The delay is intended by Republicans, in order to cause a crisis that goes to SCOTUS… who seems to be owned and operated by the GOP. I’d say lets compromise… they can hand count and if not done by the cutoff then their votes simply are not admitted. Sucks to the non Republicans in the juristictions but hey, why let these dumbshits screw up the whole election?

I call them forced-birth, which sums up their position well. They care nothing for the woman having the child and care nothing for the child after it’s born. It’s all about forcing that birth by whatever means… then walking away.

So you don’t agree that starting from the ground up won’t work? Why not? Too much effort or takes too much time?

I think you might need to reread my post, I didn’t say it was easy. It’s reality, which generally isn’t easy.

This. Most likely the thinking is that Mr Trump and Co. will make the grift blatantly obvious whereas now it’s just quietly cruising along in the background. They certainly don’t need Trump saying the quiet part out loud with this much money on the line.

In my experience women say this when they (mistakenly) take their current life and transpose it on their younger self. For example, a married woman with a stable job and great family in her thirties looks back at the abortion she decided to get when she was 18, dating an abusive boyfriend, living with her evangelical parents, and unemployed and says “I’m doing great now so it would have been the same then”. It’s self delusion at a grand scale, but I suppose it’s a way for them to “blame the world” instead of taking responsibility for their choice.

I’m not convinced democrats have been completely against fracking. I think it’s location based as fracking does or can have extreme negative consequences on the surrounding environment, so doing it around a major city aquifer probably isn’t the greatest idea. Fracking out in the middle of nowhere might be more positively embraced.

I suspect that if he intends a mass pardon he will do it after the election. Common sense says that there is more risk of negative campaign influence then positive in this case, and why would he risk it?

Want to build a viable third party for presidential elections? Start small at the city/county level and eventually you will have candidates at the state/federal level. Today’s city council is tomorrow’s senator/president. Does it really surprise anyone that a relatively unknown and unproven candidate outside of the two major parties doesn’t get any traction in a federal election?

Basically if Mr Trump wins then the case just sorta “goes away”. If he loses then the book probably gets thrown at him. I think the judge did it because he doesn’t want the guaranteed retaliation if Trump wins.

Somehow I get the impression his idea of “better security” is the local team of Gravy Seals patrolling campus looking for “trouble”. Trouble being minorities, girls, kids who look at them funny. That kind of thing.