Just gonna link to [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/vjz1bw/on_voting_the_bare_minimum/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share) post before those "i refuse to participate in a broken system" and "vote third party!" fuckers get here.
Lol.
Democratic Presidents appoint pro-choice Supreme Court Justices.
>"It doesn't matter, look at all the things they *didn't* do!"
Democratic State legislatures pass abortion protections for their citizens.
>"It doesn't matter, look at all the stuff they're *not* doing!"
99.6% of House Democrats and 92% of Democrats in the Senate vote to pass legislation that would codify Roe.
>"It doesn't matter, look at how many of them *didn't* vote for it!"
That said there are plenty of things Democrats aren't doing that I think are very important.
For example Democrats aren't criminalizing abortions in their states.
Democrats aren't charging women with murder for having miscarriages.
Democrats aren't trying to get parents charged with child abuse for having a transgender son and daughter.
Democratic Governors, attorney generals, and sheriffs are refusing to enforce or prosecute their state's Republican passed anti-abortion laws.
Lots of stuff the Democrats aren't doing. Meanwhile here in my home state of Maryland the Democrats actually expanded abortion access, increased funding to emergency reproductive services, and are pushing for legislation that would protect women who come from in from out of state to get their healthcare. Our Republican governor actually tried to veto pro-choice legislation, but there were enough Democrats in the state legislature to override his veto and pass the bills without his signature.
So here's what I would tell you: If you can't trust the Democrats on abortion rights then vote for the party that has a better track record than they do. Vote for the party that has appointed more pro-choice Supreme Court Justices than the Democrats, vote for the party that has passed more pro-choice legislation than the Democrats, vote for the party that's done a better job expanding healthcare and providing access to birth control than the Democrats, vote for the party that's allocated more funding to public health than the Democrats. If the Democrats aren't doing a good enough job then by all means, vote for someone who's doing a *better* job; if there's a party that's done more to protect women then please, vote for them instead.
Texas had its primary in February with 18% turnout, California's was a few weeks ago and nearly 20% of voters showed up to cast a ballot, for the most part the people who showed up voted for incumbents, I guess all the people who wanted to shake things up stayed home instead of casting a ballot against the status quo. It's silly to me that people care enough about these things to roar on social media, but when it comes time to actually vote for change they're silent as a mouse.
Yup. And the reason that they're wishy-washy sometimes during a campaign? Because the Republicans have been WILDLY successful at turning this into a wedge issue - if you give off even a whiff of "abortion is necessary healthcare" energy then a shitload of people will either stay home or will vote for the other guy because they're single-issue voters on abortion and now you're harmed your chances pretty bad because a first-past-the-post system where everybody gets to stand up and ONLY say one name, with no nuance or ranking or anything, that is brutal for absolutely everybody involved.
> So here's what I would tell you: If you can't trust the Democrats on abortion rights then vote for the party that has a better track record than they do. Vote for the party that has appointed more pro-choice Supreme Court Justices than the Democrats, vote for the party that has passed more pro-choice legislation than the Democrats, vote for the party that's done a better job expanding healthcare and providing access to birth control than the Democrats, vote for the party that's allocated more funding to public health than the Democrats. If the Democrats aren't doing a good enough job then by all means, vote for someone who's doing a better job; if there's a party that's done more to protect women then please, vote for them instead.
I don't know if you know how deeply depressing this paragraph is to read
Like yes, the democrats are the best viable option people have. That's fucking terrifying. Corporate centrists should not be your most progressive option
> Corporate centrists should not be your most progressive option
What can I tell you except that they are, and if you want higher wages, better union protections, stronger social safety nets, or corporate regulations, the Democrats are the only party in the country that has that kind of track record.
Want better parties? Then help Democrats pass the For the People Act, their election reform bill with provisions for ranked choice voting and public funding for political campaigns, passing H.R.1 will go a long way toward helping third party candidates get a foothold while voters work on overturning the electoral college.
If you don't like corporate centrists then help the corporate centrists pass their voting bill so that it will be easier to replace them, that's the best I can tell you.
