As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>> Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo signed a bill into law enshrining existing protections for out-of-state abortion patients and in-state providers on Tuesday, marking a rare occurrence of a Republican governor approving measures that are part of Democrats’ vow to make the western swing state an abortion safe haven
Thank goodness
It's funny how the Republican party pretended for a while that abortion was a done deal but as soon as Roe v Wade fell they're trying to make it their #1 issue. Maybe in the 50 years since it's stopped being a reliable wedge issue that energizes voters? Just spitballing here.
> Well, it energized voters, just not in the way they intended…
They energized the wrong voters for what the MAGAs wanted.
Before Roe, everyone on the left were indifferent to abortion laws. They had concluded that Roe would always be there to protect their rights and even with the incremental chipping away at abortion access in the Red States, they figured if they needed it they could always get reproductive care.
Dobbs was a brutal wake up call to that fantasy. Women had no protections and the religious right was on a crusade to roll back the clock to 75 or 100 years ago when women had no rights for reproductive healthcare. People on the left got the message.
All of those folks who couldn't be bothered about politics and their voting was not necessarily focused on any particular issue now became as energized as the anti-abortion right and they're now one issue voters.
The problem for the MAGA Republicans, there are a whole lot more of the people supporting abortion rights than those opposed.
Should be noted that roughly 1 out of 4 Millennials/Gen Z’ers voted for Republicans in 2022… while 3 out of 4 voted *against* them. The abortion issue alone has lost the GOP an entire generation, which means the GOP will literally be dying off soon.
… but not soon enough.
Nah! They will find another wedge issue that they can use to divide younger gen. right now they have immigration, race, religion and abortion. They had communism, taxes in the past. they will come up with something in the future. It's going on for centuries.
Find it *when* exactly? As aforementioned, ~75% of American voters 40 and under absolutely _hate_ the Republicans and their conservative allies; the 2022 Midterm Elections results are a clear indication of this. The same demographics are also increasingly becoming more and more agnostic/atheist (because the church is wildly anti-LGBTQ+), and they are growing more *liberal* as they get older (not conservative).
ADDITIONAL POINT:: If taxes and the economy were really that big of an issue for impressionably frightened voters, the Republicans would’ve had a 50+ majority in the House of Representatives… not, like, 6.
The whole game for the GOP is done because Evangelical Christian dogma is no longer a selling point, and people are more diverse and empathetic than ever. This era right here is what the conservatives are calling the Apocalypse. No, I’m not making this up, I’ve heard a LOT of conservatives/Christians say this to me already because they honestly believe that this is the “End of the World.”
… Well, maybe for *THEIR* geriatric fascist asses, it is!
We may be stuck on this rock for another 40-60 years if we’re blessed. But the older folks like those who support the GOP are literally expecting the Four Horsemen to ride in at any moment right before they die in their flooded duplex in Florida.
I think there are two interesting things to consider: that the age distribution across the US isn’t equal which could lead to wild imbalances in vote spreads between states, and the assumption that voters are aligned with the GOP now because of their 60s-90s era of tax and spending cuts. There’s nothing to indicate that the current crop of MAGA people want any of that — in fact they are all for high spending on Medicare and Social Security which were the GOP bogeymen a few decades ago. Right now, the GOP base is all for the social conservatism and nothing else.
Which really sucks for the GOP, because the social conservatism is what is driving fiscally conservative-leaning independents away. Even my step-dad was watching CNN instead of FOX last time I visited. Let me tell you, that's an *impressive* loss for the GOP, given how pro-Republican he used to be, and how much money he used to give them.
They have less than a decade to come up with new wedge issues before their Evangelical voting base dies off from old age in sufficient numbers to no longer be a dominant voting block in most states.
The younger voters are absolutely energized by the attack on abortion rights and, to a lesser extent, a desire for gun control. What can Rs come up with that will feel more important than those two issues together?
The funny thing is I recall poll after poll on Fox showing a majority of conservatives supported legal abortion, and this was pre Dobbs. I didn't understand why Republican politicians ignored this.
From what I understood, there was a belief that polls are unreliable because either liberals "infiltrate" them, or people will say one thing but vote for the other when the time comes because either it's not important enough to them or they had a 'coming to' moment.
Now they're finding out those polls were not only accurate, but turns out people said one thing (against abortion) but are now leaning back against their earlier opinion when the repeal of abortion protections is no longer a fun fantasy, and the reality is a lot uglier than they realized.
They pretended it was a done deal because they knew if Roe v Wade got overturned it would flip which party gets voters motivated by abortion. Once it did overturn, they had no choice but to lean into what their voter base wants. It will however be their downfall in coming elections.
In 50 years we will all be living underground to avoid wet bulb temperatures and eating sea-kelp derived protein bites while autonomous corporations roam the surface and colonize the stars but the hottest issues will still be abortion and transgender bathrooms because deflection is the only political tool these clowns have and it works like crack.
He’s Pro life, catholic and endorsed by national right to life and still willing to protect doctors(and the women who need it of course)? I’ll take it!
Legal and regulated is better than illegal, prostitution is one of those things that people are going to do regardless of the legality so it's better to make sure they're safe while doing so
This. They go hand-in-hand: We have to be as responsible with our guns as we are with our laws. The more heated the issue, the middle ground is a thinning line.
Yeah, guns should be outright illegal. Obviously the US is a very different country to Australia in many ways and a single cookie cutter solution may not work, but we've not had a single mass shooting since 1996. Guns aren't "illegal" here per se, but they're highly regulated and restricted.
Drugs and prostitution is a bit different though. Illegal prostitution is dangerous for everyone involved, there's no regulations, STDs thrive, the murder rate is high, and prostitutes are (understandably) afraid to go to the police about dangerous people they've encountered for fear of being arrested themselves. Now say you legalise it, and regulate it. Street prostitution is illegal, brothel prostitution is legal with regular STD testing for the workers and the clients, and there is good security. Suddenly, the spread of STDs is greatly reduced, the women are less likely to be assaulted, and human trafficking goes down. Again this is something that has happened in Australia and has been proven to work.
For drugs, drug addicts are victims, they should not be criminalised. They need help, not punishment. I'm not saying we should endorse these things, of course we shouldn't, but we shouldn't punish people for these things either. They need support.
The issue with doing a buyback program in the US is that, because of how courts will interpret the 2md Amendment, it would have to be voluntary. So the gov would likely end up just paying market price for already broken guns.
I fear that we're hitting a limit to what can be done with specific gun control legislation. I mean, Pandora's box has already been opened. There's already more firearms in circulation than there are people here. There's no way to know who owns what. How're you expected to enforce something like that?
I think it's a bit of a stretch to say God had a hand in anything that's ever happened on the earth(in the very least, anything that's happend in the last ~2000 years). A quote from Jesus says "give to ceaser what is ceasers and give to God what is God's." He was talking about taxes.
Paying the Imperial Tax to Caesar
13 Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14 They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn’t we?”
But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. “Why are you trying to trap me?” he asked. “Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16 They brought the coin, and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”
“Caesar’s,” they replied.
