• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Impact of a Roe v. Wade overturn

There are several feelings I have toward a potential Roe v. Wade overturn. If the leak is as it appears to be, then it has made SCOTUS a player in the gamesmanship in Washington. This means that they can no longer be counted on to provide a neutral ruling on cases. Second, if SCOTUS wanted to rule on the matter, they could have found a neutral ground on which they abolished third trimester (aka, “Late-term") abortions at the federal level. Finally, they are violating the spirit in which John Marshall’s historic Marbury v. Madison case was decided.
(If I actually thought such a case could be won, I would argue that now is the time to appeal the Marbury v. Madison decision. The decision gave the Supreme Court power to decide matters such as these. Go read the Constitution. The modern-day function of SCOTUS is found nowhere in the Constitution. I’ll wait.)
Now that we’ve all read up on the Constitution and how SCOTUS’s main function is arguably and ironically unconstitutional to begin with, let’s discuss the practical implications of a Roe v. Wade overturn.

I ran an analysis on the Senate races that assumes that:
  • Democrats can make an effective pro-choice
  • Republicans can make an effective pro-life argument
(Note that if either side is is ineffective, then this whole analysis is pointless :p )

To make these predictions or assumptions, I evaluated Senate races on the basis of eight things:

  • States where Women outnumber men (or vice-versa)
  • States where the most abortions are performed (according to the most recently-available statistics)
  • States where those who voted third party can make a difference
  • States where there is a large presence of religiously-affiliated voters. Must have over 60%
  • States where there is a large presence of none-affiliated voters. Must have over 25%.
  • States where there are a large number of pro-life organizations. Must appear on top 10 list by Christian Headlines.
  • States where there are a large number of pro-choice organizations. Must appear on bottom 10 of list by Christian Life.
  • Opinion on abortion by state, according to YouGov
What happened was that the Senate held at 50/50, with Maryland changing hands and Wisconsin changing hands. The change in Maryland is "caused" by a campaign poll taken by Mr. Hogan's own campaign. If we throw that out, then Democrats take control of the Senate. You can see the Hogan poll on Fivethirtyeight. Keep in mind, the Democrats' modest gain is caused by the fact that many of the Senate seats are "safe" and in conservative states.


I can provide sources, etc., that went into this analysis if you would like. Admittedly, some of these sources are imperfect, but I believe them to be better than what we have.

Here is the final "Energy" or "momentum" map for all 50 states:

Here is the final map when those factors above are linked up with current polling data (which also can change):
 

Gateman_Wen

Official disruptive influence
Suspended
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
7,560
Reaction score
6,966
Location
Middle of it all
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
A. It's already known that the current court is hopelessly compromised and cannot be trusted to be impartial, much less non partisan.

B. Voter's positions on abortion are already solidly entrenched and unlikely to be swayed by any arguments from candidates.

So C. The only effect this is likely to have is to motivate left leaning voters in a situation (off year) where they usually are not.

No need to overthink this.
 
Last edited:

PoliSciPulse

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 5, 2020
Messages
880
Reaction score
224
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Except that most Senators are running in "Solid Red" or "Solid Blue" states where motivation won't matter because one side or the other is overwhelmed by sheer numbers. I was actually really surprised that my model says that only two Senators, Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Marco Rubio (R-FL), actually substantively got hurt by the issues. All others either were helped (on both sides) or had no effect. The Senator in Idaho, for example, isn't helped at all by the issue, which is odd because I would have expected that with a solid red state, my model would have shown him being helped. There's actually 0 effect on him.
 

lurchadams

Zoom Warrior
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 30, 2016
Messages
31,842
Reaction score
15,808
Location
Seattle Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Except that most Senators are running in "Solid Red" or "Solid Blue" states where motivation won't matter because one side or the other is overwhelmed by sheer numbers. I was actually really surprised that my model says that only two Senators, Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Marco Rubio (R-FL), actually substantively got hurt by the issues. All others either were helped (on both sides) or had no effect. The Senator in Idaho, for example, isn't helped at all by the issue, which is odd because I would have expected that with a solid red state, my model would have shown him being helped. There's actually 0 effect on him.
The total effect of the tyranny of the Republicans and their religious zealot buddies has not yet been felt. Wait until the first few women in Idaho, having to travel to Washington for their healthcare speak out. It's going to get much uglier, very soon. You just need to be patient.
 