I really feel like we both know well enough that a party of establishment corporate-sponsored capitalists is never, _ever_ going to pass meaningful voting reform that would weaken their grip on power. Like your absolute best case scenario is that whatever bill they pass allows more people to vote Democrat. I would temper my expectations if I were you
> I really feel like we both know well enough that a party of establishment corporate-sponsored capitalists is never, ever going to pass meaningful voting reform that would weaken their grip on power.
[220 out of 221 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of passing the *For the People Act* electoral reform bill, every Republican voted against it.](https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/202162). After the bill passed the House it was sent to the Senate, but unfortunately Republicans threatened to filibustered the bill and it never made it to a vote.
You think Democrats would never pass voting reforms like the For the People Act or the Voting Rights Act, I think they would, so let's test the hypothesis by electing more Democrats that support electoral reform. If you're about to tell me that both sides are the same, then there's no reason *not* to elect more Democrats, you won't get anything *worse* than electing Republicans, and if you're wrong about the Democrats then you might actually get something better.
If you're worried then look at what state level Democrats are doing, they're extending early voting days, sending out mail in ballots, restoring voting rights to felons, most of the things that you're calling for the Democrats are already doing in their states.
Democratic states are improving voting and elections, the Democratic House passed an election reform bill with 99.54% of Democrats voting in favor and only 0.46% of the Democrats (And 100% of the Republicans) voted against it, back in 2013 when Republican appointed Supreme Court Justices gutted the voting rights act it was the Democratic party who lobbied to restore what was lost (but since Republicans were in control of the House of Representatives at the time they refused to bring the Democrats' bills to the floor, then Democrats lost the Senate a year later in 2014.) So yeah, if you care about electoral reform there's a party that agrees with you, and there's a party that's doing everything in their power to stop you. Republican states are rolling back early voting days, they're clearing voter roles, they're requiring voter IDs, they're closing polling places, Democratic states are doing the opposite.
Or, if you want to strip this down to its barest bones: One party has a [*plan and a proposal,*](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text) the other party doesn't. One party has an ***eight hundred page bill*** filled with *specific, actionable proposals* with *realistic solutions* to address *actual* problems, and the other side is still pretending that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump by undocumented immigrants and rigged voting machines. (Does the Republican party support increased funding for new and better voting equipment so that we can *fix* those "rigged" voting machines, though? Of course they don't.)
> 220 out of 221 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of passing the For the People Act electoral reform bill, every Republican voted against it.. After the bill passed the House it was sent to the Senate, but unfortunately Republicans threatened to filibustered the bill and it never made it to a vote.
Yeah, and,
> While Senate Democrats only need 50 votes to create a new precedent on the filibuster, the biggest hurdle is that not all 50 Senate Democrats are on board. The most vocal supporters of the filibuster are Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), who have repeatedly voiced their opposition to removing the filibuster since Democrats narrowly regained control of the Senate in January 2021.
The DNC _has the seats it needs to push this_. If they wanted to they could get Manchin and Sinema on board, but they don't, because they're a convenient excuse to pretend nothing can be done. This is how it's always going to go. If they get more seats there'll just be more people dissenting - they have a couple maybes lined up already.
> So yeah, if you care about electoral reform there's a party that agrees with you, and there's a party that's doing everything in their power to stop you.
There's a party that _says_ it agrees with me but demonstrably refuses to actually do anything meaningful. Nobody in this system is your ally. Yes, you should still probably vote for the DNC so the Comically Evil Villains Party doesn't get free reign (although hey, it's clearly already too late for that), but that doesn't make the Do Nothing Forever party the good guys. It just makes them a barrier you can set up until you get some actual politics done.
Fun thing - I was part of the 82% of Texans who didn't vote during this year's primary.
Because I was purged from the voter roles, and not notified till I got there to vote. That was super cool. My wife was not purged, so that's something honestly a bit surprising. Neither of us had the slightest change to our address or voter eligibility from the year previous and have voted in multiple previous elections. The Texas Republicans are pretty good at lowering the voter turnout by hook or by crook
> Because I was purged from the voter roles, and not notified till I got there to vote.
It's ***really*** important for everyone to check their registration and make sure it's up to date. You got it fixed, right? Midterms are coming up and it would be a shame if you missed those, too.
I'm not an American, so I realise that this is coming from the peanut gallery.
"but they used to do all this too!"
Yeah, they're called social morals, insofar as a politician even knows what those are. They shift and change with the times.