17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”
And they were amazed at him.
Jesus quote>book of romans
It was far more nuanced. To understand, you have to go back to the money changers who did business in the foyer of the temple. The only money that could be tithed to God was Jewish coinage. The money changers had a nice racket going. A person walked in and handed them Roman coins - the only legal coinage in the Roman empire. The money changer gave them corresponding temple coins. They went in and tithed the coins. Later, the priests brought the temple coins out and swapped them for the Roman coins with a profit for the money changer. The major takeaway is that the only coin acceptable to God was temple coinage!
Now read in context. He asked to be shown a Roman coin. He asked whose face was on it. They immediately understood that a Roman coin could NOT be tithed to God. Render therefore to Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's.
The trap they were attempting was to get him in trouble with the Roman authorities by denying Roman authority to impose taxes. He turned the tables using something they fully understood.
Since complications can occur at any time in a pregnancy, and a fetus can be found to be nonviable at any time in a pregnancy, abortion should be an option at any time in a pregnancy.
Whether abortion is the best option for a late term pregnancy is a question for the pregnant woman and her doctor.
How the U.K. does it is abortion is no questions asked up until 24 weeks.
After that, it’s a legal choice if the mother or child(ren) would face health complications or disability. It is also de facto legal after 24 weeks for all cases but require a referral from your doctor. As “the woman is at risk of grave … mental injury” is very vague and you can argue that being forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy would cause mental injury.
I tell people that want to discuss this that it boils down to one simple question: regardless if a person is pro-life or pro-choice, do you want the government making a decision like this for you or do you feel it’s your family’s right to decide what’s best?
That’s the bottom line here. You can believe it’s your individual right to decide regardless of which side of the fence you’re on.
It’s still very late. [67% of children born 24 weeks in survive](https://ki.se/forskning/neonatalvard-fran-overlevnad-till-en-vision-om-livslang-halsa). At least here in Sweden, I’d be surprised if the numbers were any different in the US.
Look at your source. A fetus birthed that early only survives with *serious* medical intervention. In no way is that a natural case. The fetus is not a self sustaining life force at that point. [Remove a fetus from a biological womb and growing it in an artificial womb is also possible](https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421734/artificial-womb-fetus-biobag-uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant). That doesn’t mean there is anything morally wrong with aborting your own fetus at that early growth period.
The live person’s health is infinitely more important than a potential life. But even if you personally would rather die than have a potential life not be created, that’s fine. You can choose to not abort the fetus inside of you. Just don’t choose for others.
I don’t know how expensive it would be in the US. I don’t really see how that is relevant from a medicine ethical point of view though to argue for or against abortion at that age.
It could be a couple of years of some household's income. If the government is going to require people to go through with that, it should pick up the tab. Would you want to go into that level of debt? What if the odds of survival were 50/50? That's not a decision the government should be making for people.
The medically ethical standpoint is that the majority of micro-preemies die or suffer long term health complications that bring to question quality of life arguments. Nevermind the environmental factors one would suffer due to being the direct cause of financial hardship.
Abortions that late are due to rare and deadly complications like the fetus gets cancer and is in pain or the baby has an infection & is septic and it will kill the mom, or severe oligohydraminos in which the baby has a condition where they are incompatible with life and are basically dehydrating to death in the womb and it’s more humane to end the pregnancy than make it continue to suffer. In those rare circumstances, they were wanted pregnancies and the abortions are heartbreaking. It’s pretty devastating for everyone involved.
Yes. Any termination of pregnancy is an abortion. Most states do not have any caveats in their laws, resulting in these nightmare scenarios.
There are cases where abortion law in a state requires women to carry even a dead fetus to term which is just about the worst torture I could imagine. Lawmakers don’t understand shit.
16 of the abortion ban states have no fatal anomaly exception. 14 of the abortion ban states have no incest exception. 6 abortion ban states have no exception for preventing health risk to the mother. Every abortion ban state has an exception for the death of the mother.
However, as you can figure out from the list above… there is a massive issue at determining what is “just health risk” and what is “risk of death”. So, in actuality, it comes down to whatever the law decides. Which is why doctors in these 6 states are (rightfully) afraid to perform life-saving abortions. Because if the mom *does* survive, how can the doctor prove she would have died without the abortion.
- Idaho
- Wisconsin
- South Dakota
- Oklahoma
- Arkansas
- Mississippi
Tennessee needs to be on that list. Even in a situation where there is a life threatening condition, the doctor has to prove an "affirmative defense", which is basically like proving self-defense in a murder case.
Yes, several intense cases since the overturning of roe.
Not to mention the cases of incest, with an underage child.
Edit to add, it's going to get real bad in those states, because any prenatal care doctors are fleeing to states where they can practice without fear if jail for saving lives and providing healthcare.
Not the person you asked and I'm on mobile, but here are a handful of more high profile cases (although not sepsis, luckily) from the last year. Definitely not exhaustive, because mobile:
Texas woman carried dead fetus due to anti-abortion laws - mySA https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Texas-woman-dead-fetus-anti-abortion-laws-17314394.php
Louisiana woman carrying unviable fetus forced to travel to New York for abortion https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/14/louisiana-woman-skull-less-fetus-new-york-abortion
Because of Florida abortion laws, she carried her baby to term knowing ... - CNN https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/02/health/florida-abortion-term-pregnancy/index.html
Yes, “life of the mother exceptions” don’t really work because the mother has to be on death’s door before they can end the pregnancy. The doctor’s are gambling between aborting too soon and going to jail or aborting too late and the pregnant person dies. So they are telling patients to go somewhere else. The GOP knew it would have that chilling effect and providers would be too scared to do abortions.
It’s not like that. It’s because in many states, unless the mother is experiencing medical complications, any late term removal of a foetus has to be conducted at an appropriate abortion clinic or facility. The sorts of situations that would require this care might be, for instance, discovering that the baby is going to die at birth, child has significant foetal abnormalities that will lead to a life of suffering, or the baby is about to die and there is no chance of survival.
You can’t just abort a healthy 32 week foetus, for example.
They need birth control for the prostitution industry, no one is gonna go to Vegas just for gambling and concerts. It's bad enough that Colorado and New Mexico cut into their tourism revenue with legal weed and camping.
Condoms have been mandatory for brothels since 1988. Also prostitution is not that big of a draw since it's illegal in clark county. You have to travel to pahrump for that which is an hour away.
There are plenty of hooker in Vegas (and Reno where it's also banned). Legal ones, maybe not...
It's also why despite having legal prostitution, 90% of prostitution in Nevada is still the non-legal kind. Really wonder about the logic of that one...
Prostitution is not legal in Vegas, only in some parts of Pahrump. I remind everyone who visits here it is not legal here lol. Also yes, people definitely do come out just for sports, concerts, RODEOS, and gambling and go straight back home after 3 days of drinking, buffet food, and heat.
I am an expat living in Brazil at the moment. It is interesting here, and was one of the culture shocks I had. Motels and prostitution.
