Serious question, if a democratic candidate for 2028 was absolutely adamant about banning abortion nationwide in all instances and sending those who seek them out to life in prison, would you still vote for them? Say you agree more or less with the rest of their policies.
Not a chance.
No, that's a breaking point because it indicates they're willing to violate bodily autonomy. If they're comfortable doing it for abortion, they're probably going to either directly or indirectly support similarly invasive restrictions against trans folks, sex work, nsfw content, and the like.
Definitely not a serious question. Lol.
No
TL/DR, fuck no : for that to be an actual policy position, such a candidate would also be totally fine with an unending list of human rights violations and be straight faced about committing atrocities n the name of "national security" or some such manufactured bs.
That would not be a Democrat candidate.
It’s a strange hypothetical. It’s impossible to imagine a politician who embraces a short-sighted, socially-domineering position on abortion would not then embrace short-sighted, socially-domineering policies across the board. That plane wouldn’t fly in the Democratic Party
Is trump running again?
Per the constitution, he can't. Unless the bullshit with districts hands the GOP a 2/3 majority in Congress, he can't amend the constitution to run for a third time. If blue states do what Texas, Florida are doing with gerrymandering, they won't get 2/3 of seats next year.
And even IF they get 2/3 of Congress, they'd still need 38 states to agree. They don't have 38 states.
I agree that all you said is true if they follow the law. If they follow the law.
They shouldn’t do that in these times. There are too many single issue voters and social media, “experts,” that would have a field day working against anyone who threatens their sacred cow.
Nope, If they will take one right for someone they will take more.
Correct
No
Definitely a deal breaker for me.
If they are willing to restrict the rights of women and give them life in prison then it’s not possibe in any reality that I agree with the rest of their policies. This is one of the stupidest what if questions I’ve ever read.
No
No. Unless the alternate candidate just wanted to send *everyone* to life in prison.
This seems to be one of those "divide" questions where someone ends up going "see some voters hate women" at the end.
Nope.
Then...what is the point? There's no major dem that's pro abortion that i know of?
I believe such a candidate would lose in the primaries. And my state votes so late that my vote never matters there. BUT if I had to choose a D in the general with a bad platform versus an R who wants to be a dictator, yeah, I'd grit my teeth and vote for the D. And hope wiser heads prevailed.
No. We can and must do better than that.
That is, in fact, NOT a serious question.
The fact that you posted this, and that 5 people agree, is disheartening. By serious, she means not trolling. It's a thought exercise with a value that everyone on the left generally agrees upon, because trying this with other values ends up spoiling the exercise by becoming about the value.
I don’t think it’s a good thought experiment because a position as radical as was proposed would not occur alongside agreeing with their other policy proposals, If it did, I would reject the candidate for a lack of consistency.
You don't think it's a good thought experiment because you want to throw others under the bus to "build a coalition", and this puts people you care about in the "others" category and not the "immune from the bus" category.
No one can be affording to throw anyone under the bus right now, and *that goes both ways*. This is why Putin quietly gave Hamas the go-ahead to do the kidnappings - he knew the resulting war would tear apart any ability for pluralists to talk rationally.
Do I think that the genocide is an indefensible overreaction to the kidnappings? Of course. Do I think the kidnappings were an indefensible overreaction to the settler issue? Yes. Do I think that settlers and Israeli security measures are an indefensible overreaction to '80s suicide bombers? Yes.
Do I think '80s suicide bombers were an overreaction to the disenfranchisement of the Palestinian people? Yes. Do I think the disenfranchisement was an overreaction to the Palestine War? Yes. Do I think the Palestine War and settlement of Palestine post-WWII was a mess? Yes.
All of this needs to stop, and both sides need to take responsibility for it. I've already seen talk about rounding up every single Israeli citizen. No Israeli OR Palestinian state solves this problem - only one which validates and enforces the right of both Jew and Muslim to exist.
Imagine telling the Jews they were going to have to coexist with the Germans after the holocaust. Only if there are penultimate consequences for the architects and perpetrators of this ethnic cleansing can such a state even consider existing.
Most people would say supporting a genocide and white, European colonizer ethno-religious state is pretty fucking radical and inconsistent with the professed ideals and their other policies.
That's a fair criticism, but you see the difference between disagreeing with it and saying it's not serious? The first is rational engagement. The second is invalidation.
