Swift endorsement turns more voters from harris than it attracts…

[impulse]

36 minutes ago, riclag said:

Shes a good singer and like many celebrities are progressive in their political positions!

 She’s got a big fan base too!

But like many of the rich & famous , they dont live in traditional reality!

imop

 

So what you're saying is that she's pretty much immune to inflation, high gas prices, crime outside of her bodyguards' security perimeter, competition for jobs and depressed wages due to immigrants, and... and...

 

Hell, I may vote for 4 more years of chaos if I could buy my own island when SHTF, and if all that angst didn't need a distraction, like going to one of my concerts.  (And listening to me sing about my poor choices when it comes to men).

 

[cdemundo]

12 hours ago, stevenl said:

Lol, she build from scratch a career and empire, you're a nurse living on retirement in NZ. Who's the smart one?

Right.

Also show business of any kind is a cutthroat, hyper-competitive business.

Guess why?

The paydays are sooooo big.

Anyone who is successful in the entertainment industry has gotta have something going for them.

Of course envious people can't see that.

[cdemundo]

As far as Taylor Swift's endorsement causing Harris to lose votes, I have my doubts.

Those that said her endorsement made them less likely to vote for Harris probably had zero chance of voting for Harris anyway.

[Cameroni]

1 hour ago, cjinchiangrai said:

As opposed to making people carry dead babies to term? 

 

Nobody in their right mind would deny an abortion where the mother or child would die or have serious health consequences. That's not the issue.

 

The issue is that the law in Minnesota does not contain a single limitation on gestation period so even viable post 27 week babies can be aborted if the mother decides. She needs no specific reason  under this abomination of a law.

 

You said that doctors decide. In fact the law specifies that doctors don't even have to do abortions, nurses can do it!

 

"Finally, Minnesota law no longer requires that abortions be performed by a physician. Nurse practitioners can now provide reproductive health care services"

 

https://www.ag.state.mn.us/AbortionRights/

 

It is absolutely vile and evil what Walz and his cabal have unleashed on Minnesota.

 

We cannot have extremists like Walz and Harris pass abortion laws that require not a single gestation period limit! Abortions not performed by doctors.  It's insane. 

 

Swift may like it but it goes against all that is decent and reasonable.

[frank83628]

11 hours ago, marin said:

 So dang funny. 405,000 new voters in 24 hours registered. How many of those

used ID to register? you have ID right, use it in everyday life, but not to vote. do you think  asking for ID in order to vote is a racist thing?

[frank83628]

5 hours ago, Berkshire said:

I doubt anyone believes you.  If she had come out for Trump, you'd be singing her praise like she's the greatest since the Beatles and Elvis.  But hey, we'll never know.  But we do know Trump wanted her endorsement desperately because he gleefully accepted her fake AI endorsement. 

you clearly have a very simple understanding of sarcasm and humour

[frank83628]

7 hours ago, placeholder said:

If you had actually  bothered to read the article you would know that her "rounded back" is a thing of the past. The "experts" cited, were speculating about what she did to correct it.

placeholder aka swifties for ever

[cjinchiangrai]

15 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Nobody in their right mind would deny an abortion where the mother or child would die or have serious health consequences. That's not the issue.

 

The issue is that the law in Minnesota does not contain a single limitation on gestation period so even viable post 27 week babies can be aborted if the mother decides. She needs no specific reason  under this abomination of a law.

 

You said that doctors decide. In fact the law specifies that doctors don't even have to do abortions, nurses can do it!

 

"Finally, Minnesota law no longer requires that abortions be performed by a physician. Nurse practitioners can now provide reproductive health care services"

 

https://www.ag.state.mn.us/AbortionRights/

 

It is absolutely vile and evil what Walz and his cabal have unleashed on Minnesota.

 

We cannot have extremists like Walz and Harris pass abortion laws that require not a single gestation period limit! Abortions not performed by doctors.  It's insane. 

 

Swift may like it but it goes against all that is decent and reasonable.

Or MAGA extremists like you.

[frank83628]

8 hours ago, placeholder said:

I don't think you understand the phallus worship of so many right wingers. To them, a penis does double duty as as a morally sanitizing wand. Or is that triple duty?

most left wingers hate theirs and want to cut it off and then use womens bathrooms. 

