What makes you think that a single Trump voter is needed to win, when 4 years later the demographics will have shifted even further in Democrats’ favor, turnout will be much higher than it was in 16, and he lost the popular vote?

You’re right about the need to engage in precisely this kind of campaigning. Well, did you get a tax cut or not? Did it get easier for you to access and pay for your health care or not? Is your state having a budget crisis right now thanks to problem that tariffs will make worse or not? However, the reason to do it is…

Exactly, and that’s why everyone else who still has a functioning moral conscience needs to be united against any candidate who supported this. And I know it will work because the most far-right Republicans where I live are all issuing misleading, running-scared statements about how they don’t want to take anyone’s…

No, they’re committed to the demographic reality that we do not need those people to vote for Democrats in order to win. We need those people to be recognized fully for how wicked the things they want are.

It’s just that far-right Republicans are no longer needed to win general elections, and the more moderate Republicans and everyone else can be united around an opposing agenda, the better. 

No interest in reaching this section of the voting public, because they are now a minority and totally unnecessary for winning. The only goal worth pursuing is to unite everyone else against this morally and economically bankrupt agenda.

Ignore the minority that cannot be reasoned with and votes completely against their own self-interest and for some completely twisted idea of what religious values are supposed to be. Get everyone else to vote like their lives depend on it, which they do, and this problem is solved.

If people actually cared about voting the current problem would be solved, period.

These people are still fundamentally self-interested, and even Trump will become unpopular among people in states damaged badly by ag tariffs and who didn’t get a cent back from those tax cuts.

He tried to take two of them at once actually. He started on this ill-advised plan before Suarez finished his shot, which may be why he sent it along the ground and prevailed, where normally one might try to bend it around that upper curve and hope nobody heads it away. I laughed aloud, that’s all.

Right, but you were talking about “after” someone is already pregnant. Affirmative choice, you said, as if the default was abortion and a positive affirmation of keeping the pregnancy required. Which is strange.

You are spared eating bad pasta, so your Barilla boycott is a win-win.

I was interrogated for trying to get a refill of my kid’s skin cream at Walgreen’s. It won’t be a big sacrifice to switch pharmacies.

What is the difference?

For many people that is not an open option unless forced by some crisis. I realize that some virulent pro-life types think that women choose abortion like choosing a pair of shoes for the day, but it’s just not like that.

This is why it matters that Mitch McConnell stole a USSC seat and the rest of the Republican party stood by and let him get away with it, and the rest of the citizenry stood by and let him get away with it. The problems took deep root long before Trump was elected.

Mystified that people think holding a job opportunity open or being willing to hire someone back immediately is a special treatment that only women on maternity leave can access. Hilarious but also sad that people have so little experience of the world as to think this, and that it will affect their judgments…

Because injuries might have a long-term effect on the player’s ability to return to the same level of play, and pregnancy without complications does not do that, as it is not an injury but a normal physical process.

Not really, no, unless you think people can spontaneously end pregnancies with magic.

But she didn’t merely have a baby; she had other serious health problems that may have made it more difficult to get back up to normal speed.