Money is pouring in for Kamala Harris as U.S. presidential candidate

[MsAmerica]

And I confess myself very surprised.

Kamala Harris' fundraising reaches a record-breaking $100 million since Biden's exit
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/23/fundraising-for-kamala-harris-tops-100-million-shattering-records/74509043007/

Historic flood of cash pours into Harris campaign and allied groups
www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/historic-flood-of-cash-pours-into-harris-campaign-and-allied-groups/ar-BB1qvtCj?ocid=BingNewsSerp

It’s not up to you to decide it’s overused. It should be available to every woman who needs or wants it. Women aren’t barefoot and pregnant at the sink any more. The only body you have any right to make decisions about is your own.

What limitations do you propose? Because other than a term limit I can’t see any appropriate ones.

No one's arguing for more abortions. This is such a twisted garbled steaming pile of horse shit, I can't believe you concluded with

God forbid someone tries to talk some sense to you.

First of all, I completely believe people should be in control of their own bodies. But, assuming you big men get to legislate our lil uteruses, I would suggest, since you're so hot on talking sense to us little ladies, you spend some time researching which Republican politicians have voted for and or supported programs that actually help women and children. School lunches, family and maternal leave, health care, head start, childcare, pregnancy and maternal care (do you know anything about how these restrictions have harmed reproductive medical care, including labor and deliver care in these states? Thought not). You name it, they've voted against it. Their policies cease to care about women and children once birth has happened. Pro-child and family my ass.

I hate when the intolerant anti woman brigade starts whining about how we should all let our rights go up for popular debate.

You seem to be missing a point here. There is generally a correlation between times of government that want to ban abortion or go heavier on it, and the number of abortions that take place. Often abortions rise with more conservative governments because there's also less care and support available for women who are pregnant and in a difficult situation.

It's not like having a more liberal government means abortion figures go through the roof. Nobody wants to increase abortions. They do want to increase freedom for women in need.

The problem is a simple Google search shows you're wrong based on reported #'s per year (at least in the US). And that data is flawed anyways because CA stopped reporting in 1997.

Some of us have a more worldwide perspective than the US.

Anyway here's an interesting article about abortion in America that backs up what I said.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/abortion-texas-mississippi-stimulus-poverty-b1928564.html

So what you're saying is it's ok for you to insult my username, be condescending, and overreact... But it's not ok for others to do that. Got it.

Your political party's position on the COVID vaccine says otherwise. And don't give me crap about being anti-vax because I took my shots. Even though they didn't do anything for me or my family. Thank you very much.

Brigade? I'm one person... And you're losing your cookies because I've pointed out really uncomfortable statistics and the sketchy history of a policy you're head over heals for.

It is so easy to tell you worship at the temple of you, with how important your politics and your opinion is that you can't even have a respectful conversation with someone who disagrees with you. Ridiculous.

You know you are in the 19% (if you're from the US) that is trying to tell the other 81% of the nation that no one else can play with your toys. Do you even realize how crazy that is?

@user556453 "What I can't believe is that even after 50 years and 65,000,000 abortions progressive liberals still think there needs to be more."

Progressive liberals, like every other sane person would like there to be as near to none as possible. We just want that to be achieved by medical advances, education, and social reform. Not by forced birth.

Toys? Are you referring to women’s healthcare or women’s bodies? Either way what a fucking horrible analogy.

Yes, please clarify there @Wabash6503 because it would be good to know what toys you mean.

@Wabash6503 tell me why it's a good thing for a woman to be forced to give birth.

Don’t let one man with a fetish for controlling women destroy this thread. This is what we are up against! Single issue culture war voters who would see the world burn and women die like dogs from unattended miscarriages and illegal abortions.

As a country with vast resources, assets, liabilities, duties, allies, enemies and a powerful state apparatus we have a duty ti choose a president that must be fulfilled every four years.

I absolutely choose Harris-Walz on the basis that I prefer competent, non corrupt, leadership focused on the freedoms that I and my daughters need to live without fear of theocratic oppression. I refuse to live under the thumb of the evangelical right. I refuse to let the right wing billionaires who fund trump use culture war attacks on women, LGBTQ, immigrants, journalists, and everyone but MAGA seize power in order to once again loot the treasury and give themselves tax cuts.

We Won’t Go Back.

What does that even mean? It’s complete gibberish.

First of all, can you please explain, using a specific example, how I've insulted your username even once?

Second, you have used the phrases
God forbid someone tries to talk some sense to you and losing your cookies to what is essentially a roomful of women, while trying to mansplain to us, that we should give over control of our own bodies to largely male-dominated Republican state legislatures? I don't think that's particularly worthy of a 'respectful conversation' unless you believe you are due one just by virtue of being a man?

*Caveat: I love men, am married to one, have two boys, a wonderful father, a lovely brother, three fantastic brothers-in-law and numerous male colleagues and friends, so don't bother accusing me of being a man hater.

So what you're saying is it's ok for you to insult my username, be condescending, and overreact... But it's not ok for others to do that. Got it.

Your political party's position on the COVID vaccine says otherwise. And don't give me crap about being anti-vax because I took my shots. Even though they didn't do anything for me or my family. Thank you very much.

Huh? What are you talking about? Are you getting me confused with another poster? Or is this just random disordered thinking?

@Zonder
@CurlewKate
@pikkumyy77

Agree with every word of those posts.

If you look at it globally (and you really should, it isn't healthy to look at huge issues through a one nation lens!) then you will see that the countries which have the lowest abortion rates are the ones which have

1. Excellent sex education starting young
2. Easy and affordable access to contraception, including the MAP
3. Excellent maternal healthcare which includes early diagnostics for conditions incompatible with life
4. A well funded and functioning welfare system that supports parents with children

The US has exactly none of those things. Start there - banning abortions doesn't work. If you genuinely want the number of abortions to reduce, you wouldn't be bleating on about limiting it, you would be talking about addressing the factors that keep the numbers high.

Exactly @pointythings

Sorry, but most of that made little sense and it was all over the place. I think you might be overestimating your skill at argumentation a tad.
You don't seem to be able to process the idea that the goal of pro-choice is exactly that, choice. It's not about wanting more abortions, the goal is that the woman should be able to choose which option is best for her. Another goal is fewer women dying or being made infertile from illegal abortions, something which is certainly not addressed by prohibiting it.

Excellent points.

Exactly!

This is an excellent example of unintentional irony.
Btw, one loses one's marbles. One tosses one's cookies, which refers to vomiting.
You're welcome.

So you're using what you consider flawed data to prove a point? 🙄
Be that as it may, one year would not be enough to show a trend. It would have to be a span of several years at a minimum. A one year change could be entirely due to other factors. Nor would a simple change in government change these numbers. There would have to be a very specific policy changes associated with it. So this number you quote is not valid evidence.

"And the roots of overuse stem from racism and Nazi eugenics"

Godwinned. I guess all these women getting abortions must be neo-Nazis who seek abortion because they are afraid the baby might turn out to be a difference race? 😆

"For example, 71% of Americans think there should be some limitations."

No sale. Argument by popular opinion. 71% of Americans probably believe a lot of silly things. The bottom line is it's none of their business what other people do with their bodies.

"most people can't even discuss it rationally. Why is that?"

This from the person who brought Nazis into it. Too funny.