I bet you’ve never once looked up a bill and checked out the votes to see how Republicans blocked so many of them because the Democrats didn’t have enough of a voting majority.

Do you know why the Public Option was removed from the Affordable Care Act? Because Democrats needed 60 votes, and there were only 58 Democrats elected to the Senate, with 2 Independents voting with them… 60 exactly - this gave extraordinary power to any Democrat who was against the public option (Joe Lieberman and 5 others). If 6 or more extra Democrats had been elected, the Lieberman 6 votes would have had no power. Or if just 6 Republicans out of the 40 had voted with the Democrats. Ha.

And in the end, I always see people blaming the Democrats, not the Republicans. Because nobody looks at the actual bills and how they are gutted or defeated because the people won’t elect enough Dems to counter the Rep opposition. Shrug.

Be sure to google “Lindsey Graham ladybugs”

Did you know Democrats originally tried to make single payer a part of ACA?

The problem is, they needed 60 votes in the Senate, and ONE Democrat, Joe Lieberman, joined EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN in voting against the public option.

1 single Republican voter crossing the aisle could have delivered single payer, but idiots blame the Dems. Electing 1 more Democrat instead of a Republican could have delivered single payer, but idiots blame the Dems. 40 Republicans and 1 Democrat voted NO against Single Payer, and brilliant minds everywhere gargled BOTH SIDES SAME!! You can’t make this shit up.

I think that plenty of people who voted for Trump would be fine voting for a woman president

I’m sorry, but this is based on what, exactly? I know you didn’t base it on historical data. Trump won against Hillary Clinton, a woman, lost against Joe Biden, a man, then won against Kamala Harris, a woman.

2016 turnout for Clinton/Trump: 128,837,949

2020 turnout for Biden/Trump: 155,507,476

2024 turnout for Harris/Trump: 152,319,643

3,187,833 fewer people turned out for the Harris/Trump election.

The problem isn’t whether YOU will vote for her. It’s whether everyone else will, including Christian swing voters. If you’re curious about those numbers, just check out the voting demographics for Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris.

Plenty of articles out there, https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/elon-musk-confirms-used-burner-190847581.html

In Christianity, the bible forbids women from exercising authority over men in the church - they are forbidden from any leadership role within the church. This begs the question: what makes you think Christians will vote to elect a woman to the highest level of leadership this country has, into a position where she can make decisions affecting not just one church, but every single church across the US?

Ask yourself a question: why can’t a woman become a preacher, priest or pastor? All major US religions indoctrinate their followers from birth with the teachings that god does NOT permit women to exercise authority over men.

So if Christian and Catholic men and women believe in a core set of values and reasons for why women are not allowed to take leadership roles over men in the church, what makes anyone think they don’t or won’t apply that same logic to leadership at the political level, or ANY level?

Christians won’t let a woman lead their church, but they somehow will be OK with electing a woman into a much higher role, one that can make decisions that affect all churches/the entire world? I don’t see it.

Whether you believe in the ends justifying the means or the means justifying the end… the world you helped create was granting power to evil, putting evil in charge.

You straight up chose the side of evil. Congrats on being on the wrong side of history.

But not quite as embarrassing as your comment history.

Sounds like something a Hitler glazer would say.

Just wait until Trump disbands NATO and Russia starts turning the rest of the Baltics into Ukraine. Then bets are off as to whether you are even smart enough to realize… oh, never mind.