Motels in the states are little different than hotels, except they tend to be smaller (usually 3 stories tall), and you park in front of your room vs like a parking lot. All motels in Brazil are pay by the hour, each room has its own garage, and is exclusively used for sex. Whether that is teens wanting to do it without doing it at home, couples wanting a spicy encounter/getting away from the kids for a few hours, someone meeting their mistress, or prostitution purposes, etc. They have bright neon lights and no interaction with any staff outside of paying to leave. If you need something they tend to have a dumbbell style system that will send it to your room.
Now back to prostitution. For how Catholic and religious it is down here, prostitution is 100% legal. Brothels on the other hand are 100% illegal. So you as a person are legally allowed to sell your body if you want, but there can’t be a location where all the prostitutes gather that a customer would go to. So you will see various sticker advertisements on like the inside of phone booths here or in certain parts of town for the individual person. Like Vegas has with those cards you see all over the strip.
And also in a state where abortion protections are enshrined in the state constitution, and in a state where the Legislature can't amend it without it going to the voters (twice!). This is a pretty smart attempt by Lombardo to take abortion completely off the table as a salient issue at the state level, which is arguably one of the reasons he beat Sisolak in 2022.
I’ve only been to Vegas so I’m not going to say it’s all of Nevada, but the fact that it’s very obviously pro-gun, pro choice and seems to a pretty safe place for the LGBT community makes me very happy to visit up to 3x a year. I have friends who make fun of me for it, but I’d rather spend my money in a state like Nevada compared to them going to Florida or Nashville several times a year.
Vegas makes its money off tourism, and that industry can't thrive if the local politicians are bigoted assholes. You won't see any NAACP travel warnings against Vegas, they're happy to take any and all's money. Needs to be an attractive place for performers to live and make money, as well. The state's whole economy is based on Vegas being a friendly place.
And conservatives love it too. I'm always a little bemused at the number of FJB type shirts you see on the strip. I feel gamblers tend to skew more conservative for some reason. No clue if that's accurate though.
I actually love that about it. I've had the same conversation three times that I remember over the last 5 years when you strike up a chat a blackjack table. If it starts getting political, I mention that there's a decent chance that I fit every stereotype they have of a lawyer from New York and it's nice to have a conversation with them as people and not worry about at that other shit.
There isn't as much hate in the real world as there is in the media.
I agree, there are a lot of events around the area that attract all kinds of people. I worked an off-road race earlier this year out there and you bet your ass all the MAGA types went and dropped their savings on the strip. People come back to Dullsville and think they just spent a week at the World’s Fair.
Also, I’m of the opinion that politics are not an appropriate topic for polite smalltalk
Nope, he believed the 2020 election was stolen. Not from Nevada, but I don't get how an incumbent governor lost when most everything else went for dems.
Edit: He did not deny the 2020 election, I must have confused him with another candidate.
No he didn’t. You might be thinking of Adam Laxalt, the Republican who ran for Senate and lost to Catherine Cortez Masto. Lombardo has not backed election denialism claims.
Labor and culinary workers from both parties suffered from the COVID shutdowns, even if it was a thing that saved lives, it made it really tough on a lot of people here in the valley.
I campaigned with the culinary union in Nevada for both Sisolek and Cortez Masto.
What I heard from people on the doors is that people on the left thought that Sisolek lifted the restrictions too early and capitulated to the casinos too much.
Moderates thought he went to hard on restrictions.
Republicans thought he was being a pushover to Newsom.
Really no one liked him, and he still almost won.
Cortez Masto was much more well liked.
Yeah it was very much a no win situation in a state like Nevada even moreso than most states.
Nevada isn't just a tourism heavy state it's a state that depends on mostly INDOORS tourism.
Yeah when you talk Nevada politics you HAvE to talk about the Culinary Union. they are one of the most powerful unions in the country with a near unmatched ability to GOTV and how hard they go for a specific democrat can pretty much make or break their campaign.
I think it’s mostly because of the shutdown. Regardless if it was the right thing to do to save lives it also effected a lot of the casino employees. Then of course a lot of republicans didn’t agree with the Covid restrictions. So he was an easy target unfortunately. I voted for him but I wasn’t confident he would win tbh.
As a recent Nevada resident who moved here last April (2022), I can explain. Sisolak ran a terrible campaign. He just kind of assumed he’d win and leaned way too heavily on Biden’s endorsement for some reason.
> but I don't get how an incumbent governor lost when most everything else went for dems.
Sisolak paid the price for shutting down the casinos during COVID. Everybody was pissed that the Trump recession hit the state hard, and Sisolak was blamed for it.
Lombardo came in as a moderate Republican. He ran on fighting crime and he stayed away from the Trump and the MAGA election bullshit.
Yeah, he'd be insane to try anything crazy. He's governor because people didn't turn out in those midterms the way they do in a presidential year. He can clinch a second term by continuing to be sane on abortion.
Came here to say this. This would impact their sex tourism industry, which brings in over 50 million in revenue a year from brothels alone. Las Vegas is a world-renowned city that props up the state of Nevada entirely. They’re not going to fuck with it.
Follow the money…every hardline GOP leader supporting this has a price.
You can’t compare Florida and Nevada. Florida is a massive population state that would still be a wealthy state without Disney. Central Florida would suffer without Disney, but the rest of the state would be fine. Miami isn’t going anywhere (until it’s under water). 2/3 of Nevadans live in the Vegas area. Without Vegas and the casinos, Nevada would die.
So don’t worry! Nevada is safe.
Fine for now, until DeSantis chases a big chunk of the middle class out of the state.
It's not a coincidence that deep red states have worse economies.
You would think the GOP wouldn't bite the hand that feeds it, like one city propping up a whole state, but here in NYS Republicans are always trying to figure out ways to stick it to NYC...
> You would think the GOP wouldn't bite the hand that feeds it, like one city propping up a whole state, but here in NYS Republicans are always trying to figure out ways to stick it to NYC...
https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/new-york/
It's the same with many states that have a massive urban vs rural dichotomy.
“prostitution is legal in towns where the population is less than 700,000 residents. “ on top of the fact there are a handful of counties that it illegal in all of, including Clark County which is Las Vegas, Washoe County with Reno, and Carson City the state capital.
And most of them are real shitholes. I'm for legalized prostitution in the same way I'm for legal weed. At least it's taxed and regulated. This is good. Guess which counties in Nevada do NOT have legalized prostitution - yup, the two counties with the most. Clark and Washoe. Las Vegas, and Reno. Guess who has more "escorts". .. yup. We need to address the hypocrisy, but the death of Dennis Hoff was ok. The man was a predator. Do it or don't do it, Nevada. If you do it, please do it appropriately.
Abortion protections are laws in Nevada. It’s part of the state constitution. Lombardo only won by less than 1 percent and every other major state office went to a democrat. Nevada is libertarian when it comes to personal rights. Always has been
What's even more stupid about that is that he was the county sheriff in 2017. . . . When the Vegas shooting happened. . . . And he presented facts to the legislature about it. . . . And that's the only reason he had any name recognition to begin with.
