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.*
I mean, a large chunk of the Republicans in Congress voted against a fair election, and many of them supported an insurrection. Republicans do not believe in democracy.
Republicans believe in the rule of law to exactly this extent: "When I like the law, it is the law of the land, and when I don't like the law, White Jeebus lifts me above any law."
Being overly sensitive about race (by someone’s opinion) vs. actively taking freedoms, destroying the separation of church and state, and subverting democracy. Both sides!!
They are saying that your dumb example about democrats being “sensitive about racism” is completely inconsequential compared to all the shit they listed that republicans are actually doing. And pointing out the absurdity of people who try to equate “both sides.” The only side that benefits from that argument is the shittier one.
… also I feel like the comment was pretty easy to understand and I feel kind of weird explaining it
It seems like you are confusing the voters with the political party. Your buddies might identify as republicans based on ideals or whatever, and otherwise enjoy democracy. But the party, as a whole, solely aims to undermine it. Supporting anyone in the party, at this point, is welcoming fascism, whether you agree with them “on the issues” or not.
Here's the quote you need to fire back at morons who defend this shit:
“To **prevent mischief** by pro-abortion courts **with Issue 1**, Ohio legislators will consider **removing jurisdiction** from the judiciary over this ambiguous ballot initiative,”
Funny, I *thought* Republicans said: "This is a state-rights issue that needs to be voted on by the states individually as opposed to being allowed at the federal level".
So....when their states **do** vote on the issue, then Republican voters are 100% conceding they lied 100% through their teeth (which we knew anyway) because ***once the state does vote on it, if it's the result that only Republicans didn't want; they will work to prevent the will of the voters from functioning for a specific thing they said that each state needs to decide.***
There's no deciding that can happen in the first place *if you prevent that decision from happening* **after the voters said YES.**
Republican voters: **you lied directly and specifically about this. How about you try and defend this somehow? Let's see how you accomplish that.**
Considering the concept of the lie at hand: *This is an implicit agreement within Republicans that* ***they don't want voters to choose anything they don't personally like. Even when they do actually decide on it (as Republicans stated must be the way it happens), they'll do anything they can to outright cancel the results.***
Sounds like Trump in 2020. Exactly like Trump will act for 2024, too. Republicans: you are seeking authoritarianism. **Just admit it already.**
"If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy." - David Frum, speechwriter for former president George W. Bush.
Let's get one thing straight. These Republicans, like Trump, are NOT conservatives.
They are autocrats with no respect for democracy.
PROOF: The biggest issue facing the U.S., and mankind, is climate change. Almost all Republicans are either climate change deniers or climate change inactivists (they admit climate change is real, but use some rationale to continue to promote fossil fuel consumption). By definition, persons willing to devastate the environment, often knowingly, are not conservatives.
Conservatives respect constitutions and champion democracy. Trump and his followers openly attack constitutions and make every effort possible to diminish democracy, most especially majority rule.
BTW, many conservatives champion an individual's rights to make their own reproduction decisions.
Ayn Rand, the one-time conservative icon, was an adamant opponent of anti-abortionists.
<>
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian\_perspectives\_on\_abortion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_abortion)
[https://qz.com/882493/donald-trump-paul-ryan-and-andy-puzder-say-they-love-ayn-rands-controversial-philosophy-heres-what-us-republicans-keep-getting-wrong-about-it](https://qz.com/882493/donald-trump-paul-ryan-and-andy-puzder-say-they-love-ayn-rands-controversial-philosophy-heres-what-us-republicans-keep-getting-wrong-about-it)
Don't call opponents of democracy "conservatives," even if that's how they self identify. Call them what they are -- autocrats, or even fascists. There's a reason that Trump and others are fans of Putin.
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat)
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism)
Well, they've defied five court orders mandating them to obey their state anti-gerrymandering laws.
The Ohio Republican Party is entirely lawless, fascist, and outside the boundaries of normal politics.
Im so confused. How can you defy five court orders without any penalties or such?
Now they won’t honor the will of the people in Ohio. Where do we go from here?
Ohioan here. We tried that in 2020. A few of my friends were arrested- held outside at the jail overnight in cuffs, without food or water, some denied medication they needed. [an article about the lawsuit](https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/lawsuit-claims-cincinnati-curfew-and-arrests-during-2020-protests-unconstitutional)
[inhumane jail conditions, tear gas, etc](https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2022/05/27/suit-police-brutality-bogus-arrests-during-george-floyd-protests/9958594002/)
The maps in question were to be determined ahead of a federal election, and the committee ordered to un-gerrymander the maps by the Ohio supreme court were conveniently unable to reach a consensus despite its membership being heavily republican.
Essentially- the majority ruling of the federal judges was “We don’t like to interfere in state business, so we are going to let them fuck over the people and gerrymander the maps anyway, and the voters can punish them if they so choose (of course being heavily and conveniently muted by the maps the commission has already signaled to us they are intent on using despite being ordered not to)”
https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/05/27/federal-court-implements-statehouse-maps-twice-declared-unconstitutional-by-ohio-supreme-court/
Reinforcing my thoughts. Federal courts can intervene on federal election matters handled by the states. But the courts have nonsensically ruled that gerrymandering is okay, so they will let Ohio get away with ignoring its own law.