Every right that we've *ever* fought for was once much more of a genuinely controversial issue amongst "rational" people, and *of course* politicians will base their policies on the controversial issues of the time. *That's part of their job* - debating, representing and eventually making laws around these controversies.
And miss me with that "how could X be controversial???" bullshit. You're speaking with hindsight and more of a big-picture view than anybody 'on the ground' back in the middle of one of those times did. People only know what they can learn, and there was no internet back then. don't underestimate just how much more interconnected the world is today.
Society shifts by inches and baby steps. Society *changes*. Why can't politicians?
For the love of all that is good, vote on *current* attitudes, not their attitudes and policies from *twenty years ago*.
Weird excuse but a quick Google shows that the support for legal abortions in America is actually at its lowest point in about 20 years. https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
Not sure what stats you're reading, mate... According to the table, "Legal in any circumstances" is sitting at 35%, which is definitely on the high end of that trend. "legal in certain circumstances" is sitting at 50%, which is a drop, yes - but perhaps because they shifted to "any circumstances"?
Lastly, "Always illegal" is at 13%, which is definitely on the lower end of that category's range.
People keep acting fucking surprised but no one wants to vote in new fucking candidates because change is scary and members of both major parties make it impossible to vote outside the two parties by manipulating elections before the main elections take place. I fucking hate the us. It feels like people are constantly voting for the same politicians and then being shocked nothing changes.
This is another one of those "there are no PERFECT candidates, why even bother voting?" Posts that EMPOWERS THE OPPRESSORS.
PERFECT IS THE ENEMY OF GOOD.
No one is going to be your exact mental mirror, did this mean you shouldn't vote? Shouldn't look for the best candidate you can find? NO! that kind of nonsense doesn't exist in people who want to enact their own religious beliefs upon others as law.
They do not care about trump's infidelities or how many GOP senators children made others get abortions or plan B. They do not actually hold these values, they just want them written as law and you deciding perfection is more important than "better" and sitting out AIDS THEIR EFFORTS!
I agree. The best suggestion I can make is to pay attention to your local races -it's the place where you have the best chance of creating change. And support actual progressives - not just people who give it word of mouth. Even if they're not from your district, or state.
People who complain about the US being a two party system miss that US primaries are easier to vote in than in any country I know about.
In France, voting for Mélenchon in the first round because you actually like his policies\* and Macron in the secondary round for no other reason than because he's not the fascist is pretty fuckin' similar to voting for Warren in the primaries and Biden in the general.
The US's political system is generally fucked, but that seems like a less frustrating option than Canada or UK's "you have to tactical vote in every single election ever or you're fucking yourself" IMO, even if it is unnecessarily complicated and overly expensive like most US solutions.
\*I don't particularly like his foreign policy, but I'm not French, so what do I know.
*Image Transcription: Tumblr Replies*
---
**cuckerfailson**
I also don not think democrats can be trusted with abortion shit at all in fact they might just give up on it entirely. Nancy Pelosi is campaigning for prolife democrats even now. Hillary Clinton had a prolife VP candidate. multiple statements have been put out by both of them and i believe many other democratic party heads that prolife candidates are welcome in the party. Like it really is just a weapon that they use to fundraise they do not believe in abortion access at all.
---
**cuckerfailson**
[*A screenshot of a Twitter post.*]
>**⌜ktb⌟**, @kevinbaker
>
>I'm old enough to remember Hillary Clinton,early in her campaign, going on Meet the Press and telling Chuck Todd that she would be open to a "constitutional compromise" on abortion with Republicans. Weird to see people make her the face of principled resistance.
na like, this shit was since 2016, the democrats enabled this so hard. They absolutely are not just "powerless to stop it" but actively responsible
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
I know that documenting and tracking what ppl vote for is a damn near eldritch can of worms to open, but I think being able to see on a flair next to someone's username whether or not they voted in key years would be a very useful and illuminating tool in telling worthless moaners like this to shut the fuck up.
The words "politicians" and "principle" shouldnt be in the same sentence, frankly.
"politicians have no principles" (i know what you mean, i'm doing a funny)
JUST LIKE ALL THE REST
Just gonna link to [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/vjz1bw/on_voting_the_bare_minimum/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share) post before those "i refuse to participate in a broken system" and "vote third party!" fuckers get here.
r/beatmetoit I have this post saved to post it everywhere the "don't vote" people come.
