[Breitbart] A remarkable one in five President Joe Biden voters said they regret voting for the 78-year-old in the last presidential election, according to the latest Zogby poll released on Friday.
Zogby is strongly in the Democrat camp...
The Zogby poll was taken before Kabul, Afghanistan, was conquered by the Taliban jihadist organization, and Biden’s botched Afghanistan withdrawal turned deadly, killing 13 U.S. services members and injuring more.
There was also 76 percent of the respondents who said “no” they do not regret their vote, and four percent said they were “unsure.”
However, while the 20 percent do not specify if they would have voted for former President Donald Trump. Zogby Analytics points out that looking at the 2016 and the 2020 elections closely, both were only decided in a handful of battleground states by only tens of thousands of votes, not hundreds of thousands, meaning this can hurt the president’s chances in 2024.
Younger voters in the 18 to 29 (29 percent) and 30-49 (30 percent) age groups were more likely to regret their vote than the 50 to 64 (ten percent) and the 65 plus (six percent) age range.
Broken down by registered party preference, Republicans who voted for Biden regret their vote more than Democrats and independents, 29 percent, 21 percent, and 14 percent, respectively.
The Zogby poll also found that urban voters were about twice as likely to regret voting for Biden as suburban and rural voters, 28 percent, 14 percent, and 12 percent, respectively.
[MSN] When Justice Anthony Kennedy cynically retired the next year so that the Republicans could solidify their hard core majority by installing a political hack by the name of Brett Kavanaugh, it was all over but the shouting. The 5-4 majority to overturn Roe vs Wade was on the court.
Liberal Tears with a whine chaser.
And the sad thing is that there are people who believe this (highly entertaining) crap!
#7
People too dumb, lazy or stupid to use contraception should not reproduce. Sterilization, not abortion, is the answer to that.
My impression is that people who abort babies are in a much better position* to bring them up than people who keep them in order to have a lifeline to welfare bennies. Many abortions are carried out so that young people can go to college or career women can continue working without the bother of a child. The welfare leeches don't abort their kids. Think of the foster child racket but with a biological link. For welfare leeches, kids are a meal ticket, so abortions are a no-no.
* And by better position, I mean more intelligent and more conscientious, with all that implies.
#3
That's why they now call it "Climate change" rather than "global warming". Any change can be called climate change - hotter, colder, drier, wetter, more hurricanes, fewer hurricanes, anything.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
09/04/2021 10:12 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Only marxist - democrat - totalitarian - Science™ morons could look at chaos itself and see a man-made phenomenon.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
09/04/2021 10:15 Comments ||
Top||
[The Hill] The Supreme Court’s refusal to block the Texas "fetal heartbeat" law, the most restrictive abortion legislation in the U.S. to date, is expected to inspire more Republican-led states to follow in the Lone Star State’s footsteps.
Politicians in Arkansas, South Dakota and Florida, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), have already committed to at least looking into implementing a version of the Texas six-week abortion ban in their states.
The court’s 5-4 decision not to intervene in the Texas law that went into effect Wednesday did not determine whether the law is constitutional, while courts have ruled previous six-week bans unconstitutional.
"What they did in Texas was interesting, but I haven't really been able to look at enough about it," DeSantis told reporters on Thursday. "They've basically done this through private right of action. So, it's a little bit different than how a lot of these debates have gone. So we'll have to look, I'm gonna look more significantly at it."
Similarly, Florida Senate President Wilton Simpson (R) said the state’s lawmakers will consider mimicking Texas’s law, saying in a statement to The Hill that the legislation "represents a new approach," and the Supreme Court’s decision not to intervene is "encouraging."
"As an adoptive child myself, it’s important to me that we do everything we can to promote adoption and prevent abortion; therefore, I think it’s worthwhile to take a look at the Texas law and see if there is more we can do here in Florida," he said.
#3
^Nope. Just deferred until they're teenagers - like "13 years old shoots at the cops, is killed"
So sorry, all you sanctity of life people - but it takes like 20 years of TLC to produce a human.
#10
Seems a lot of Americans have gone overseas to adopt. About the only group that will adopt regardless of color, race, or creed.
I remember the usual trouble makers in South Korea complaining about Americans adopting till it was pushed back that Korans only adopted in the family blood line and the Americans didn't care about that issue.
POSTED ON SEPTEMBER 3, 2021 BY STEVEN HAYWARD IN CHINA, CLIMATE
Thank you for adding the above, Abu Uluque. It enabled me to find the article after you forgot to paste the URL into the Source box and also did not put the name of the website in square brackets at the top of the text. But doing the other things would have been easier for both of us.
[Powerline]There is little doubt that China was already giddy that they get to deal with U.S. "climate envoy" John Kerry, but having watched Biden’s weakness in Afghanistan, they aren’t even being coy about it any more. They are openly telling Kerry that the U.S. won’t get any Chinese cooperation on climate change unless the U.S. backs off pressuring China on other issues, such as trade, human rights, etc. The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday:
HONG KONG—Senior Chinese officials told U.S. climate envoy John Kerry that continued U.S. hostility on a range of issues could jeopardize cooperation on fighting climate change, though Mr. Kerry said that working-level talks were productive in the run-up to a November climate summit.
Mr. Kerry, wrapping up a two-day visit to the northern port city of Tianjin, was warned repeatedly by his hosts that climate cooperation couldn’t be kept separate from worsening geopolitical ties between the two countries.