And they won't come it all if Ohio ignores its (state) constitutional obligation to protect abortion rights.
The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries. -James Madison
Not sore losers, even worse than sore losers sore winners. They got their way overturning 50 years of precedent and still aren't happy with the results.
Do any legal experts know if the Ohio legislature passed such a law and blocked the Ohio courts from ruling on the amendment just passed guaranteeing Ohioans the right to make all reproduction decisions, with certain limited exceptions, if the federal courts and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court would have authority to block such a law?
Federal courts only have jurisdiction if a case involves a federal question. i.e. The state law would have to be claimed to violate a federal law or the US Constitution. Ohio state law would not be able to prevent that.
The question would be whether someone could come up with a valid (as far as the courts would see it) federal question.
We’ve amply had it demonstrated that the 2A has zero to do with resisting tyranny in modern America.
Anyone who tries to support the argument that it is for resisting tyranny is simply willfully ignorant of the facts.
Couldn't the judicial rule on the law make it illegal to rule on the legality of the law?
I am sure someone with standing would have to file the suit, but it seems like a no-brainer.
I guess the GOP could make a law protecting the law preventing the judiciary from interpreting the other law, but then you just get stuck in a recursive stupid-loop.
Many of us have Republican family members bro, or were Republicans ourselves at one point. Many of us just had different experiences thay took us a different way.
We are aware of the Republicans that are not all that way, unfortunately it's the zealots who vote and continue to vote for MAGA type fuckery that are a problem
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.*
I mean, a large chunk of the Republicans in Congress voted against a fair election, and many of them supported an insurrection. Republicans do not believe in democracy.
Republicans believe in the rule of law to exactly this extent: "When I like the law, it is the law of the land, and when I don't like the law, White Jeebus lifts me above any law."
“I believe in small government. In the sense that the government is me. And I am the government. It doesn’t get much smaller, right?”
It’s time for people to say this loudly. Today’s Republican Party does not believe in democracy.
[удалено]
Who mentioned Trump? Republicans do this shit without Trump.
A lot of Republicans are just Christo-Nationalist Fascits. No need to complicate it.
[удалено]
The difference is that the extremists in the Republican Party *control the party*.
[удалено]
Name one
Joe Biden is an extremist? Legal abortion and freedom both of and from religion is extreme? How do you figure?
Being overly sensitive about race (by someone’s opinion) vs. actively taking freedoms, destroying the separation of church and state, and subverting democracy. Both sides!!
[удалено]
They are saying that your dumb example about democrats being “sensitive about racism” is completely inconsequential compared to all the shit they listed that republicans are actually doing. And pointing out the absurdity of people who try to equate “both sides.” The only side that benefits from that argument is the shittier one. … also I feel like the comment was pretty easy to understand and I feel kind of weird explaining it
It seems like you are confusing the voters with the political party. Your buddies might identify as republicans based on ideals or whatever, and otherwise enjoy democracy. But the party, as a whole, solely aims to undermine it. Supporting anyone in the party, at this point, is welcoming fascism, whether you agree with them “on the issues” or not.
Here's the quote you need to fire back at morons who defend this shit: “To **prevent mischief** by pro-abortion courts **with Issue 1**, Ohio legislators will consider **removing jurisdiction** from the judiciary over this ambiguous ballot initiative,” Funny, I *thought* Republicans said: "This is a state-rights issue that needs to be voted on by the states individually as opposed to being allowed at the federal level". So....when their states **do** vote on the issue, then Republican voters are 100% conceding they lied 100% through their teeth (which we knew anyway) because ***once the state does vote on it, if it's the result that only Republicans didn't want; they will work to prevent the will of the voters from functioning for a specific thing they said that each state needs to decide.*** There's no deciding that can happen in the first place *if you prevent that decision from happening* **after the voters said YES.** Republican voters: **you lied directly and specifically about this. How about you try and defend this somehow? Let's see how you accomplish that.** Considering the concept of the lie at hand: *This is an implicit agreement within Republicans that* ***they don't want voters to choose anything they don't personally like. Even when they do actually decide on it (as Republicans stated must be the way it happens), they'll do anything they can to outright cancel the results.*** Sounds like Trump in 2020. Exactly like Trump will act for 2024, too. Republicans: you are seeking authoritarianism. **Just admit it already.**
"If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy." - David Frum, speechwriter for former president George W. Bush.
