Charlie is one of my favorite political commentators. I can't say enough good things about him, his podcast and his newsletter. But one thing I would push back on him is that while correctly sounding the alarm about the need to protect our democracy from assault from autocrats, he likewise sounds the alarm that the most contentious po…
Charlie is one of my favorite political commentators. I can't say enough good things about him, his podcast and his newsletter. But one thing I would push back on him is that while correctly sounding the alarm about the need to protect our democracy from assault from autocrats, he likewise sounds the alarm that the most contentious political issue of our times - abortion - might be decided by the democratic process instead of unelected federal judges. That seems very much contradictory. I'm not worried about the issue being decided by state legislatures. I think early on there will be a lot of craziness, on both sides, but after things get sorted out I think you're going to see some meaningful compromises made. Roe v. Wade prevented those compromises from being made. It will be good for Roe to be gone.
It's possible that you're right. I.e. in the long-term (like *really* long-term, I suspect) things settle, sensible compromises are achieved, and so forth.
However, long-term here probably means 25+ years. It will probably be pretty bad in the meantime. Clearly, for the foreseeable future, there will be nothing sensible and no compromises. It's all culture wars, 24/7. The GOP, in its current form, is incapable of governing, let alone sensible ideas or compromise. The Dems may catch up with them on that.
Is it worth it?
And, that's even granting your rosy future, which strikes me as unlikely. More likely, IMHO, is that the settled state of affairs is a two-state America with extremists calling the shots. Mistresses of rich Republicans travel incognito to blue states as needed. The poor slobs in red states get hauled in for possession of birth control.
Charlie is one of my favorite political commentators. I can't say enough good things about him, his podcast and his newsletter. But one thing I would push back on him is that while correctly sounding the alarm about the need to protect our democracy from assault from autocrats, he likewise sounds the alarm that the most contentious political issue of our times - abortion - might be decided by the democratic process instead of unelected federal judges. That seems very much contradictory. I'm not worried about the issue being decided by state legislatures. I think early on there will be a lot of craziness, on both sides, but after things get sorted out I think you're going to see some meaningful compromises made. Roe v. Wade prevented those compromises from being made. It will be good for Roe to be gone.
It's possible that you're right. I.e. in the long-term (like *really* long-term, I suspect) things settle, sensible compromises are achieved, and so forth.
However, long-term here probably means 25+ years. It will probably be pretty bad in the meantime. Clearly, for the foreseeable future, there will be nothing sensible and no compromises. It's all culture wars, 24/7. The GOP, in its current form, is incapable of governing, let alone sensible ideas or compromise. The Dems may catch up with them on that.
Is it worth it?
And, that's even granting your rosy future, which strikes me as unlikely. More likely, IMHO, is that the settled state of affairs is a two-state America with extremists calling the shots. Mistresses of rich Republicans travel incognito to blue states as needed. The poor slobs in red states get hauled in for possession of birth control.
This will not be good. It will be a nightmare for women in red states who need abortions, especially those without means.