The leaders of the party aren’t the ones who will overturn it. They have already appointed those people to the Supreme Court. I think it’s very likely to be overturned in June of 2022.
The flaw is thinking that “The Republican Party” is the entity that will decide whether or not to overturn Roe. The members of the Supreme Court will make that decision for their own individual reasons, and the interests and motivation of the various factions that those members belong to do not necessarily align with the general electoral interests of the Republican Party.
The leaders of the Republican Party (whoever they may be) no longer have control of the carrot.
More like - you feed the horse half of the carrot, with both you and him knowing that there are still 50 more carrots in the rider’s bag.
The majority may support legal abortion, but they don’t support it with the fervor with which the right opposes it. Someone who answers “yes” to a survey question may not feel they themselves have been robbed of a right if Roe is overturned and may not feel a law reasserting Roe is motivation enough to vote blue. (I should add I hope I’m wrong about this.)
Meanwhile, the right can keep drumming up threats to unborn babies even without Roe, and no matter how ephemeral those threats are they’ll keep motivating GOP voters.
I have no doubt of their ability to weaponize hypocrisy.
“This is a ridiculous imposition on the rights of gun owners!”
“But what about the Texas abortion law that’s built on the exact same principles?”
“Abortion is completely different Because Reasons.”
By the time this law ever makes it to SCOTUS, if it ever does, they will have already overturned Roe, so there will be no reason to come up with a reason to overturn this one but not the Texas one. The Texas one will no longer be needed, because abortion will already be illegal there, so they can overturn this stupid gun one with impunity.
Being a gun owner and being in favor of gun control are not automatically mutually exclusive. There are plenty of responsible gun owners who are okay with common-sense restrictions on purchasing and possession of guns, and AFAICT Democrats make up a substantial part of that group.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/03/us/us-crime-rate-rise-2020/index.html
This is what CNN (I hope you’ll agree this isn’t some right-wing source) says:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/12/us/homicides-major-cities-increase-end-of-year-2021/index.html
Most of the new gun buyers are women and minorities livingnin big cities - and they aren’t gun nuts - many are first-time gun buyers.
One thing I should rescind: I don’t think it’s fair to say ‘big Democratic cities’, because all big cities are pretty much run by Democrats. So if it’s just a big city thing, being Democratic may just be a correlation. But clearly there are policy-influenced causes here, from the revolving-door policiesmof progressive DAs to changes to theft laws in California.
I’ve listed the reasons criminologists cite for the current violence. Conspicuously absent was fear of roving gangs of MAGA hat wearers, Do you have any cites to back you up? Other than Jussie Smollett, perhaps?
Here’s Chicago, for instance:
Could be, but guns are expensive. And once you own one and take some training, the irrational fear of them tends to be mitigated. And so long as DAs keep releasing violent felons back into the population and look the other way with property crime and theft, conditions are going to remain such that people are not going to give up their guns, and more new gun owners will be created every day.
The key argument Democrats have made against guns has always been that we have police to protect us and gun ownership is not required or a good idea for safety. Then Democrats started demonizing the police and telling people that police are the problem, and started advocating the defunding of police departments. Now murders are spiking, stores are boarded up in major cities and women and minorities bearing the brunt of these policies are arming up or moving away. They are also moving towards the Republican party politically.
This was a self-own on the Democrats’ part. They undermined their own arguments against owning guns.
Your first link says “Murder increased in every geographic region, and in small towns and suburban areas as well as large cities.” So it’s not that, either.
That isn’t even close to reality. But it does read like a Republican campaign ad.
While that probably affected non-violent crime, it doesn’t seem to have affected violent crime. From the FBI database:
Look at that. There was a significant uptick in violent crime across the US, as stated (though note the Y axis start; it’s not as bad as it looks). And yet in the Democratic Republik of California, the violent crime rate from 2019-2020 is flat.
It is a stunt. See gun manufacturers are protected from such lawsuits by Federal law.
However, this should give the Dem congress an idea- make abortion clinics immune for lawsuits of the Texas sort.
Please note- if your gun blows up due to a manufacturers error, etc, they are still liable, just like a clinic would be liable for a incompetently botched operation.
What gun companies are immune from is being sued if their guns, once out of their control- are used in a crime.
So, let Congress lass a law making clinic immune for lawsuits just for performing an abortion.
The “exodus”,- due to every time I have seen or heard a person getting out- is retirees moving to cheaper states. True taxes are part of what makes CA a expensive state (but our property taxes are very low), but real estate is the BIG one.
Who are immune.
And most favor rather mild controls. Few want things like handgun bans.
No one has “pro-violence policies”, and CA is 17th in violent crime rates (that isn’t good, but not bad) , the top ten states are AK, NM, TN, AR, LA, MS, SC, SD, AZ, MI. 8 are GOP. It ain’t idiotic progressive DA’s causing high violent crime rates, dude.
“Sellers”, not “manufacturers”, is who the law will allow people to sue.
56%.
Only about 47% of the state is registered Democratic.
About 47% of registered voters are Democrats , 24% are Republicans , and 23% are independents
I am one of them.
No, the key argument that Democrats have made against guns is that it’s reasonable to regulate their acquisition and use. Most Democrats still agree with that argument whether they own a gun or not.
Black Americans, for example who are overwhelmingly Democratic in their political affiliation, are both overwhelmingly likely to recognize problems with policing and overwhelmingly likely to favor gun control.
You’ve got that backwards: Republicans are starting to support more women and minorities among their candidates, but that doesn’t mean that women and minorities overall are becoming more Republican.
I generally avoid reading your cites, because they never say what you claim they say. This is another good example. You claimed that Democrats were becoming more pro gun because they were afraid of crime. Then you cited a bunch of pieces talking about a rise in crime.
Dramatically missing, here, is the part where you provide evidence that the former is being driven by the latter.
Thanks for the cites, but that’s a one year increase from near record lows. If you look at Dr.Strangelove’s graphs, it’s flat from 2016, slightly down from 2010.
If people weren’t buying guns like crazy to protect themselves from violence running out of control in 2010 (or before, when crime was higher still), I guess I don’t get why they would now.