PoliSciPulse

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 5, 2020
Messages
880
Reaction score
224
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
The total effect of the tyranny of the Republicans and their religious zealot buddies has not yet been felt. Wait until the first few women in Idaho, having to travel to Washington for their healthcare speak out. It's going to get much uglier, very soon. You just need to be patient.
I'm much more interested in how this will pan out in the Presidential election to be honest. I haven't been able to come up with a single Republican who can weather this storm besides Donald Trump (who has a remarkable ability to weather -any- storm.. so he's kinda there by default.) and possibly Murkowski and Collins.
 

Risky Thicket

Sewer Rat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
32,067
Reaction score
33,664
Location
With Yo Mama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm much more interested in how this will pan out in the Presidential election to be honest. I haven't been able to come up with a single Republican who can weather this storm besides Donald Trump (who has a remarkable ability to weather -any- storm.. so he's kinda there by default.) and possibly Murkowski and Collins.

Once the other dominos fall - and they will soon after Roe v. Wade slides into hell - we might expect for the masses to express suddenly express horror and outrage.

"What do you mean I can no longer buy birth control pills or condoms or an IUD?"

"Are you insane? I'm not going to tell my employer WHY I need birth control pills. No, I am not married but what does my sex life have to do with human resources?"

"You are not going to pay for my birth control unless I get a note from my doctor. And now you're telling me my insurance won't pay for me to visit my doctor to get birth control until I get a note from my priest/Rabbi/Imam/pastor?
 

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
45,865
Reaction score
32,217
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Once the other dominos fall - and they will soon after Roe v. Wade slides into hell - we might expect for the masses to express suddenly express horror and outrage.

"What do you mean I can no longer buy birth control pills or condoms or an IUD?"

"Are you insane? I'm not going to tell my employer WHY I need birth control pills. No, I am not married but what does my sex life have to do with human resources?"

"You are not going to pay for my birth control unless I get a note from my doctor. And now you're telling me my insurance won't pay for me to visit my doctor to get birth control until I get a note from my priest/Rabbi/Imam/pastor?
Yossarian, that you?
 

Bear5131

Well-known member
Joined
May 13, 2022
Messages
5,186
Reaction score
1,623
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The total effect of the tyranny of the Republicans and their religious zealot buddies has not yet been felt. Wait until the first few women in Idaho, having to travel to Washington for their healthcare speak out. It's going to get much uglier, very soon. You just need to be patient.
Or all the California transplants in Boise Idaho just move back home and fix the Democrat mess they made?
 

Risky Thicket

Sewer Rat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
32,067
Reaction score
33,664
Location
With Yo Mama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There will be many unintended consequences. Some of which are:

1. A marked increase in the growth of African-American and Latino populations. I cannot imagine the US power white, straight, old man, cabal of socio-religious ethics and mores being pleased with that fact.

2. No-abortion laws are going to cost Americans. Taxes will increase. Today, on average, it costs approximately $130,000 to raise a healthy child from birth to 18. What are the state plans, national plans, for handling the impact of children that are not raised by their mother and/or father?

Who is going to pony up the bucks for kids added to the system?

And to that matter, what will be the quality of those little lives? Foster hell? Where abuse is a greater risk for a child than being raised at home.

Will throw away children who become permanent or semi-permanent residents in the system be able to go to college? Who is going to pay for that?

Where are the answers to these questions written?
 
Last edited:

Bear5131

Well-known member
Joined
May 13, 2022
Messages
5,186
Reaction score
1,623
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
There will be many unintended consequences. Some of which are:

1. A marked increase in the growth of African-American and Latino populations. I cannot imagine the US power white, straight, old man, cabal of socio-religious ethics and mores being pleased with that fact.

2. No abortion laws are going to cost Americans. Taxes will increase. Today, on average, it costs approximately $130,000 to raise a healthy child from birth to 18. What are the state plans, national plans, for handling the impact of children that are not raised by their mother and/or father?

Who is going to pony up the bucks for kids added to the system?

And to that matter, what will be the quality of those little lives? Foster hell? Where abuse is a greater risk for a child than being raised at home.

Will throw away children who become permanent or semi-permanent residence in the system be able to go to college? Who is going to pay for that?

Where are the answers to these questions written?
On the upside (if your a Democrat) when these 20 million or so liberal babies reach voting age it will be the end of the Republican party
 
Top Bottom