[Cameroni]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

This was written to address the fact that some babies are born alive but with no hope of survival. For instance, babies born without a skull. Previously, the law demanded that even in such a hopeless case, any measure that could prolong the life of the infant should be taken:

 "The law now requires “all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice … shall be taken by the responsible medical personnel to care for the infant who is born alive.”
What that means, as Liebling noted, is that families and physicians decide together how best to proceed when a termination past the point of viability is tragically required. Thankfully, this is rare, with just 1% of all U.S. abortions happening at or after 21 weeks"

https://archive.ph/eOh0L#selection-1107.190-1119.31

Liebling would say that, since she was the ultra feminist behind this law, she's a lawyer not a doctor. Let's have a look at the actual wording:

 

 The language about preserving the infant’s life and health is gone. The law now requires “all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice … shall be taken by the responsible medical personnel to care for the infant who is born alive.”

 

What Walz and Liebling did was to deliberately water down the protections for the infant. "What are "reasonable" measures?  It's not defined, jus as "care" is not defined. 

 

Who can play God here and say a child has no hope of survival? Liebling?  There should be a requirement to ensure everything is done to keep a living being alive. Walz and Liebling destroyed these protections in their pursuit of pro-abortion extremism.

 

 

[placeholder]

Just now, Cameroni said:

Liebling would say that, since she was the ultra feminist behind this law, she's a lawyer not a doctor. Let's have a look at the actual wording:

 

 The language about preserving the infant’s life and health is gone. The law now requires “all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice … shall be taken by the responsible medical personnel to care for the infant who is born alive.”

 

What Walz and Liebling did was to deliberately water down the protections for the infant. "What are "reasonable" measures?  It's not defined, jus as "care" is not defined. 

 

Who can play God here and say a child has no hope of survival? Liebling?  There should be a requirement to ensure everything is done to keep a living being alive. Walz and Liebling destroyed these protections in their pursuit of pro-abortion extremism.

 

 

Thanks for the rhetorical nonsense. There are conditions that are utterly hopeless. I gave the example of an infant born without a skull. There are others. 

[cjinchiangrai]

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

Liebling would say that, since she was the ultra feminist behind this law, she's a lawyer not a doctor. Let's have a look at the actual wording:

 

 The language about preserving the infant’s life and health is gone. The law now requires “all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice … shall be taken by the responsible medical personnel to care for the infant who is born alive.”

 

What Walz and Liebling did was to deliberately water down the protections for the infant. "What are "reasonable" measures?  It's not defined, jus as "care" is not defined. 

 

Who can play God here and say a child has no hope of survival? Liebling?  There should be a requirement to ensure everything is done to keep a living being alive. Walz and Liebling destroyed these protections in their pursuit of pro-abortion extremism.

 

 

It happens every day and needs to be dealt with by the parents and the doctor, not some meddling, bible thumping political A-hole.

[frank83628]

5 hours ago, cjinchiangrai said:

And yet it is Trump that is the sexual predator and out of control adulterer. And loser.

only sccording to a radical left wing politically charged court.  oh and dear-rangement  sufferas

[placeholder]

21 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

most left wingers hate theirs and want to cut it off and then use womens bathrooms. 

Thank you for spewing. 

[Jingthing]

12 hours ago, mdr224 said:

Im a libertarian with no stake in the game. The west is too liberal for anyone with common sense. Its a no brainer to go with trump this time

More like people with no brains vote Trump.

[Cameroni]

24 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Thanks for the rhetorical nonsense. There are conditions that are utterly hopeless. I gave the example of an infant born without a skull. There are others. 

 

Says who? You? If I had child that was born, luckily mine were heallthy, God forbid with some medical issue of course doctors should do all they can to keep it alive. Now doctors have no obligation to do so, thanks to Liebling and Walz, they can just turn around and say to the parents "in our view not reasonable", since "reasonable medical care" is not defined in this abomination of a law. Nor is "care" defined. And for good reason, because this is an extremist abortion law.

 

Imagine not having a single gestation period limitation! Doctors don't have to do abortions, nurses can do it! So under this law there may not even be any doctor involved in the abortion,

Edited Tuesday at 02:03 PM by Cameroni

[cjinchiangrai]

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

More like people with no brains vote Trump.

He loves the uneducated. They vote for felons and give their money to conmen.

[Cameroni]

26 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

It happens every day and needs to be dealt with by the parents and the doctor, not some meddling, bible thumping political A-hole.

You don't understand, the previous law gave parents the protection that doctors had to do all  things possible to save the life of the child. Now, if a doctor is involved at all, and of course nurses can do abortion in Minnesota now, the doctor can tell the parents "not reasonable medical care in our view" and that child is then left to die.

 

It is a truly evil law.