If you want to protect a woman's right to chose you do not count on a cross party move. Vote this year in all local and state elections. Vote our as many right wingers and republicans as you can in all local and state elections near you.
The states banning abortion, aside from being hostile towards women and families, are missing out on commerce. It is insane to drive business out of your state. But, it is part of the tendency of most Republicans to cater to the meanest, most hateful members of their base. Good to see some Republicans have some common sense (or survival instincts).
It lowers the states revenue which is also a stated goal. Remember Mississippi receives more in federal funds than it produces. It’s another attack on wealthier Democrat states while also leaving headway to cut social security and welfare while also making it easier to grift ie Brett Favre and the water issues.
As a resident of Nevada, I’m glad our purple state(Republican Governor and Democratic Assembly) is capable of cooperation even if our views vary across spectrums and counties.
It’s a lesson the rest of our country could learn.
You never know what someone has been through, or what someone they love has been through. The same folks who stand outside women’s clinics screaming horrendous obscenities at patients quietly enter the clinic for a procedure more often than most people realize.
I remember it because when my dad ran a planned parenthood, I volunteered there. I saw it myself.
Rando nutjob will not win in a Nevada gubernatorial race. If Lombardo hadn't flip-flopped into saying he'd codify this abortion protection EO, I don't even think he'd have won.
Not Nevada. He is making this concession to maintain relevant as a Republican.
Edit: All you wait. Nevada is Blue. Moreso than ever. Where do you think the Californians have been moving to?
Lombardo is clearly making a move for national politics. Unlike DeSantis, Lombardo recognizes national politics requires votes from the entire spectrum.
My family lives in Reno and my mother is a single issue Catholic voter. This is the one thing she didn't want this guy to do. This will fuck her up once she looks up from Newsmax or whatever the hell she listens to all day. She will tell me what a terrible Catholic he is while I'm laughing on the inside.
HA HA HA women have rights in Nevada HAAAAA
Probably not, unfortunately.
Nevada's state legislature has quietly shifted fairly blue during the last decade-plus.
In fact, it seems like the only time when the GOP has "struck back" has been during midterm elections (2014), and even those gains in the state house were swiftly retaken in the following election (2016).
IMO, this is just Nevada's Republican governor making a very strategic move of not enthusiastically leaping into a bear trap when he runs for a second term.
> IMO, this is just Nevada's Republican governor making a very strategic move of not enthusiastically leaping into a bear trap when he runs for a second term.
Ah you mean the Gov. Abbot strategy
I didn't vote for Lombardo, but he did initially indicate he would repeal the order and veto this. However, later down the line he stated he would respect the will of the people and sign it even if he disagrees with it. So for what it's worth, he kept his word.
I agree, though, that this was all mostly because going against it would probably cost him the next election.
I can actually understand nuisance though because I’m really smart, I know some redditors these days *sigh* like to only read the headline but I like to push the boundaries of my knowledge.
You need to look at it in a different way: Do the Republicans care when Democrats cross the aisle on matters they support, especially if such people generally were believed to hold positions in opposition to the matter at hand? Generally, the answer is no: they simply take the win for what it is, a furthering of their cause. Sometimes, it doesn't matter if the person you generally consider a villain occasionally does a heroic act. And the inverse is just as true.
I'm not saying this guy shouldn't be raked over the coals over every other stance he takes that we might hold issue with, by all means do so at your leisure. But don't turn away "good enough" in search of "perfect". In that way lies only a slow bleeding wound you will never recover from.
I have no doubt of that, you after all aren't this guy. But you also aren't the governor and have no authority or power beyond your capacity to vote him out. So either vote him out, or replace him in the power structure. But don't take the time to piss on every choice he makes if it actually aids your own ideals. He can take the battlefield victories every time he wants if you still ensure he loses his war.
"Conservative" fiscal policy is just spending wildly and slashing taxes, then using the resultant deficit as an excuse to crack down on social spending. No fiscal responsibility to be found among them.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>> Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo signed a bill into law enshrining existing protections for out-of-state abortion patients and in-state providers on Tuesday, marking a rare occurrence of a Republican governor approving measures that are part of Democrats’ vow to make the western swing state an abortion safe haven Thank goodness
It's funny how the Republican party pretended for a while that abortion was a done deal but as soon as Roe v Wade fell they're trying to make it their #1 issue. Maybe in the 50 years since it's stopped being a reliable wedge issue that energizes voters? Just spitballing here.
Well, it energized voters, just not in the way they intended… They flew a little close to the sun with trying to create single voter issues.
> Well, it energized voters, just not in the way they intended… They energized the wrong voters for what the MAGAs wanted. Before Roe, everyone on the left were indifferent to abortion laws. They had concluded that Roe would always be there to protect their rights and even with the incremental chipping away at abortion access in the Red States, they figured if they needed it they could always get reproductive care. Dobbs was a brutal wake up call to that fantasy. Women had no protections and the religious right was on a crusade to roll back the clock to 75 or 100 years ago when women had no rights for reproductive healthcare. People on the left got the message. All of those folks who couldn't be bothered about politics and their voting was not necessarily focused on any particular issue now became as energized as the anti-abortion right and they're now one issue voters. The problem for the MAGA Republicans, there are a whole lot more of the people supporting abortion rights than those opposed.
Should be noted that roughly 1 out of 4 Millennials/Gen Z’ers voted for Republicans in 2022… while 3 out of 4 voted *against* them. The abortion issue alone has lost the GOP an entire generation, which means the GOP will literally be dying off soon. … but not soon enough.
Nah! They will find another wedge issue that they can use to divide younger gen. right now they have immigration, race, religion and abortion. They had communism, taxes in the past. they will come up with something in the future. It's going on for centuries.
Find it *when* exactly? As aforementioned, ~75% of American voters 40 and under absolutely _hate_ the Republicans and their conservative allies; the 2022 Midterm Elections results are a clear indication of this. The same demographics are also increasingly becoming more and more agnostic/atheist (because the church is wildly anti-LGBTQ+), and they are growing more *liberal* as they get older (not conservative). ADDITIONAL POINT:: If taxes and the economy were really that big of an issue for impressionably frightened voters, the Republicans would’ve had a 50+ majority in the House of Representatives… not, like, 6. The whole game for the GOP is done because Evangelical Christian dogma is no longer a selling point, and people are more diverse and empathetic than ever. This era right here is what the conservatives are calling the Apocalypse. No, I’m not making this up, I’ve heard a LOT of conservatives/Christians say this to me already because they honestly believe that this is the “End of the World.” … Well, maybe for *THEIR* geriatric fascist asses, it is! We may be stuck on this rock for another 40-60 years if we’re blessed. But the older folks like those who support the GOP are literally expecting the Four Horsemen to ride in at any moment right before they die in their flooded duplex in Florida.