I enjoy and employ a good thought experiment. I would have opened by recognizing the absurdity of the situation instead of claiming it to be a serious one.
No.
No! I would not vote for them. But, this could be difficult if their Republican opponent also would ban abortion. Since I always vote, I would have to do my research and vote for the least dangerous candidate. I hope I never have to face such a choice.
Absolutely fucking not. Fascists who want to murder people are still fascists whatever letter is next to their name. At some point the country is no longer worth trying to save and that would be a sign.
stop using women’s bodies for your fucking hypothetical “but what about Gaza” go use someone else. we’re fucking abused and raped and assaulted enough. or are you NOT paying attention to the very REAL situation in America??! women are going to jail for miscarriages you fuckfaces.
why the fuck would you post this.
While I respect those who can say they are not a single issue voter, I understand for some people that isn't an option. I wouldn't ask a parent who lost a child to gun violence not to be a single issue voter. And, in my case, the loss of reproductive rights is unacceptable (i.e. death/disability).
No. That one principle is linked to so many others such as women's health, body autonomy, rule of law, etc. that it cannot be cherry picked in isolation. The rest of their policies could not exclude that one thing.
Serious answer Point out one that expresses that opinion or even has gone on record for a ban on them
I will not vote for a candidate who wants to ban abortion.
No, as the right to privacy is the keystone right, as demonstrated by the decades-long effort to undermine and disarm it immediately preceding the full-on free fall into fascism. It’s not even about the abortions, it’s about what justifies the abortions’ legality, and the commitments you make by
criminalizing it.
This is a flamethrower we don't need right now, Rebekah. Read the room.
The room doesn't seem to understand what cost them 2024. If they don't learn, they'll never win again
Never. They wouldn't be on the left. That's not a democrat position. That would be another conservative candidate.
Don’t see how that kind of Democratic candidate makes it through the primaries, so to my mind it’s a bit of a moot question.
Nope
I prefer not to vote on single issues and i dont think others should either. No politician is perfect and the idea is to have more good and less bad. Heck, I disagreed with Obama, Biden and Clinton on many topics. To answer your hypothetical, I would, though I strongly disagree on that point.
So is fascism worse than abortion...is that the premise of your question?
Nope
Yes, I want America to still be free. The alternative is this crap that we have now
No, I wouldn't, because bodily autonomy is an absolute right. If we don't agree on that, I don't care what else they have to say, they aren't worth my vote.
No because that is the tip of an iceberg; it speaks volumes about their real agenda.
No. Support for genocide and anti-abortion are two red lines in the sand for me. Also wouldn't consider voting for anybody that has raped or molested.
No.
No, I don't believe I could support that person. Fortunately no such candidate exists, right?
No. Now ask the same question but replace the abortion language with “supporting genocide in Palestine.”
One is genocide at home and one is genocide overseas. Both are wrong, but one is waging war on their own constituents.
Waiting for responses before making that exact point
wow you’re awful.
I hope the nuance I'm attempting here comes through and people don't make wrong assumptions, but I need to ask: did anyone vote for the evil clown thinking he would be BETTER on Palestine? He has shown repeatedly that he is WORSE on *everything* always. I truly don't understand the hatred for +
Kamala Harris re Palestine when the genocide is continuing unabated under the orange monster. Yes, we need to do anything we can to stop it; but voters put a 💩🍊 in office who DGAF what we want or what's moral, right, humane, or vital. That insured that the genocide will continue at least for 4 yrs.
I think I understand what you're saying, but I think the framing is wrong. The argument that Trump is worse on Palestine, or that Harris would have done anything different, is dishonest. The genocide was happening under Biden. Aided under Biden. Harris chose a side, and it was genocide.
Absolutely not!
In general, depends on alternatives and their platforms. If the alternative candidate held the same abortion view plus they promised to do things that restrict voting rights then I'd vote for the former.
Ok assuming this is a “serious question “‘as u say….serious answer
Hell no!
No. Never. It says something inherent about that person's basic opinion of women. It's not good.
There is nothing serious to that question. If you want to be a Democrat then you support abortion up to the Roe vs Wade level. If you don't then you shouldn't be allowed to run as a Democrat. "Big tent" politics is for suckers
Not a chance. With that policy, they show a lack of respect for women, for science, and for freedom. I would worry that they were hiding other unacceptable bigotries.