Edited Tuesday at 02:05 PM by Cameroni

[cjinchiangrai]

Just now, Cameroni said:

You don't understand, the previous law gave parents the protection that doctors had to do all  things possible to save the life of the child. Now, if a doctor is involved at all, and of course nurses can do abortion in Minnesota now, the doctor can tell the parents "not reasonable medical care in our view" and that child is then left to die.

 

It is a truly evil law.

You don't understand, it is none of the governments business..

[Cameroni]

Just now, cjinchiangrai said:

You don't understand, it is none of the governments business..

 

Yes it is, the parents and infant need the protection of the law, they need doctors to have a duty to do everything to save the life of the infant.

 

Under this law doctors can just turn around and say "in our view not reasonable care" and that's it, the baby will be left to die. The doctors have no obligation to save the life of the infant because Walz and his cabal did away with this  protection.

 

Just as they eliminated the monitoring of the babies that are born despite abortion and what happens to them.

[frank83628]

17 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Thank you for spewing. 

puberty blockers for kids of any age despite parents disagreements.... you approve that type of stuff?

[Cameroni]

Then we get to the kicker: Walz actually signed the repeal of the ban on coercion:

 

Coercion; penalty. Any person who receives compensation for services under any program receiving financial assistance under this section, who coerces or endeavors to coerce any person to undergo an abortion or sterilization procedure by threatening the person with the loss of or disqualification for the receipt of any benefit or service under a program receiving state or federal financial assistance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 

 

Why is Tim Walz in favor of coercing women into abortions? And if he says he’s not in favor, why did he repeal the law against it?

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/08/tim-walz-made-it-legal-to-coerce-women-into-abortions/

[cjinchiangrai]

4 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Yes it is, the parents and infant need the protection of the law, they need doctors to have a duty to do everything to save the life of the infant.

 

Under this law doctors can just turn around and say "in our view not reasonable care" and that's it, the baby will be left to die. The doctors have no obligation to save the life of the infant because Walz and his cabal did away with this  protection.

 

Just as they eliminated the monitoring of the babies that are born despite abortion and what happens to them.

If all of your scare mongering scenarios were really happening, we would hear about it, but we don't . You are trying to fix a problem that does not exist, again. Of course none of this has anything to do with Talor.

[Cameroni]

15 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

If all of your scare mongering scenarios were really happening, we would hear about it, but we don't . You are trying to fix a problem that does not exist, again. Of course none of this has anything to do with Talor.

 

The law has been passed very recently. By their nature these cases will be rare. And many parents will not want to talk to newspapers after such an event, indeed cannot do so because of ongoing litigation possibly.

 

This is a problem that  will happen. And if you look at the rewrite Tim Walz has signed you can see it is an all comprehensive, unfettered pro-abortion extremist rewrite.

 

He even deleted the provision whereby the coercion of women into abortion was penalised. So pregnant women have no protection against such practices now.

[cdemundo]

1 hour ago, frank83628 said:

most left wingers hate theirs and want to cut it off and then use womens bathrooms. 

Certainly not "most" left wingers.

[cjinchiangrai]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Says who? You? If I had child that was born, luckily mine were heallthy, God forbid with some medical issue of course doctors should do all they can to keep it alive. Now doctors have no obligation to do so, thanks to Liebling and Walz, they can just turn around and say to the parents "in our view not reasonable", since "reasonable medical care" is not defined in this abomination of a law. Nor is "care" defined. And for good reason, because this is an extremist abortion law.

 

Imagine not having a single gestation period limitation! Doctors don't have to do abortions, nurses can do it! So under this law there may not even be any doctor involved in the abortion,

Nurses can hand out the abortion pills, under the supervision of the doctor. Nurses have always dispensed medicines. You should know that. They are over the counter in many places.

[frank83628]

11 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Are illegal and not dispensed that way. Stop making up nonexistent problems.

 

It is also off topic, The topic is TayTay kicking the orange clowns butt.

i will take 'TayTay' as the joke i truly hope is was.  threads go off topic, but i was replying to someone, forgot who now.

 

[frank83628]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

More like people with no brains vote Trump.

i found your profile pic😎

Edited Tuesday at 03:28 PM by frank83628

[cjinchiangrai]

5 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

i will take 'TayTay' as the joke i truly hope is was.  threads go off topic, but i was replying to someone, forgot who now.

 

Not a joke, Taylor is making Trump look like a fool. You are spreading transphobic lies that do not happen.

[frank83628]

1 minute ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Not a joke, Taylor is making Trump look like a fool. You are spreading transphobic lies that do not happen.

so you said TayTay in a serious manner?, what a whopper, just how fickle are you guys, fake as fake can be