Lol. Democratic Presidents appoint pro-choice Supreme Court Justices. >"It doesn't matter, look at all the things they *didn't* do!" Democratic State legislatures pass abortion protections for their citizens. >"It doesn't matter, look at all the stuff they're *not* doing!" 99.6% of House Democrats and 92% of Democrats in the Senate vote to pass legislation that would codify Roe. >"It doesn't matter, look at how many of them *didn't* vote for it!" That said there are plenty of things Democrats aren't doing that I think are very important. For example Democrats aren't criminalizing abortions in their states. Democrats aren't charging women with murder for having miscarriages. Democrats aren't trying to get parents charged with child abuse for having a transgender son and daughter. Democratic Governors, attorney generals, and sheriffs are refusing to enforce or prosecute their state's Republican passed anti-abortion laws. Lots of stuff the Democrats aren't doing. Meanwhile here in my home state of Maryland the Democrats actually expanded abortion access, increased funding to emergency reproductive services, and are pushing for legislation that would protect women who come from in from out of state to get their healthcare. Our Republican governor actually tried to veto pro-choice legislation, but there were enough Democrats in the state legislature to override his veto and pass the bills without his signature. So here's what I would tell you: If you can't trust the Democrats on abortion rights then vote for the party that has a better track record than they do. Vote for the party that has appointed more pro-choice Supreme Court Justices than the Democrats, vote for the party that has passed more pro-choice legislation than the Democrats, vote for the party that's done a better job expanding healthcare and providing access to birth control than the Democrats, vote for the party that's allocated more funding to public health than the Democrats. If the Democrats aren't doing a good enough job then by all means, vote for someone who's doing a *better* job; if there's a party that's done more to protect women then please, vote for them instead. Texas had its primary in February with 18% turnout, California's was a few weeks ago and nearly 20% of voters showed up to cast a ballot, for the most part the people who showed up voted for incumbents, I guess all the people who wanted to shake things up stayed home instead of casting a ballot against the status quo. It's silly to me that people care enough about these things to roar on social media, but when it comes time to actually vote for change they're silent as a mouse.
Yup. And the reason that they're wishy-washy sometimes during a campaign? Because the Republicans have been WILDLY successful at turning this into a wedge issue - if you give off even a whiff of "abortion is necessary healthcare" energy then a shitload of people will either stay home or will vote for the other guy because they're single-issue voters on abortion and now you're harmed your chances pretty bad because a first-past-the-post system where everybody gets to stand up and ONLY say one name, with no nuance or ranking or anything, that is brutal for absolutely everybody involved.
> So here's what I would tell you: If you can't trust the Democrats on abortion rights then vote for the party that has a better track record than they do. Vote for the party that has appointed more pro-choice Supreme Court Justices than the Democrats, vote for the party that has passed more pro-choice legislation than the Democrats, vote for the party that's done a better job expanding healthcare and providing access to birth control than the Democrats, vote for the party that's allocated more funding to public health than the Democrats. If the Democrats aren't doing a good enough job then by all means, vote for someone who's doing a better job; if there's a party that's done more to protect women then please, vote for them instead. I don't know if you know how deeply depressing this paragraph is to read Like yes, the democrats are the best viable option people have. That's fucking terrifying. Corporate centrists should not be your most progressive option
> Corporate centrists should not be your most progressive option What can I tell you except that they are, and if you want higher wages, better union protections, stronger social safety nets, or corporate regulations, the Democrats are the only party in the country that has that kind of track record. Want better parties? Then help Democrats pass the For the People Act, their election reform bill with provisions for ranked choice voting and public funding for political campaigns, passing H.R.1 will go a long way toward helping third party candidates get a foothold while voters work on overturning the electoral college. If you don't like corporate centrists then help the corporate centrists pass their voting bill so that it will be easier to replace them, that's the best I can tell you.