On Thursday, Yang Jiechi, leader Xi Jinping’s top foreign-policy aide, told Mr. Kerry in a video call that the U.S. had interfered in China’s internal affairs and harmed its interests, causing difficulties in the bilateral relationship.
A day earlier, China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, while describing climate-change cooperation as an oasis in the desert, said that "cooperation on climate change cannot be divorced from the overall situation of China-U.S. relations."
Given how single-minded Democrats are on climate change, expect them to cave to China. And since China’s climate pledges always involve action many years in the future, they don’t actually have to do anything for the duration of the Harris-Biden administration.
Another sign that the ChiComms are fast learners: back in the Cold War, it was the U.S. that insisted on "linkage" in arms talks with the Soviet Union. Now it’s China that wants linkage, and the U.S. that is resisting it. Whatcha gonna do about, Joe? How does a greenie-weenie president justify trade with a hostile totalitarian communist dictatorship that also happens to be the world's biggest emitter of hydrocarbon?
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
09/04/2021 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11125 views]
Top|| File under: Commies
#2
This is just one of the reasons China wanted Trump out, he held their feet to the fire and made them 'lose face' in both their local populace and the world.
And they would do anything to get him out.
Anything.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
09/04/2021 9:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I am duly chastised, tw. I know better but I forgot. Probably focused too much on including the link to the WSJ (even though it's behind a paywall), or maybe it was the blockquote tags for the part that Hayward copied from the WSJ, or the fancy span tags for italics...or maybe I'm just getting old. I'll try to do better next time.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
09/04/2021 12:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Spoken like a gentleman and a Rantburger, dear Abu Uluque. :-)
[HotAir] We already discussed the political pressure being applied to scientists to meet Joe Biden’s arbitrary September 20th target for making COVID booster shots widely available. It was enough to cause a couple of them to resign. Yesterday, Allahpundit asked why the various players in the administration, the FDA and the CDC can’t seem to get on the same page for a policy that will potentially impact the health of hundreds of millions of people. Well, that 9/20 deadline was dealt another blow last night. FDA regulators have come out and said that it’s doubtful that Moderna can be approved for third shots by then. (NBC News)
U.S. regulators don’t expect to meet the Biden administration’s Sept. 20 timeline of making booster shots widely available to those who received the Moderna Covid vaccine, said a person familiar with the process.
Top health officials informed the White House they will need more time to review the Moderna application because the data the company submitted Sept. 1 was "found inadequate and needs strengthening," the person said.
But officials believe regulators are still on track to make a decision on boosters for Pfizer’s vaccine by Sept. 20. The FDA has an advisory committee meeting scheduled to discuss the Pfizer boosters Sept. 17, the person said.
Right from the beginning of this process, Moderna has had a lot more trouble with its applications and paperwork than either Pfizer or Johnson & Johnson. And it sounds like their documentation of the trials for booster shots is no different. That means that if the federal government tells America that September 20 is the time to start signing up for boosters, millions of people either won’t be able to comply if they received Moderna originally or they’ll have to switch over to Pfizer.
Question number one: Has anyone completed thorough trials on patients switching vaccines? And if not, are they at least working on that? We’ve already seen reports of people lying about their initial shots in their desperation to go get a third one. If the entire country wasn’t being stampeded into a panic by the horrendous messaging campaign coming out of the White House, perhaps we could be approaching these questions in a bit more rational fashion.
Also, keep in mind that it really isn’t the CDC or the FDA that’s conducting these trials. It’s the pharmaceutical companies themselves in conjunction with medical providers around the world. The government just collects the data from them so they can determine what the policy should be.
Now let’s look at the second half of that announcement. You’ll note that it says federal regulators "believe regulators are still on track to make a decision on boosters for Pfizer’s vaccine" by the time they meet to discuss it on September 17. That’s three days before the White House deadline. You know what that means, right? Pfizer’s boosters haven’t even been approved yet. And yet everyone has a deadline looming in a little over two weeks that’s apparently in place because Joe Biden picked a date out of thin air.
Is any of this sounding familiar? When Joe Biden selected August 31st as the date we needed to be out of Afghanistan he was warned by defense and intelligence aides that it was probably too soon. But having publicly announced the date once, he was obviously terrified of missing the deadline for purely political reasons. We all saw what happened after that.
Is that how we’re going to handle the next phase of the vaccination rollout? Once Biden announces a date, that’s when we go and the science can be damned? If the pharmaceutical companies can’t make the date, then they can’t make the date. The results of the clinical trials are the only thing that should be determining the schedule. I’m no longer sure who is actually running the show over at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but they need to pull their heads out of the sand and start practicing what they preach when it comes to "following the science."
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/04/2021 09:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11124 views]
Top|| File under:
The UK's vaccine advisory body has refused to give the green light to vaccinating healthy children aged 12 to 15 years old on health grounds alone. As children are at such low risk from the virus, they decided that vaccination would offer only "marginal gain" and, therefore, there was "insufficient" evidence to offer mass vaccination for this age group.
Perhaps the Science is different in the UK.
Posted by: Bubba Lover of the Faeries8843 ||
09/04/2021 14:23 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Metric science. Or is it Imperial?
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/04/2021 14:41 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[The Hill] The Supreme Court’s refusal to block the Texas "fetal heartbeat" law, the most restrictive abortion legislation in the U.S. to date, is expected to inspire more Republican-led states to follow in the Lone Star State’s footsteps.
