We’ve had 8 years of miserable failures from Obama. It will just continue under Hillary, if not get worse.
Thanks for the specifics. I knew that we could count on a sophisticated policy analyst like you to cut through the simplistic slogans and identify the key areas of contention. That really clears things up.
Fucking moron.
The basic mistake is to think that most people think that is the case. Not so.
The key in the polls to me is on the question of how satisfied Americans are with the current laws or want less restrictions, most of them are. The ones that do want to see more restrictions or abolition of it is about 29%.
The damage for me is that, with guys like Pence, the insane and less wanted restrictions will be the order of the day under a republican presidency. That they will waste a lot of treasure in their attempt at changing the law and going over what most of the people think.
To me it is clear that while just about half of the people think abortion is immoral, a good number of that group does not see that as reprehensible as you see it, because they also do realize that having the potential of becoming human is not the same as being so.
I never said, nor do I contend, that most people adopt the reasoning I mentioned.
Just saying, the damage does depend on how many will be affected by the new regulations or the insanity of the regulations to come.
You’re pretty fucking stupid if you think a magazine limit doesn’t modify functionality.
Obama has made your life better, because if a conservative was in charge, dipshit children like you would have a much harder existence.
That is precisely the reason I would cast a vote for Trump if I were to do so. I’m in CA so I’m not, but it’s a valid reason. What makes you think your latter paragraph is more likely than the former? I wouldn’t be surprised if that were true for his early supporters, but for those getting on board fueling his recent poll increases I don’t think that’s a result of converts. My take is that those folks in a choice of two candidates, the bad outcomes of one outweigh the bad outcomes of the other. That’s your first paragraph, not your second.
Doesn’t it depend on the function in question?
Agreed.
A 30 round magazine only appears to hold more bullets!
CMC fnord!
You mean not getting thousands of Americans killed for nothing? You mean the incredible decrease in the uninsured? You mean the (finally!) decreasing income and wealth gaps? You mean the continuous economic growth? Which “failures” are you referring to?
I understand this is rhetorical, since you don’t enjoy actually engaging with those who disagree, and you don’t seem interested in learning anything that doesn’t confirm your own preconceived notions. But I’ll post it anyway. You’re probably a great guy, but I just wish you were interested in having your own opinions challenged and then trying to figure out if maybe there are some things you’re wrong about.
In my experience, and I have a bit, anti-abortion people oppose it because it offends them personally. These people often, but not always, try to validate their being offended by claiming some supernatural entity feels the same way. I’m neither obliged nor inclined to humour that belief, though.
If the damage comes and goes depending on your feelings, it isn’t there. “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away” - Philip K. Dick.
You’re being irrational, The Tooth, and in a way that I think is reflective of a disconnect that a lot of posters here are experiencing when it comes to Trump. You seem to think that anyone’s going to give a shit how you feel about their feelings.
The answer to your question was that people who are opposed to abortion on the grounds that it’s murder believe a President Clinton would facilitate murdering a bunch of people. Your followup is “yeah, but how does that hurt the country?”. It’s a disingenuous question. It would be extremely stupid if it were not disingenuous. It’s probably pretty stupid even as a disingenuous one, even though as far as I can tell I agree with you 100% on the issue.
People who are going to vote for Trump aren’t going to do it because nobody has ever pointed out the “truth” that actually abortion isn’t harmful. They’re not going to follow you down the path of enlightenment because you trick them into admitting that they’re against abortion because of how they feel about abortion. The answer to the question “what’s the harm” is that they think a shitload of murders could result. That’s actually pretty fucking straightforward. There’s nothing to untangle there. If you’re genuinely confused how the math works on this, it’s not because you need more information.
Okay, you’ve convinced me, you’re pretty fucking stupid. 
Sure.
And a black firearm appears scarier than a bright green one.
However, the question is: what function are we discussing?
If the question is simply, “Does one hold more bullets than the other?” then I certainly concede that higher capacity magazines hold more bullets than lower capacity magazines.
But the inference is that higher capacity magazines are more dangerous than lower – specifically that in the mass shooting that prompted the President’s proposal, fewer lives would been lost if only the shooters were restricted to lower capacity magazines. This is the appearance of taking substantive action but the functional reality of changing nothing.
You thought that I thought I could MAKE this rowdy bunch do anything?? Now, who’s delusional. I’m enjoying the hell out of it. I’ve never posted in the Pit much and it’s really fun.
Hey, I’m having surgery on Thursday and a root canal next week. To me this IS fun. 
You do remember SC appointees have to be approved by the Senate, right? The Republicans currently control the Senate, and can just reject any of Clinton’s nominees without much in the way of recourse, or delay voting on it like they’re doing now.
Hurray Democracy!
Hillary will not damage the country in 4 years. She’ll do it on day one.
Yes - but how long will they hold out? I already consider them to be in violation of their duties, and I am closer to Republican than Democrat. Further, the President also appoints lower courts - and those appointments are also for life and can add up to a lot of power from a certain perspective.
The power of the President to pack the courts is pretty high - and I think that court decisions to have more impact than legislation in recent years. Key examples being gay marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges), gun control (Heller), public takings (Kelo vs New London), and campaign finance (Citizens United).