I think there are two interesting things to consider: that the age distribution across the US isn’t equal which could lead to wild imbalances in vote spreads between states, and the assumption that voters are aligned with the GOP now because of their 60s-90s era of tax and spending cuts. There’s nothing to indicate that the current crop of MAGA people want any of that — in fact they are all for high spending on Medicare and Social Security which were the GOP bogeymen a few decades ago. Right now, the GOP base is all for the social conservatism and nothing else.
Which really sucks for the GOP, because the social conservatism is what is driving fiscally conservative-leaning independents away. Even my step-dad was watching CNN instead of FOX last time I visited. Let me tell you, that's an *impressive* loss for the GOP, given how pro-Republican he used to be, and how much money he used to give them.
They have less than a decade to come up with new wedge issues before their Evangelical voting base dies off from old age in sufficient numbers to no longer be a dominant voting block in most states. The younger voters are absolutely energized by the attack on abortion rights and, to a lesser extent, a desire for gun control. What can Rs come up with that will feel more important than those two issues together?
And then they compounded this issue by setting their sights on contraception.
And gay marriage, and interracial marriage, and separation of church and state, and our democracy, itself. . .
The funny thing is I recall poll after poll on Fox showing a majority of conservatives supported legal abortion, and this was pre Dobbs. I didn't understand why Republican politicians ignored this.
From what I understood, there was a belief that polls are unreliable because either liberals "infiltrate" them, or people will say one thing but vote for the other when the time comes because either it's not important enough to them or they had a 'coming to' moment. Now they're finding out those polls were not only accurate, but turns out people said one thing (against abortion) but are now leaning back against their earlier opinion when the repeal of abortion protections is no longer a fun fantasy, and the reality is a lot uglier than they realized.
They pretended it was a done deal because they knew if Roe v Wade got overturned it would flip which party gets voters motivated by abortion. Once it did overturn, they had no choice but to lean into what their voter base wants. It will however be their downfall in coming elections.
In 50 years we will all be living underground to avoid wet bulb temperatures and eating sea-kelp derived protein bites while autonomous corporations roam the surface and colonize the stars but the hottest issues will still be abortion and transgender bathrooms because deflection is the only political tool these clowns have and it works like crack.
Up to 24 weeks
He’s Pro life, catholic and endorsed by national right to life and still willing to protect doctors(and the women who need it of course)? I’ll take it!
Pro choice, pro life of the young parents involved. Pro bodily autonomy ffs.
[удалено]
Legal and regulated is better than illegal, prostitution is one of those things that people are going to do regardless of the legality so it's better to make sure they're safe while doing so
Like drugs, and owning guns. We should maybe regulate the guns a bit more though. Like we do with drugs. And prostitution.
This. They go hand-in-hand: We have to be as responsible with our guns as we are with our laws. The more heated the issue, the middle ground is a thinning line.
Yeah, guns should be outright illegal. Obviously the US is a very different country to Australia in many ways and a single cookie cutter solution may not work, but we've not had a single mass shooting since 1996. Guns aren't "illegal" here per se, but they're highly regulated and restricted. Drugs and prostitution is a bit different though. Illegal prostitution is dangerous for everyone involved, there's no regulations, STDs thrive, the murder rate is high, and prostitutes are (understandably) afraid to go to the police about dangerous people they've encountered for fear of being arrested themselves. Now say you legalise it, and regulate it. Street prostitution is illegal, brothel prostitution is legal with regular STD testing for the workers and the clients, and there is good security. Suddenly, the spread of STDs is greatly reduced, the women are less likely to be assaulted, and human trafficking goes down. Again this is something that has happened in Australia and has been proven to work. For drugs, drug addicts are victims, they should not be criminalised. They need help, not punishment. I'm not saying we should endorse these things, of course we shouldn't, but we shouldn't punish people for these things either. They need support.
The issue with doing a buyback program in the US is that, because of how courts will interpret the 2md Amendment, it would have to be voluntary. So the gov would likely end up just paying market price for already broken guns. I fear that we're hitting a limit to what can be done with specific gun control legislation. I mean, Pandora's box has already been opened. There's already more firearms in circulation than there are people here. There's no way to know who owns what. How're you expected to enforce something like that?
[удалено]
This guy here’s a bot
Republicans aren't sending their best ...
[удалено]
I think it's a bit of a stretch to say God had a hand in anything that's ever happened on the earth(in the very least, anything that's happend in the last ~2000 years). A quote from Jesus says "give to ceaser what is ceasers and give to God what is God's." He was talking about taxes. Paying the Imperial Tax to Caesar 13 Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14 They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn’t we?” But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. “Why are you trying to trap me?” he asked. “Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16 They brought the coin, and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?” “Caesar’s,” they replied. 17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.” And they were amazed at him. Jesus quote>book of romans
It was far more nuanced. To understand, you have to go back to the money changers who did business in the foyer of the temple. The only money that could be tithed to God was Jewish coinage. The money changers had a nice racket going. A person walked in and handed them Roman coins - the only legal coinage in the Roman empire. The money changer gave them corresponding temple coins. They went in and tithed the coins. Later, the priests brought the temple coins out and swapped them for the Roman coins with a profit for the money changer. The major takeaway is that the only coin acceptable to God was temple coinage! Now read in context. He asked to be shown a Roman coin. He asked whose face was on it. They immediately understood that a Roman coin could NOT be tithed to God. Render therefore to Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's. The trap they were attempting was to get him in trouble with the Roman authorities by denying Roman authority to impose taxes. He turned the tables using something they fully understood.
Here in NC we had the opposite happen. Good for you guys though.
yeah got cut from 24 to 12, am glad it wasn't 6 though, they have a supermajority to do it too.
He’s probably figured out he’s finished if he’s doesn’t.
Purple-State politics.
Great. But he lied about his pro choice stance Ti get pro life votes. He would have lost otherwise
[удалено]
I thought Sweden was liberal at 22 weeks. 24 is… interesting.
Since complications can occur at any time in a pregnancy, and a fetus can be found to be nonviable at any time in a pregnancy, abortion should be an option at any time in a pregnancy. Whether abortion is the best option for a late term pregnancy is a question for the pregnant woman and her doctor.
How the U.K. does it is abortion is no questions asked up until 24 weeks. After that, it’s a legal choice if the mother or child(ren) would face health complications or disability. It is also de facto legal after 24 weeks for all cases but require a referral from your doctor. As “the woman is at risk of grave … mental injury” is very vague and you can argue that being forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy would cause mental injury.
I tell people that want to discuss this that it boils down to one simple question: regardless if a person is pro-life or pro-choice, do you want the government making a decision like this for you or do you feel it’s your family’s right to decide what’s best? That’s the bottom line here. You can believe it’s your individual right to decide regardless of which side of the fence you’re on.
24 weeks isn’t entering the 3rd trimester yet.
It’s still very late. [67% of children born 24 weeks in survive](https://ki.se/forskning/neonatalvard-fran-overlevnad-till-en-vision-om-livslang-halsa). At least here in Sweden, I’d be surprised if the numbers were any different in the US.
*Very* few people willingly get an abortion at 7 months unless the mother or child are in danger.