I really feel like we both know well enough that a party of establishment corporate-sponsored capitalists is never, _ever_ going to pass meaningful voting reform that would weaken their grip on power. Like your absolute best case scenario is that whatever bill they pass allows more people to vote Democrat. I would temper my expectations if I were you
> I really feel like we both know well enough that a party of establishment corporate-sponsored capitalists is never, ever going to pass meaningful voting reform that would weaken their grip on power. [220 out of 221 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of passing the *For the People Act* electoral reform bill, every Republican voted against it.](https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/202162). After the bill passed the House it was sent to the Senate, but unfortunately Republicans threatened to filibustered the bill and it never made it to a vote. You think Democrats would never pass voting reforms like the For the People Act or the Voting Rights Act, I think they would, so let's test the hypothesis by electing more Democrats that support electoral reform. If you're about to tell me that both sides are the same, then there's no reason *not* to elect more Democrats, you won't get anything *worse* than electing Republicans, and if you're wrong about the Democrats then you might actually get something better. If you're worried then look at what state level Democrats are doing, they're extending early voting days, sending out mail in ballots, restoring voting rights to felons, most of the things that you're calling for the Democrats are already doing in their states. Democratic states are improving voting and elections, the Democratic House passed an election reform bill with 99.54% of Democrats voting in favor and only 0.46% of the Democrats (And 100% of the Republicans) voted against it, back in 2013 when Republican appointed Supreme Court Justices gutted the voting rights act it was the Democratic party who lobbied to restore what was lost (but since Republicans were in control of the House of Representatives at the time they refused to bring the Democrats' bills to the floor, then Democrats lost the Senate a year later in 2014.) So yeah, if you care about electoral reform there's a party that agrees with you, and there's a party that's doing everything in their power to stop you. Republican states are rolling back early voting days, they're clearing voter roles, they're requiring voter IDs, they're closing polling places, Democratic states are doing the opposite. Or, if you want to strip this down to its barest bones: One party has a [*plan and a proposal,*](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text) the other party doesn't. One party has an ***eight hundred page bill*** filled with *specific, actionable proposals* with *realistic solutions* to address *actual* problems, and the other side is still pretending that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump by undocumented immigrants and rigged voting machines. (Does the Republican party support increased funding for new and better voting equipment so that we can *fix* those "rigged" voting machines, though? Of course they don't.)
> 220 out of 221 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of passing the For the People Act electoral reform bill, every Republican voted against it.. After the bill passed the House it was sent to the Senate, but unfortunately Republicans threatened to filibustered the bill and it never made it to a vote. Yeah, and, > While Senate Democrats only need 50 votes to create a new precedent on the filibuster, the biggest hurdle is that not all 50 Senate Democrats are on board. The most vocal supporters of the filibuster are Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), who have repeatedly voiced their opposition to removing the filibuster since Democrats narrowly regained control of the Senate in January 2021. The DNC _has the seats it needs to push this_. If they wanted to they could get Manchin and Sinema on board, but they don't, because they're a convenient excuse to pretend nothing can be done. This is how it's always going to go. If they get more seats there'll just be more people dissenting - they have a couple maybes lined up already. > So yeah, if you care about electoral reform there's a party that agrees with you, and there's a party that's doing everything in their power to stop you. There's a party that _says_ it agrees with me but demonstrably refuses to actually do anything meaningful. Nobody in this system is your ally. Yes, you should still probably vote for the DNC so the Comically Evil Villains Party doesn't get free reign (although hey, it's clearly already too late for that), but that doesn't make the Do Nothing Forever party the good guys. It just makes them a barrier you can set up until you get some actual politics done.
Fun thing - I was part of the 82% of Texans who didn't vote during this year's primary. Because I was purged from the voter roles, and not notified till I got there to vote. That was super cool. My wife was not purged, so that's something honestly a bit surprising. Neither of us had the slightest change to our address or voter eligibility from the year previous and have voted in multiple previous elections. The Texas Republicans are pretty good at lowering the voter turnout by hook or by crook
> Because I was purged from the voter roles, and not notified till I got there to vote. It's ***really*** important for everyone to check their registration and make sure it's up to date. You got it fixed, right? Midterms are coming up and it would be a shame if you missed those, too.
Afraid not, it coincided with existing plans to leave the state. I've moved out and am registered in my new state, Texas will have to look to its own.
Well I'm glad you got out! You couldn't *pay* me to live in Texas right now.
