Wisconsin Supreme Court Election: Liberals Win Control of Wisconsin State Supreme Court For The First Time In 15-Years.

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Why? You tranny loons tell people who they can and can’t have sex with.

WTF?!?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

I'd rather be an honest loser than a dishonest winner

Mission accomplished.

This one seat in one supreme court in one state really doesn't mean much when you see how badly democrats got their asses kicked in 2022.

There was no ass kicking. Everything magaturds predicted fell apart. Reps barely took the House and Dems retained the Senate. The GOP is coasting on gridlock. The midterms were a disaster for your party, not matter your 'feelings' about it.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

I am antiwar and mourn the destruction of innocent life in Ukraine caused by the ineptitude of President Biden. You seem to rejoice in all the carnage.

Did Biden invade Ukraine?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Males should have equal abortion rights. Not to force a woman to do anything with their body, but the right to abort the male's parental responsibility on the same timeline a woman can abort a baby. You know, equality.

Can you birth a child from your urethra? No? Then shut the fuck up about equality.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Mission accomplished.

There was no ass kicking. Everything magaturds predicted fell apart. Reps barely took the House and Dems retained the Senate. The GOP is coasting on gridlock. The midterms were a disaster for your party, not matter your 'feelings' about it.

Taking back the house is not a disaster. It's an attempt to stop one.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

As a matter of law, we need to have guardrails in place, so we do not become barbaric, and allow wholesale slaughter of healthy babies minutes or weeks before they would have taken their first breath.

Your conservative “guardrails” are not preventing “wholesale slaughter of healthy babies minutes or weeks before they would have taken their first breath” — because there was never such a phenomenon, not under Roe vs. Wade or anywhere in the U.S. at any time.

If you knew the first thing about real women and abortion, or even just what women go through in a real pregnancy, you would know your ridiculous supposition that women would choose to carry fetuses for eight or nine months only to slaughter them “wholesale” on a whim is childish nonsense … and deeply insulting.

In Wisconsin your oh-so-“moral” candidate was defeated precisely because of similar nonsensical “moral” pontificating. He welcomed the outlawing of abortion altogether when Roe vs. Wade was overturned and a law passed a century and a half ago took effect, just as elsewhere your red state politicians and fundamentalist preachers “morally” fight to outlaw abortion or limit it to the first six or eight weeks after pregnancy … in highly restricted circumstances.

Even the Federalist Society has published articles proposing, and certainly Republicans like Pence push for, a “National Law Outlawing Abortion” — to be introduced as soon as Republicans have the power to pass one.

Fake infantile “moral” pretenses don’t fool the majority of U.S. voters, who were satisfied with the compromises embedded in Roe vs. Wade. We Liberals, Independents and pro-choice Conservatives — like Barry Goldwater famously was! — never force anybody to abort an unwanted pregnancy. But we will stick with our own sense of morality and stop you fake “Moral Majority” types from using the state to force your own childish sense of “morality” on all the rest of us.

No true conservative will EVER support the killing of a baby in the womb. They might lose every fucking election from now until eternity because of it, but at least they can lay their heads down at night knowing they stuck with their morals.

Good! I hope you do lay down your heads and “lose every fucking election from now until eternity” … until you learn to respect women’s basic right to control their own bodies, to end unwanted pregnancies, to have children they really want and can support and love. That is also how most of us encourage stable, loving and responsible two-parent families.

 

[Wapasha]

Your conservative “guardrails” are not preventing “wholesale slaughter of healthy babies minutes or weeks before they would have taken their first breath” — because there was never such a phenomenon, not under Roe vs. Wade or anywhere in the U.S. at any time.

If you knew the first thing about real women and abortion, or even just what women go through in a real pregnancy, you would know your ridiculous supposition that women would choose to carry fetuses for eight or nine months only to slaughter them “wholesale” on a whim is childish nonsense … and deeply insulting.

I asked you a simple question, should there be any limits on abortions at all. You refused to answer and decided to feign outrage, and put on an obvious grandstanding rant instead. So I'll ask again, do you think there should be any restrictions on abortion at all? Or should it be legal to abort a healthy baby in the final month? Can you give an answer, or are the only arrows in your quiver for feigned outrage?

 

[Rogue AI]

Can you birth a child from your urethra? No? Then shut the fuck up about equality.

Can you birth a baby without male and female DNA? No? Then STFU.

 

[Blaster]

Did Biden invade Ukraine?

By supplying them with weapons and sending millions of our tax dollars there he is fighting a proxy war.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I asked you a simple question, should there be any limits on abortions at all. You refused to answer and decided to feign outrage, and put on an obvious grandstanding rant instead. So I'll ask again, do you think there should be any restrictions on abortion at all? Or should it be legal to abort a healthy baby in the final month? Can you give an answer, or are the only arrows in your quiver for feigned outrage?