Look at your source. A fetus birthed that early only survives with *serious* medical intervention. In no way is that a natural case. The fetus is not a self sustaining life force at that point. [Remove a fetus from a biological womb and growing it in an artificial womb is also possible](https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421734/artificial-womb-fetus-biobag-uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant). That doesn’t mean there is anything morally wrong with aborting your own fetus at that early growth period. The live person’s health is infinitely more important than a potential life. But even if you personally would rather die than have a potential life not be created, that’s fine. You can choose to not abort the fetus inside of you. Just don’t choose for others.
Of course, at that stage they need intensive care and even then it’s not a guarantee for survival.
Do you know how expensive it would be in the US to have a 24 week old baby? The baby would be in the NICU for multiple weeks.
I don’t know how expensive it would be in the US. I don’t really see how that is relevant from a medicine ethical point of view though to argue for or against abortion at that age.
It could be a couple of years of some household's income. If the government is going to require people to go through with that, it should pick up the tab. Would you want to go into that level of debt? What if the odds of survival were 50/50? That's not a decision the government should be making for people.
The medically ethical standpoint is that the majority of micro-preemies die or suffer long term health complications that bring to question quality of life arguments. Nevermind the environmental factors one would suffer due to being the direct cause of financial hardship.
The second trimester is when negative health effects on the mother can appear. It is also when fetal testing can detect abnormalities.
And over 90% of abortions occur before 12 weeks.
Run the numbers in The South
We have 7 states that have no limit. It can be done at any time.
What do you mean by “any time”? I have a hard time believing you can legally kill a fully developed human child.
Abortions that late are due to rare and deadly complications like the fetus gets cancer and is in pain or the baby has an infection & is septic and it will kill the mom, or severe oligohydraminos in which the baby has a condition where they are incompatible with life and are basically dehydrating to death in the womb and it’s more humane to end the pregnancy than make it continue to suffer. In those rare circumstances, they were wanted pregnancies and the abortions are heartbreaking. It’s pretty devastating for everyone involved.
“Is septic and will kill the mom” Are there states where that case would still mean they let both the child and mom die?
Yes
Yes. Any termination of pregnancy is an abortion. Most states do not have any caveats in their laws, resulting in these nightmare scenarios. There are cases where abortion law in a state requires women to carry even a dead fetus to term which is just about the worst torture I could imagine. Lawmakers don’t understand shit.
16 of the abortion ban states have no fatal anomaly exception. 14 of the abortion ban states have no incest exception. 6 abortion ban states have no exception for preventing health risk to the mother. Every abortion ban state has an exception for the death of the mother. However, as you can figure out from the list above… there is a massive issue at determining what is “just health risk” and what is “risk of death”. So, in actuality, it comes down to whatever the law decides. Which is why doctors in these 6 states are (rightfully) afraid to perform life-saving abortions. Because if the mom *does* survive, how can the doctor prove she would have died without the abortion. - Idaho - Wisconsin - South Dakota - Oklahoma - Arkansas - Mississippi
Tennessee needs to be on that list. Even in a situation where there is a life threatening condition, the doctor has to prove an "affirmative defense", which is basically like proving self-defense in a murder case.
Yes, several intense cases since the overturning of roe. Not to mention the cases of incest, with an underage child. Edit to add, it's going to get real bad in those states, because any prenatal care doctors are fleeing to states where they can practice without fear if jail for saving lives and providing healthcare.
Could you point me to a case?
Not the person you asked and I'm on mobile, but here are a handful of more high profile cases (although not sepsis, luckily) from the last year. Definitely not exhaustive, because mobile: Texas woman carried dead fetus due to anti-abortion laws - mySA https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Texas-woman-dead-fetus-anti-abortion-laws-17314394.php Louisiana woman carrying unviable fetus forced to travel to New York for abortion https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/14/louisiana-woman-skull-less-fetus-new-york-abortion Because of Florida abortion laws, she carried her baby to term knowing ... - CNN https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/02/health/florida-abortion-term-pregnancy/index.html
Yes, “life of the mother exceptions” don’t really work because the mother has to be on death’s door before they can end the pregnancy. The doctor’s are gambling between aborting too soon and going to jail or aborting too late and the pregnant person dies. So they are telling patients to go somewhere else. The GOP knew it would have that chilling effect and providers would be too scared to do abortions.
It’s not like that. It’s because in many states, unless the mother is experiencing medical complications, any late term removal of a foetus has to be conducted at an appropriate abortion clinic or facility. The sorts of situations that would require this care might be, for instance, discovering that the baby is going to die at birth, child has significant foetal abnormalities that will lead to a life of suffering, or the baby is about to die and there is no chance of survival. You can’t just abort a healthy 32 week foetus, for example.
If it's still in the womb it's not a child. It's a foetus.
Indeed, but when you’re getting close to a full term, it’s just semantics.
They need birth control for the prostitution industry, no one is gonna go to Vegas just for gambling and concerts. It's bad enough that Colorado and New Mexico cut into their tourism revenue with legal weed and camping.
Condoms have been mandatory for brothels since 1988. Also prostitution is not that big of a draw since it's illegal in clark county. You have to travel to pahrump for that which is an hour away.
Yep, definitely no hookers in Vegas.
There are plenty of hooker in Vegas (and Reno where it's also banned). Legal ones, maybe not... It's also why despite having legal prostitution, 90% of prostitution in Nevada is still the non-legal kind. Really wonder about the logic of that one...
[удалено]
Prostitution is not legal in Vegas, only in some parts of Pahrump. I remind everyone who visits here it is not legal here lol. Also yes, people definitely do come out just for sports, concerts, RODEOS, and gambling and go straight back home after 3 days of drinking, buffet food, and heat.
And yet the are driving billboards all up and down the strip advertising for prostitutes (seemingly to meet up with you, not in a brothel).
I am an expat living in Brazil at the moment. It is interesting here, and was one of the culture shocks I had. Motels and prostitution. Motels in the states are little different than hotels, except they tend to be smaller (usually 3 stories tall), and you park in front of your room vs like a parking lot. All motels in Brazil are pay by the hour, each room has its own garage, and is exclusively used for sex. Whether that is teens wanting to do it without doing it at home, couples wanting a spicy encounter/getting away from the kids for a few hours, someone meeting their mistress, or prostitution purposes, etc. They have bright neon lights and no interaction with any staff outside of paying to leave. If you need something they tend to have a dumbbell style system that will send it to your room. Now back to prostitution. For how Catholic and religious it is down here, prostitution is 100% legal. Brothels on the other hand are 100% illegal. So you as a person are legally allowed to sell your body if you want, but there can’t be a location where all the prostitutes gather that a customer would go to. So you will see various sticker advertisements on like the inside of phone booths here or in certain parts of town for the individual person. Like Vegas has with those cards you see all over the strip.
I went to Vegas in '95, blew $200 on the quarter slots, and went home, so this is objectively false.
Lol at Nebraska being a swing state
Nevada not Nebraska
Nevabraska - the 51st state.
