This probably belongs in that other moving thread, but this x 1 million.
Can you imagine McCain or Romney trying to get the 2024 GOP nomination? (I mean with policy; I know one of them is dead) They would legitimately have a better shot at the Democratic nomination.
Back in 2016, when a bunch of abortion rights advocates were saying that a Trump presidency could lead to the end of Roe, did you believe them, or think they were being hyperbolic and alarmist?
The track record of alarmists has been poor.
Seems like they nailed that one though. And most of the arguments people made against them (“Roe is settled precedent, SCOTUS would never overturn it”, “Rs might talk about abortion to energize their base, but they don’t really want to eliminate it”, “middle class women have gotten so used to reproductive autonomy that they’d never really let it get taken away”) are the ones you’re making now about contraception.
I agree that access to the pill is more secure than abortion, but after the last few years, I’m definitely not as blase about the threat as I once was.
Wow, maybe I am dumb and naive but that is much higher across the board then I would have expected. I don’t necessarily think of myself as risk averse lol, but I can’t imagine the thinking around taking an ARM when mortgage rates are 3 percent. Whoops.
This does fit in with a weird conversation at our coop board meeting. Last year we took out an adjustable rate loan for some facade repairs and the smartest person in our group, a thirtysomething lawyer, was incredulous that there is no cap to the rate hikes. They literally cannot fathom the idea of 7% interest. I told them about my parents paying 18% on their mortgage when I was a kid and blew their minds.
There has been a massive movement to overturn Roe for 40 years. There is nothing close to the same groundswell to overturn birth control. It’s similar to gun nuts thinking the government will take all their guns once background checks are made universal.
No groundswell is required. The justices are in place. The legislatures are in place. What would possibly stop it? Do you think there will be no challenges to Griswold, Lawerence, Obergefell?
Because all it takes is one legislature to write the law and the supreme court to take the case. Overturning Roe was a giant judicial leap. These other cases are tiny steps.
Just checked this out. The median age in the US is 38, so the majority of americans have not seen 7% mortgage rates in their adult lives.
Abortion was bigger, but there’s been a lot of subtle attempts to undermine access to the pill too. There have been all kinds of attempts to say that employers shouldn’t have to cover the pill, or that pharmacists shouldn’t have to dispense it if doing so violates their religious beliefs. All of these things make it harder to get the pill even while it remains legal. And there’s a reason why Alito referenced Griswold in his draft opinion. You often have to chip away at the legal support for something before you can directly overturn it.
Right, but there’s a big difference between those attempts and an attempt to ban it. Alarmists make it sound likely that the pill will be banned in multiple states in the next few years. I’ll take a bet at evens it isn’t.
Like I said, I agree it’s unlikely, but I’m more open to the possibility than I was a few years ago.
Anyway, this is kinda derailing what I just now realized was the econ thread, so I’ll just sum up by saying that I don’t think Commonwealth is wrong for at least thinking about some of the non financial “costs” that might come with moving to a red state.
Fair enough. At least border patrol concerns are less prevalent in flyover country.
I came of age in the last inflation peak and those numbers imprinted on me like a baby bird seeing its mother. 7% was paid by my first savings account.
I remember my parents refinancing for the bargain rate of 12.5%. I remember their friend complaining about taking a 25% mortgage.
My student loans were at 10%-ish. I ended up paying 2-3x the amount I took out. Fucking ridiculous
I remember 5% in 2007 or something. Why are we at 1% now?
Many of the same people in the same movement are making that a new goal. Difference this time is they don’t need to build up the political/judicial power to get it done, they already have that part. They only have to want it.
The Louisiana state house already passed a bill out of committee 7-2 banning the pill and making it tantamount to murder, it remains to be seen if it is passed by the legislature. I’m not sure what the end result will be there, but it’s clearly in the mix.
Do you have some examples?
Many of the doomsday Trump 2020 scenarios laughably did not come to fruition: he will deploy military to maintain power; he will commandeer Republican election officials in AZ/GA to change voting results; he won’t voluntarily leave the WH.
It is axiomatic that alarmists will protest too much. This shouldn’t be too hard to understand. A few months ago, we were headed for WW3 and Russia was going to blow up nuclear reactors. Neither of these exaggerate mainstream alarmists. Eric Dingle or whatever on Twitter re: COVID has been wrong on the alarmist side at a very high rate. Et cetera.
He tried. There was a fucking insurrection, maybe you saw it on TV? He leaned on Republican election officials in GA, and had the state legislatures in numerous swing states doing show trial investigations.
Nobody (serious) was saying he wouldn’t try. The alarmists believed he would succeed and dismissed those that laughed at them.