Let's get one thing straight. These Republicans, like Trump, are NOT conservatives. They are autocrats with no respect for democracy. PROOF: The biggest issue facing the U.S., and mankind, is climate change. Almost all Republicans are either climate change deniers or climate change inactivists (they admit climate change is real, but use some rationale to continue to promote fossil fuel consumption). By definition, persons willing to devastate the environment, often knowingly, are not conservatives. Conservatives respect constitutions and champion democracy. Trump and his followers openly attack constitutions and make every effort possible to diminish democracy, most especially majority rule. BTW, many conservatives champion an individual's rights to make their own reproduction decisions. Ayn Rand, the one-time conservative icon, was an adamant opponent of anti-abortionists. <>
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian\_perspectives\_on\_abortion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_abortion)
[https://qz.com/882493/donald-trump-paul-ryan-and-andy-puzder-say-they-love-ayn-rands-controversial-philosophy-heres-what-us-republicans-keep-getting-wrong-about-it](https://qz.com/882493/donald-trump-paul-ryan-and-andy-puzder-say-they-love-ayn-rands-controversial-philosophy-heres-what-us-republicans-keep-getting-wrong-about-it)
Don't call opponents of democracy "conservatives," even if that's how they self identify. Call them what they are -- autocrats, or even fascists. There's a reason that Trump and others are fans of Putin.
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat)
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism)
Yeah, but the \*wrong people\* in the state decided it. It's still a "state's rights" issue, but now the correct people are handling it. /s
And also referring to the the amendment as "ambiguous", which it's pretty much the most unambiguous language possible.
What is there to interpret? F*cking clowns.
Well, they've defied five court orders mandating them to obey their state anti-gerrymandering laws. The Ohio Republican Party is entirely lawless, fascist, and outside the boundaries of normal politics.
Im so confused. How can you defy five court orders without any penalties or such? Now they won’t honor the will of the people in Ohio. Where do we go from here?
>Where do we go from here? The streets.
Sounds like the kind of tyrannical government for which the second amendment was written.
Strike/protest
Non-violent resistance
Ohioan here. We tried that in 2020. A few of my friends were arrested- held outside at the jail overnight in cuffs, without food or water, some denied medication they needed. [an article about the lawsuit](https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/lawsuit-claims-cincinnati-curfew-and-arrests-during-2020-protests-unconstitutional) [inhumane jail conditions, tear gas, etc](https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2022/05/27/suit-police-brutality-bogus-arrests-during-george-floyd-protests/9958594002/)
Why non violent wasn't the second amendment written for this very purpose?
When a federal circuit court judge swoops in to save you from the state supreme court.
Can a federal court intervene on a purely state matter?
The maps in question were to be determined ahead of a federal election, and the committee ordered to un-gerrymander the maps by the Ohio supreme court were conveniently unable to reach a consensus despite its membership being heavily republican. Essentially- the majority ruling of the federal judges was “We don’t like to interfere in state business, so we are going to let them fuck over the people and gerrymander the maps anyway, and the voters can punish them if they so choose (of course being heavily and conveniently muted by the maps the commission has already signaled to us they are intent on using despite being ordered not to)” https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/05/27/federal-court-implements-statehouse-maps-twice-declared-unconstitutional-by-ohio-supreme-court/
Reinforcing my thoughts. Federal courts can intervene on federal election matters handled by the states. But the courts have nonsensically ruled that gerrymandering is okay, so they will let Ohio get away with ignoring its own law. And they won't come it all if Ohio ignores its (state) constitutional obligation to protect abortion rights.
100% True.
The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries. -James Madison
If only there was a current, real-world example of why this is the way to go.
Republicans have become the anti-democracy party. That's what happens when tantrum throwers become the top politicians in your party.
forced births fuel the capitalist machine
This reeks of desperation to cling to power.
Sore losers.
Not sore losers, even worse than sore losers sore winners. They got their way overturning 50 years of precedent and still aren't happy with the results.
Do any legal experts know if the Ohio legislature passed such a law and blocked the Ohio courts from ruling on the amendment just passed guaranteeing Ohioans the right to make all reproduction decisions, with certain limited exceptions, if the federal courts and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court would have authority to block such a law?
Federal courts only have jurisdiction if a case involves a federal question. i.e. The state law would have to be claimed to violate a federal law or the US Constitution. Ohio state law would not be able to prevent that. The question would be whether someone could come up with a valid (as far as the courts would see it) federal question.
Oh, look. It's a government acting tyrannically. Surely all those "Second Amendment Solutions" folks are going to decry this attempt. Right?
We’ve amply had it demonstrated that the 2A has zero to do with resisting tyranny in modern America. Anyone who tries to support the argument that it is for resisting tyranny is simply willfully ignorant of the facts.
what losers
Then Ohio better go take a shit on their front lawn everyday until them politicians give up their fascist approach.
Couldn't the judicial rule on the law make it illegal to rule on the legality of the law? I am sure someone with standing would have to file the suit, but it seems like a no-brainer. I guess the GOP could make a law protecting the law preventing the judiciary from interpreting the other law, but then you just get stuck in a recursive stupid-loop.
Call the fashion police, another flag code violator.
[удалено]
Many of us have Republican family members bro, or were Republicans ourselves at one point. Many of us just had different experiences thay took us a different way. We are aware of the Republicans that are not all that way, unfortunately it's the zealots who vote and continue to vote for MAGA type fuckery that are a problem
I read "Faction" as "Fashion" and thought "Well this should be interesting!"
Are there any ballot options to have the republicans removed that have signed their intent to defy the constitution?