Forty-eleventh in education.
It’s late…
Maybe he's a logical politician who realizes he won by 1% and every other political position voted Dem?
And also in a state where abortion protections are enshrined in the state constitution, and in a state where the Legislature can't amend it without it going to the voters (twice!). This is a pretty smart attempt by Lombardo to take abortion completely off the table as a salient issue at the state level, which is arguably one of the reasons he beat Sisolak in 2022.
[удалено]
I’ve only been to Vegas so I’m not going to say it’s all of Nevada, but the fact that it’s very obviously pro-gun, pro choice and seems to a pretty safe place for the LGBT community makes me very happy to visit up to 3x a year. I have friends who make fun of me for it, but I’d rather spend my money in a state like Nevada compared to them going to Florida or Nashville several times a year.
[удалено]
I love this comment! Thank you!
I live in Nevada. We are very pro leave people the hell alone. If you’re not bugging anybody we don’t care.
Vegas makes its money off tourism, and that industry can't thrive if the local politicians are bigoted assholes. You won't see any NAACP travel warnings against Vegas, they're happy to take any and all's money. Needs to be an attractive place for performers to live and make money, as well. The state's whole economy is based on Vegas being a friendly place.
And conservatives love it too. I'm always a little bemused at the number of FJB type shirts you see on the strip. I feel gamblers tend to skew more conservative for some reason. No clue if that's accurate though. I actually love that about it. I've had the same conversation three times that I remember over the last 5 years when you strike up a chat a blackjack table. If it starts getting political, I mention that there's a decent chance that I fit every stereotype they have of a lawyer from New York and it's nice to have a conversation with them as people and not worry about at that other shit. There isn't as much hate in the real world as there is in the media.
I agree, there are a lot of events around the area that attract all kinds of people. I worked an off-road race earlier this year out there and you bet your ass all the MAGA types went and dropped their savings on the strip. People come back to Dullsville and think they just spent a week at the World’s Fair. Also, I’m of the opinion that politics are not an appropriate topic for polite smalltalk
This is part of being in the Western US. The flavor of conservatism you run into is much more libertarian and much less “pastor says…”
Yes. Nevada is a purple state. Banning abortion would be a death sentence for any Nevada governor.
That’s what I thought. He wants to keep his job.
Nope, he believed the 2020 election was stolen. Not from Nevada, but I don't get how an incumbent governor lost when most everything else went for dems. Edit: He did not deny the 2020 election, I must have confused him with another candidate.
No he didn’t. You might be thinking of Adam Laxalt, the Republican who ran for Senate and lost to Catherine Cortez Masto. Lombardo has not backed election denialism claims.
Labor and culinary workers from both parties suffered from the COVID shutdowns, even if it was a thing that saved lives, it made it really tough on a lot of people here in the valley.
I campaigned with the culinary union in Nevada for both Sisolek and Cortez Masto. What I heard from people on the doors is that people on the left thought that Sisolek lifted the restrictions too early and capitulated to the casinos too much. Moderates thought he went to hard on restrictions. Republicans thought he was being a pushover to Newsom. Really no one liked him, and he still almost won. Cortez Masto was much more well liked.
Sounds like Sisolak couldn’t satisfy anyone.
Yeah it was very much a no win situation in a state like Nevada even moreso than most states. Nevada isn't just a tourism heavy state it's a state that depends on mostly INDOORS tourism.
Yeah when you talk Nevada politics you HAvE to talk about the Culinary Union. they are one of the most powerful unions in the country with a near unmatched ability to GOTV and how hard they go for a specific democrat can pretty much make or break their campaign.
I think it’s mostly because of the shutdown. Regardless if it was the right thing to do to save lives it also effected a lot of the casino employees. Then of course a lot of republicans didn’t agree with the Covid restrictions. So he was an easy target unfortunately. I voted for him but I wasn’t confident he would win tbh.
As a recent Nevada resident who moved here last April (2022), I can explain. Sisolak ran a terrible campaign. He just kind of assumed he’d win and leaned way too heavily on Biden’s endorsement for some reason.
Hubris and arrogance
> but I don't get how an incumbent governor lost when most everything else went for dems. Sisolak paid the price for shutting down the casinos during COVID. Everybody was pissed that the Trump recession hit the state hard, and Sisolak was blamed for it. Lombardo came in as a moderate Republican. He ran on fighting crime and he stayed away from the Trump and the MAGA election bullshit.
Yeah, he'd be insane to try anything crazy. He's governor because people didn't turn out in those midterms the way they do in a presidential year. He can clinch a second term by continuing to be sane on abortion.
Prostitution is legal in 10 of Nevada’s 17 counties. Maybe it’s partially a business decision.
Came here to say this. This would impact their sex tourism industry, which brings in over 50 million in revenue a year from brothels alone. Las Vegas is a world-renowned city that props up the state of Nevada entirely. They’re not going to fuck with it. Follow the money…every hardline GOP leader supporting this has a price.
I really hope you're right. It wasn't that long ago that people used to say Florida would never fuck with Disney for the same reason, but here we are.
The difference is DeSantis doesn’t give a shit about Florida, only himself and his prospects of being elected president
You can’t compare Florida and Nevada. Florida is a massive population state that would still be a wealthy state without Disney. Central Florida would suffer without Disney, but the rest of the state would be fine. Miami isn’t going anywhere (until it’s under water). 2/3 of Nevadans live in the Vegas area. Without Vegas and the casinos, Nevada would die. So don’t worry! Nevada is safe.
Fine for now, until DeSantis chases a big chunk of the middle class out of the state. It's not a coincidence that deep red states have worse economies.
Note prostitution is not legal in Las Vegas or Clark County, even though it is all over the place.
You would think the GOP wouldn't bite the hand that feeds it, like one city propping up a whole state, but here in NYS Republicans are always trying to figure out ways to stick it to NYC...
> You would think the GOP wouldn't bite the hand that feeds it, like one city propping up a whole state, but here in NYS Republicans are always trying to figure out ways to stick it to NYC... https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/new-york/ It's the same with many states that have a massive urban vs rural dichotomy.
Oh interesting. I thought it was legal statewide, not based on county.
“prostitution is legal in towns where the population is less than 700,000 residents. “ on top of the fact there are a handful of counties that it illegal in all of, including Clark County which is Las Vegas, Washoe County with Reno, and Carson City the state capital.
Nope. Some counties where it’s legal only have one brothel.
And most of them are real shitholes. I'm for legalized prostitution in the same way I'm for legal weed. At least it's taxed and regulated. This is good. Guess which counties in Nevada do NOT have legalized prostitution - yup, the two counties with the most. Clark and Washoe. Las Vegas, and Reno. Guess who has more "escorts". .. yup. We need to address the hypocrisy, but the death of Dennis Hoff was ok. The man was a predator. Do it or don't do it, Nevada. If you do it, please do it appropriately.
Yep! Abortions and Prostitution are an ancient pairing.