No “feigned outrage” from me. Just genuine outrage and great satisfaction that Republican candidates in Wisconsin tried but failed to outlaw women’s rights to elective abortions. That was the clear issue in Wisconsin and not your b.s. “abstract questions” about a “wholesale” problem that almost never arises.

You made your real view clear when you insulted tens of millions of American women who decided to plan when and with whom to have children, and decided to chose to abort an unwanted pregnancy. You said they are the sort of women who “pollute” the world with their offspring. You implied falsely that “wholesale” whimsical “last minute” abortions are what Conservatives really want “guard rails” to prevent.

I have always pointed out and agreed with the carefully crafted and thought out COMPROMISE Wade vs. Roe decision that allowed states — in roughly the last trimester — to consider what they or their resident citizens might think were possible “state interests” in restricting and b conditioning a woman’s right to abortion.

Of course these reasonable guidelines were unacceptable to reactionaries and cynical demagogic Republicans everywhere, mainly because they did not want to recognize the right and desires of millions of American women who choose to have an abortion when dealing with the trauma of an unwanted pregnancy.

THIS is exactly what reactionary Conservatives in Wisconsin were proposing. In Wisconsin, even under Roe vs. Wade, the anti-woman right had managed to stop all abortions except in just two counties. After Roe was overthrown by our rightwing Supreme Court, Republican politicians openly tried to keep even minimum, very early elective abortion illegal. Details of the reactionary proposals they advocated are available here:

Wisconsin Republicans propose abortion ban exceptions

NOW that the “guardrails” of Roe vs. Wade are gone, new ones will have to be fought for state by state. Republican and fake Christian extremist efforts to restrict woman’s fundamental right to control their bodies and lives will continue, and continue to be opposed by sober and rational Americans. Most of us “real American men” who love our wives and sisters and daughters … are not particularly interested in hypothetical questions that do not effect our lives.

When addressed hyperbolically the issue of “when human life begins” should never be dignified with an answer. When asked seriously, even honest scientists, philosophers and religious leaders — much less cynical self-serving politicians — have trouble answering adequately.

The need of the times is to defend basic women’s rights from continual attack by religious nuts and opportunist Republican hysterics claiming to be “moral.” Most Americans do not care about “how many angels can dance on a head of a pin” — but do care about defending their daughters, girlfriends, and wives, and helping them if they … “get into trouble.”

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I asked you a simple question, should there be any limits on abortions at all. You refused to answer and decided to feign outrage, and put on an obvious grandstanding rant instead. So I'll ask again, do you think there should be any restrictions on abortion at all? Or should it be legal to abort a healthy baby in the final month? Can you give an answer, or are the only arrows in your quiver for feigned outrage?

No “feigned outrage” or “ranting” from me. Just genuine outrage and great satisfaction that Republican politicians in Wisconsin tried but failed to outlaw women’s rights to elective abortions. That was the CLEAR ISSUE in Wisconsin and not your b.s. “abstract questions” about a “wholesale” problem that almost never arises.

You made your real view clear when you insulted tens of millions of American women who — wanting to plan when, whether and with whom to have children — decide to chose to abort an unwanted pregnancy. You said they are the sort of women who “pollute” the world with their offspring. You implied falsely that “wholesale” whimsical “last minute” abortions are what Conservatives really want “guard rails” to prevent.

I have always pointed out and agreed with the carefully crafted and thought out COMPROMISE Wade vs. Roe decision that allowed individual states — in roughly the last trimester — to consider what they or their resident citizens might think were possible “state interests” and restrict or condition a woman’s right to abortion.

Of course these reasonable guidelines were unacceptable to reactionaries and cynical demagogic Republicans everywhere, mainly because they did not want to recognize the right and desires of millions of American women who choose to have an abortion when dealing with the trauma of an unwanted pregnancy.

THIS is exactly what reactionary Conservatives in Wisconsin were proposing. In Wisconsin, even under Roe vs. Wade, the anti-woman right had managed to stop ALL abortions and close all abortion facilities except in just two counties. After Roe was overthrown by our rightwing Supreme Court, Republican politicians openly tried to finish the job, and to keep even minimum, very early elective abortion illegal. Details of the “reform” proposals they cynically advocated are here:

Wisconsin Republicans propose abortion ban exceptions

NOW that the “guardrails” of Roe vs. Wade are gone, new ones will have to be fought for state by state. Republican and fake Christian extremist efforts to restrict woman’s fundamental right to control their bodies and lives will continue … and continue to be opposed by sober and rational Americans. Most of us “real American men” who love our wives and sisters and daughters … are not particularly interested in hypothetical questions that do not effect our lives.

When addressed hyperbolically the issue of “when human life begins” should never be dignified with an answer. When asked seriously, even honest scientists, philosophers and religious leaders — much less cynical self-serving politicians — have trouble answering adequately.

