I am glad to see folks in red states as well as blue states get a vote on this issue. Republicans have put too many women in dangerous situations. However unless we pass expanded voter access in blue states as well as red states, such as universal vote by mail and combine the local elections with the even year elections, extremists will …
I am glad to see folks in red states as well as blue states get a vote on this issue. Republicans have put too many women in dangerous situations. However unless we pass expanded voter access in blue states as well as red states, such as universal vote by mail and combine the local elections with the even year elections, extremists will always have the opportunity to restrict reproductive health care for poor women. "The only cure for the ills of democracy is more democracy"
Those are good reforms (I'd love to see New Hampshire institute early voting), but just as important as those is making all local elections partisan, so that voters know the political beliefs of the candidates they're voting for. We should frame this as a good government issue - to help voters become more informed.
There are a lot of examples of how this would help Democrats, but the example that pisses me off the most is the 2020 mayoral election in Stockton, California. At the same time that Biden won Stockton by a 2-1 margin, they elected a Republican mayor by a 13-point margin. That would never have happened if party affiliations were on the ballot. Absolutely absurd.
As a side note, that Republican is now running for Congress against Josh Harder. And he's going to lose, because luckily, Congressional candidates do have their party affiliations on the ballot.
I think making all elections partisan makes sense, but I also think that it makes candidates from the dominant party more likely to win and candidates from the minority party less likely to win, so we'd be gaining more dominance in already blue-leaning states in exchange for even fewer wins in red states. I think that's alright, because there's a positive good in giving people more information to help them choose a candidate, but it's worth noting. It's also problematic to have to pick candidates for judgeships and Attorneys General on a partisan basis, but we definitely do have to do that at this point in American history!
I think the only thing that would really guarantee abortion rights nationally is a constitutional amendment, because the Supreme Court can presume to arrogate to themselves the power to overturn laws even if the laws state that they have no jurisdiction, but a federal abortion rights law would help.
I can't imagine this court ever letting any constitutional amendment survive, even in the unlikely event an amendment passes (say, to get rid of the electoral college). Some right-wing group will sue once the 38th state approves, and SCOTUS will find a misplaced comma means the whole process is undone. This court has completely removed my faith in settled precedent -- not sure it will ever get built back up again.
I am glad to see folks in red states as well as blue states get a vote on this issue. Republicans have put too many women in dangerous situations. However unless we pass expanded voter access in blue states as well as red states, such as universal vote by mail and combine the local elections with the even year elections, extremists will always have the opportunity to restrict reproductive health care for poor women. "The only cure for the ills of democracy is more democracy"
Those are good reforms (I'd love to see New Hampshire institute early voting), but just as important as those is making all local elections partisan, so that voters know the political beliefs of the candidates they're voting for. We should frame this as a good government issue - to help voters become more informed.
There are a lot of examples of how this would help Democrats, but the example that pisses me off the most is the 2020 mayoral election in Stockton, California. At the same time that Biden won Stockton by a 2-1 margin, they elected a Republican mayor by a 13-point margin. That would never have happened if party affiliations were on the ballot. Absolutely absurd.
As a side note, that Republican is now running for Congress against Josh Harder. And he's going to lose, because luckily, Congressional candidates do have their party affiliations on the ballot.
Here in FL, they put some local positions on the August primary ballot as non-partisan, but in red counties it means Dems are guaranteed to lose.
I'd think they'd be more likely to lose if they are identified on the ballot as Democrats.
One more headache Democrats don’t need if they want to win elections in FL.
My point was that these nonpartisan races should be on November ballot, not on lopsided primary day as "add ons".
I see, understood.
Not to mention voting for (supposedly nonpartisan) judges. I have to do some research to check on those lists here in IL (cook county)
I think making all elections partisan makes sense, but I also think that it makes candidates from the dominant party more likely to win and candidates from the minority party less likely to win, so we'd be gaining more dominance in already blue-leaning states in exchange for even fewer wins in red states. I think that's alright, because there's a positive good in giving people more information to help them choose a candidate, but it's worth noting. It's also problematic to have to pick candidates for judgeships and Attorneys General on a partisan basis, but we definitely do have to do that at this point in American history!
Aren’t mayoral elections considered non-partisan by default?
Huh? Maybe in some towns, but not in New York or many other cities.
I think the only thing that would really guarantee abortion rights nationally is a constitutional amendment, because the Supreme Court can presume to arrogate to themselves the power to overturn laws even if the laws state that they have no jurisdiction, but a federal abortion rights law would help.
Or a left wing court. Neither of which is an easy lift currently.
I can't imagine this court ever letting any constitutional amendment survive, even in the unlikely event an amendment passes (say, to get rid of the electoral college). Some right-wing group will sue once the 38th state approves, and SCOTUS will find a misplaced comma means the whole process is undone. This court has completely removed my faith in settled precedent -- not sure it will ever get built back up again.
They have ignored the 14th Amendment, so you could be right.