a life it would be important enough to restrict it for others and put it ahead of other women’s health issues. I don’t, but I see why they would. :)

Women have polled 50/50 on abortion roughly forever now. I kind of bristle at the idea of all feminists having to vote for the pro-choice party because of that. If you believe life begins at conception, like truly believe that, I could see why it would trump all feminist concerns about choice.

I’m pretty sure my mother would take great offense to you kind of dipping into the same problem the article addresses by saying a feminist should vote for whoever represents the left. She can make her own decisions about what is best for women, she would say, as she adjusts her Kasich hat.

Jezebel and many sites like it often take the stance that basically an allegation of sexual assault should be taken as a guilty verdict. I love coming here and seeing all the different opinions and challenging my preconceptions, but it’s one area I find really disappointing.

The point is if we canceled all contracts based on unproven allegations then contracts would basically no longer exist. It’s a shame, and I am not saying she is lying, but I don’t think the judge had a choice here. One person’s unproven allegation can’t destroy a contract.

The problem is the story isn’t really getting mainstream attention, likely because it is a one-on-one his word versus hers thing, and both have financial reasons to say what they’re saying. Not saying she’s lying, just that the story doesn’t have the right ingredients to get the kind of mass media attention that would…