The need of the times is to defend basic women’s rights from continuing attack by religious nuts and opportunist Republican hysterics claiming to be “moral.” Most Americans do not care about “how many angels can dance on a head of a pin” — but do care about defending their daughters, girlfriends, and wives, and helping them if they … “get into trouble.”

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

By supplying them with weapons and sending millions of our tax dollars there he is fighting a proxy war.

Did Biden invade Ukraine?

 

[Wapasha]

No “feigned outrage” or “ranting” from me. Just genuine outrage and great satisfaction that Republican politicians in Wisconsin tried but failed to outlaw women’s rights to elective abortions. That was the CLEAR ISSUE in Wisconsin and not your b.s. “abstract questions” about a “wholesale” problem that almost never arises.

You made your real view clear when you insulted tens of millions of American women who — wanting to plan when, whether and with whom to have children — decide to chose to abort an unwanted pregnancy. You said they are the sort of women who “pollute” the world with their offspring. You implied falsely that “wholesale” whimsical “last minute” abortions are what Conservatives really want “guard rails” to prevent.

I have always pointed out and agreed with the carefully crafted and thought out COMPROMISE Wade vs. Roe decision that allowed individual states — in roughly the last trimester — to consider what they or their resident citizens might think were possible “state interests” and restrict or condition a woman’s right to abortion.

Of course these reasonable guidelines were unacceptable to reactionaries and cynical demagogic Republicans everywhere, mainly because they did not want to recognize the right and desires of millions of American women who choose to have an abortion when dealing with the trauma of an unwanted pregnancy.

THIS is exactly what reactionary Conservatives in Wisconsin were proposing. In Wisconsin, even under Roe vs. Wade, the anti-woman right had managed to stop ALL abortions and close all abortion facilities except in just two counties. After Roe was overthrown by our rightwing Supreme Court, Republican politicians openly tried to finish the job, and to keep even minimum, very early elective abortion illegal. Details of the “reform” proposals they cynically advocated are here:

Wisconsin Republicans propose abortion ban exceptions

NOW that the “guardrails” of Roe vs. Wade are gone, new ones will have to be fought for state by state. Republican and fake Christian extremist efforts to restrict woman’s fundamental right to control their bodies and lives will continue … and continue to be opposed by sober and rational Americans. Most of us “real American men” who love our wives and sisters and daughters … are not particularly interested in hypothetical questions that do not effect our lives.

When addressed hyperbolically the issue of “when human life begins” should never be dignified with an answer. When asked seriously, even honest scientists, philosophers and religious leaders — much less cynical self-serving politicians — have trouble answering adequately.

The need of the times is to defend basic women’s rights from continuing attack by religious nuts and opportunist Republican hysterics claiming to be “moral.” Most Americans do not care about “how many angels can dance on a head of a pin” — but do care about defending their daughters, girlfriends, and wives, and helping them if they … “get into trouble.”

All that, and you still didn't answer my question.

I don't think you ever will answer that one simple question, because then you'd have to find common ground with me, and all you want to do is continue to grandstand and bloviate

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

All that, and you still didn't answer my question.

I don't think you ever will answer that one simple question, because then you'd have to find common ground with me, and all you want to do is continue to grandstand and bloviate

But of course I did answer it very clearly, extensively, and in a way that provided room for thoughtful consideration. See paragraph three and paragraph six in particular. “Common ground” cannot be found until you learn to read and think and respond to my comments … thoughtfully.

I put far more thought into my responses than you ever do. You NEVER responded to even ONE thing I actually said in my many comments in this thread, and just take the easy way out by demanding I answer your ridiculous “gotcha” question. I’ve already said I accepted the guidelines that Roe vs. Wade provided allowing room for states to make their own decisions (which I believe was abused by fanatic anti-abortion extremists even before RvW was over-ruled).

You want me to write you a model state law proposing exact cut off dates and what sort of limitations on abortion might be warranted in every possible individual case in every state?

Because I do not simplify, but try to show some depth of understanding of women and abortion, of history and areas where compromises can and have worked, you dismiss my response as “bloviating” or “ranting.”

Not my fault that you either don’t read or think very clearly, or else simply don’t wish to make the effort to respond as a serious adult dealing with real arguments and issues.

I note you never even explained what “guardrails” you are proposing!

 

[Wapasha]

But of course I did answer it very clearly, extensively, and in a way that provided room for thoughtful consideration. See paragraph three and paragraph six in particular. “Common ground” cannot be found until you learn to read and think and respond to my comments … thoughtfully.

I put far more thought into my responses than you ever do. You NEVER responded to even ONE thing I actually said in my many comments in this thread, and just take the easy way out by demanding I answer your ridiculous “gotcha” question. I’ve already said I accepted the guidelines that Roe vs. Wade provided allowing room for states to make their own decisions (which I believe was abused by fanatic anti-abortion extremists even before RvW was over-ruled).