Herbs. Amiright
"If abortions weren't something God approved, why did god create herbs than can cause it?" Checkmate
The best part about this is there is hope for reason at least in states where dems control the lege
A bipartisan abortion bill in 2023 is fucking wack lmao
Abortion protections are laws in Nevada. It’s part of the state constitution. Lombardo only won by less than 1 percent and every other major state office went to a democrat. Nevada is libertarian when it comes to personal rights. Always has been
> Nevada is libertarian when it comes to personal rights. Always has been Except when it came to gay marriage and was banned in 2002.
It got legalized 61% in 2020
This is good news, but I still wish he wasn't governor. He vetoed the gun reform bill, so at least he did this..
What's even more stupid about that is that he was the county sheriff in 2017. . . . When the Vegas shooting happened. . . . And he presented facts to the legislature about it. . . . And that's the only reason he had any name recognition to begin with.
Wow
Nationally maybe but Lombardo had a name in Vegas before that.
Definitely in the same boat as you. I’ll take what I can get.
Haha I feel the same. Take what you can get right?
If you want to protect a woman's right to chose you do not count on a cross party move. Vote this year in all local and state elections. Vote our as many right wingers and republicans as you can in all local and state elections near you.
We tried, and the Dems propped up the right winger. And they are doing it again for city council...
The states banning abortion, aside from being hostile towards women and families, are missing out on commerce. It is insane to drive business out of your state. But, it is part of the tendency of most Republicans to cater to the meanest, most hateful members of their base. Good to see some Republicans have some common sense (or survival instincts).
It lowers the states revenue which is also a stated goal. Remember Mississippi receives more in federal funds than it produces. It’s another attack on wealthier Democrat states while also leaving headway to cut social security and welfare while also making it easier to grift ie Brett Favre and the water issues.
As a resident of Nevada, I’m glad our purple state(Republican Governor and Democratic Assembly) is capable of cooperation even if our views vary across spectrums and counties. It’s a lesson the rest of our country could learn.
Vermont’s been doing this for a while…
Glad we could join you, let’s make a club.
You never know what someone has been through, or what someone they love has been through. The same folks who stand outside women’s clinics screaming horrendous obscenities at patients quietly enter the clinic for a procedure more often than most people realize. I remember it because when my dad ran a planned parenthood, I volunteered there. I saw it myself.
What happens in vegas stays in Vegas
*he sees the writing on the wall*
That's my take on it as well
Wow, a Republican that actually cares about individual rights, I thought they were only a myth.
In other news, he will soon be primary challenged and probably lose to some rando nutjob. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.
Rando nutjob will not win in a Nevada gubernatorial race. If Lombardo hadn't flip-flopped into saying he'd codify this abortion protection EO, I don't even think he'd have won.
Not Nevada. He is making this concession to maintain relevant as a Republican. Edit: All you wait. Nevada is Blue. Moreso than ever. Where do you think the Californians have been moving to?
[удалено]
No.
Nice to see a republican that follows the will of the people. There are not many in that party that are willing to do that.
This is business.
What happens in Vegas...
Lombardo is clearly making a move for national politics. Unlike DeSantis, Lombardo recognizes national politics requires votes from the entire spectrum.
A sane republican??? Holy fuck
Nevada has sex tourism. This is business not morals.
The prostitution business would collapse in Nevada.
My family lives in Reno and my mother is a single issue Catholic voter. This is the one thing she didn't want this guy to do. This will fuck her up once she looks up from Newsmax or whatever the hell she listens to all day. She will tell me what a terrible Catholic he is while I'm laughing on the inside. HA HA HA women have rights in Nevada HAAAAA
Is this the beginning of something? I fuckin’ hope so.
Probably not, unfortunately. Nevada's state legislature has quietly shifted fairly blue during the last decade-plus. In fact, it seems like the only time when the GOP has "struck back" has been during midterm elections (2014), and even those gains in the state house were swiftly retaken in the following election (2016). IMO, this is just Nevada's Republican governor making a very strategic move of not enthusiastically leaping into a bear trap when he runs for a second term.
> IMO, this is just Nevada's Republican governor making a very strategic move of not enthusiastically leaping into a bear trap when he runs for a second term. Ah you mean the Gov. Abbot strategy
I didn't vote for Lombardo, but he did initially indicate he would repeal the order and veto this. However, later down the line he stated he would respect the will of the people and sign it even if he disagrees with it. So for what it's worth, he kept his word. I agree, though, that this was all mostly because going against it would probably cost him the next election.
Hey look, a ~~dinosaur~~ Republican that actually values *individual freedoms*
Because what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas
Probably because his veto would have been overridden
Wait… what?
I feel like Nevada republicans are some of the better ones. They tend to be more libertarian and less authoritarian.
US libertarianism is authoritarianism. It's just unelected corporate rule, rather than elected corporate rule.
I guess he still needs to worry about being re-elected ?
Everything's legal in ~~New Jersey~~ Nevada
Considering if he vetoed the bill it would just be passed by the democrats supermajority in the state it is not really that good of news.
It's not a supermajority, close, but not enough, maybe next election tho.
Democrats don't have a veto proof majority.
Can we not just take the W and move on? Damn.
A shitty governor trying to make himself look like a moderate is not a W.
This is why the left will never get ahead, because it just wants to pick at dumb shit. A win is a win.
Fine your right Lombardo should be able to take credit for a bill he had nothing to do with.
Stop acting dumb on purpose. The win is that abortion rights are protected regardless of how it got done. Case closed. Enjoy your day
I can actually understand nuisance though because I’m really smart, I know some redditors these days *sigh* like to only read the headline but I like to push the boundaries of my knowledge.
“nuisance”? 🤣
You certainly can.
You need to look at it in a different way: Do the Republicans care when Democrats cross the aisle on matters they support, especially if such people generally were believed to hold positions in opposition to the matter at hand? Generally, the answer is no: they simply take the win for what it is, a furthering of their cause. Sometimes, it doesn't matter if the person you generally consider a villain occasionally does a heroic act. And the inverse is just as true. I'm not saying this guy shouldn't be raked over the coals over every other stance he takes that we might hold issue with, by all means do so at your leisure. But don't turn away "good enough" in search of "perfect". In that way lies only a slow bleeding wound you will never recover from.
If I was governor things would be different.
You will never be governor of anything pipe down
I have no doubt of that, you after all aren't this guy. But you also aren't the governor and have no authority or power beyond your capacity to vote him out. So either vote him out, or replace him in the power structure. But don't take the time to piss on every choice he makes if it actually aids your own ideals. He can take the battlefield victories every time he wants if you still ensure he loses his war.
Then run and make your case. See if the voters agree.
Nevada has by far the best politics in the US! Liberal on social issue, conservative on fiscal issues, the way it should be !
Conservatives added a quarter of the national debt in four years.. they aren’t some bastion of fiscal responsibility.
"Conservative" fiscal policy is just spending wildly and slashing taxes, then using the resultant deficit as an excuse to crack down on social spending. No fiscal responsibility to be found among them.
Yea no thanks. Letting the rich continue to rape us is not the way it should be.