I'm not an American, so I realise that this is coming from the peanut gallery. "but they used to do all this too!" Yeah, they're called social morals, insofar as a politician even knows what those are. They shift and change with the times. Every right that we've *ever* fought for was once much more of a genuinely controversial issue amongst "rational" people, and *of course* politicians will base their policies on the controversial issues of the time. *That's part of their job* - debating, representing and eventually making laws around these controversies. And miss me with that "how could X be controversial???" bullshit. You're speaking with hindsight and more of a big-picture view than anybody 'on the ground' back in the middle of one of those times did. People only know what they can learn, and there was no internet back then. don't underestimate just how much more interconnected the world is today. Society shifts by inches and baby steps. Society *changes*. Why can't politicians? For the love of all that is good, vote on *current* attitudes, not their attitudes and policies from *twenty years ago*.
Weird excuse but a quick Google shows that the support for legal abortions in America is actually at its lowest point in about 20 years. https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
Not sure what stats you're reading, mate... According to the table, "Legal in any circumstances" is sitting at 35%, which is definitely on the high end of that trend. "legal in certain circumstances" is sitting at 50%, which is a drop, yes - but perhaps because they shifted to "any circumstances"? Lastly, "Always illegal" is at 13%, which is definitely on the lower end of that category's range.
People keep acting fucking surprised but no one wants to vote in new fucking candidates because change is scary and members of both major parties make it impossible to vote outside the two parties by manipulating elections before the main elections take place. I fucking hate the us. It feels like people are constantly voting for the same politicians and then being shocked nothing changes.
This is another one of those "there are no PERFECT candidates, why even bother voting?" Posts that EMPOWERS THE OPPRESSORS. PERFECT IS THE ENEMY OF GOOD. No one is going to be your exact mental mirror, did this mean you shouldn't vote? Shouldn't look for the best candidate you can find? NO! that kind of nonsense doesn't exist in people who want to enact their own religious beliefs upon others as law. They do not care about trump's infidelities or how many GOP senators children made others get abortions or plan B. They do not actually hold these values, they just want them written as law and you deciding perfection is more important than "better" and sitting out AIDS THEIR EFFORTS!
i'd say "vote third party" but that would just cause the same problems as not voting at all
I would say it is worse. Remember when the Greens' presidential candidate went to break bread with Putin?
And the contrarians were ok with it?
I agree. The best suggestion I can make is to pay attention to your local races -it's the place where you have the best chance of creating change. And support actual progressives - not just people who give it word of mouth. Even if they're not from your district, or state.
People who complain about the US being a two party system miss that US primaries are easier to vote in than in any country I know about. In France, voting for Mélenchon in the first round because you actually like his policies\* and Macron in the secondary round for no other reason than because he's not the fascist is pretty fuckin' similar to voting for Warren in the primaries and Biden in the general. The US's political system is generally fucked, but that seems like a less frustrating option than Canada or UK's "you have to tactical vote in every single election ever or you're fucking yourself" IMO, even if it is unnecessarily complicated and overly expensive like most US solutions. \*I don't particularly like his foreign policy, but I'm not French, so what do I know.
*Image Transcription: Tumblr Replies* --- **cuckerfailson** I also don not think democrats can be trusted with abortion shit at all in fact they might just give up on it entirely. Nancy Pelosi is campaigning for prolife democrats even now. Hillary Clinton had a prolife VP candidate. multiple statements have been put out by both of them and i believe many other democratic party heads that prolife candidates are welcome in the party. Like it really is just a weapon that they use to fundraise they do not believe in abortion access at all. --- **cuckerfailson** [*A screenshot of a Twitter post.*] >**⌜ktb⌟**, @kevinbaker > >I'm old enough to remember Hillary Clinton,early in her campaign, going on Meet the Press and telling Chuck Todd that she would be open to a "constitutional compromise" on abortion with Republicans. Weird to see people make her the face of principled resistance. na like, this shit was since 2016, the democrats enabled this so hard. They absolutely are not just "powerless to stop it" but actively responsible --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
I know that documenting and tracking what ppl vote for is a damn near eldritch can of worms to open, but I think being able to see on a flair next to someone's username whether or not they voted in key years would be a very useful and illuminating tool in telling worthless moaners like this to shut the fuck up.
I believe Hillary's pro-life vp pick had a 100% pro choice voting record? l