You want me to write you a model state law proposing exact cut off dates and what sort of limitations on abortion might be warranted in every possible individual case in every state?

Because I do not simplify, but try to show some depth of understanding of women and abortion, of history and areas where compromises can and have worked, you dismiss my response as “bloviating” or “ranting.”

Not my fault that you either don’t read or think very clearly, or else simply don’t wish to make the effort to respond as a serious adult dealing with real arguments and issues.

I note you never even explained what “guardrails” you are proposing!

You still didn't answer the question, concerning what restrictions you would place on abortion

Here's your paragraph three: (paragraph six simply did not answer the question)

I have always pointed out and agreed with the carefully crafted and thought out COMPROMISE Wade vs. Roe decision that allowed individual states — in roughly the last trimester — to consider what they or their resident citizens might think were possible “state interests” and restrict or condition a woman’s right to abortion.

I didn't ask if you agreed that states could write abortion laws. I asked if you would place any limits on abortion. You seem to be inferring you'd limit abortion during the third month. If so, just say so.

That's the point I'm trying to make here. If we discuss abortion law, unless you are a complete sadist, you will find some point along the ninth month pregnancy where you would agree that a healthy mother should not be allowed to end the life of a healthy baby. Whatever decision a person may come up with, there will be a bloviating activist to call them all kinds of bad names and accuse them of trying to take away a woman's Right to choose.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Listen here:

What If Democrats Decided to Campaign as Real Democrats?

Way to go, Wisconsin! In a momentous progressive win, voters there elected County Judge Janet Protasiewicz to their state supreme court. She thumped a mega-MAGA-Republican by 11 points in a pivotal race, ending a dark decade of unbridled right-wing partisan extremism by that court’s GOP majority.

jimhightower.substack.com

 

[MagicMike]

like the 2016 election when the left screamed that Trump was a Russian plant installed by Putin ??? so

He was.

 

[0311]

The victory of Janet Protasiewicz over conservative Dan Kelly will allow the court's new liberal majority to determine the future of key issues like abortion rights.

Liberals gain control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court for the first time in 15 years

Janet Protasiewicz’s over conservative Dan Kelly will allow the court's new liberal majority to determine the future of key issues like abortion rights.

www.nbcnews.com

Janet Protasiewicz, a judge on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court, has won a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, NBC News projects, giving liberals their first majority on the state’s highest court in 15 years.

Protasiewicz defeated conservative Dan Kelly, a former state Supreme Court justice, on Tuesday in what became the most expensive state Supreme Court race in U.S. history and one of the most closely watched elections of 2023.

Protasiewicz’s victory will allow the court’s new liberal majority to determine the future of several pivotal issues the bench is likely to decide in the coming years, including abortion rights, the state’s gerrymandered legislative maps and election administration — including, possibly, the outcome of the 2024 presidential race in the battleground state.

Wisconsin Democrats Eye High Court's New Liberal Majority To Win Abortion and Redistricting Ruling.

Democrats Eye Wisconsin High Court's New Liberal Majority To Win Abortion And Redistricting Rulings

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court will flip from majority conservative to liberal control next month.

www.huffpost.com

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin's Supreme Court will flip from majority conservative to liberal control in August and Democrats have high hopes the change will lead to the state's abortion ban being overturned and its maps redrawn to weaken GOP control of the Legislature and congressional districts.

Democrats in the perennial battleground state focused on abortion to elect a liberal majority to the court for the first time in 15 years. The Democratic Party spent $8 million to tilt the court’s 4-3 conservative majority by one seat with the election of Janet Protasiewicz, who spoke in favor of abortion rights and against the Republican-drawn map in a campaign. Her April victory broke national spending records for a state Supreme Court race.

 

[Blaster]

Wisconsin Democrats Eye High Court's New Liberal Majority To Win Abortion and Redistricting Ruling.

Democrats Eye Wisconsin High Court's New Liberal Majority To Win Abortion And Redistricting Rulings

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court will flip from majority conservative to liberal control next month.

www.huffpost.com

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin's Supreme Court will flip from majority conservative to liberal control in August and Democrats have high hopes the change will lead to the state's abortion ban being overturned and its maps redrawn to weaken GOP control of the Legislature and congressional districts.

Democrats in the perennial battleground state focused on abortion to elect a liberal majority to the court for the first time in 15 years. The Democratic Party spent $8 million to tilt the court’s 4-3 conservative majority by one seat with the election of Janet Protasiewicz, who spoke in favor of abortion rights and against the Republican-drawn map in a campaign. Her April victory broke national spending records for a state Supreme Court race.

This is bad news for Wisconsin.

 

[Dreadnaught1968]

This is bad news for Wisconsin.

The left wing poured in a lot of money to buy this seat...