Do you want to tell me who you think was responsible for the 6 - 3 majority on the supreme court? Do you want to tell me how what I said was not the reason for that balance on the SC? Do you not think the overturning of Roe vs Wade was the erosion of women’s rights?

Why are you so fixated on a candidate from the past that was just no good?

Misogyny happens everywhere, but it doesn’t help fight it when calling the public misogynists because they didn’t support a dreadful candidate. A man can be a dreadful candidate, and so can a woman.

The degradation of women’s rights is down to failure of the Democrats to maintain balance in the supreme court. It also represents RBGs inability to step aside when Democrats were in power. Supreme Court justices should have some decency, retire at say 67, and allow a new generation to come along. Clinging on until 87 was insanely risky as you certainly need 5 to 10 years leeway to navigate out on your terms. RBG was eulogised, but her clinging to her seat undermined a careers work and any progress on women’s rights amongst other core rights.

UK citizen here. Already had 3 women prime ministers.

It wasn’t that Hilary was a woman, simply she was more dislikable than Liz Truss and seemed to put nothing out to convince people to vote for her. It wasn’t clear at all what she stood for or what her platform was.

It came across as entitled and like she took the electorate for granted. No matter how great or good you think you are, or how bad your rival is, you still have to ask the electorate to lend you their vote.

I’m confused. I remember when they shitcanned Xbox One version in favour Bedrock which was a buggy mess. Strategically they wanted everyone to play together which made sense and Bedrock progressed. This feels a bit like a betrayal. I guess values go out of the window when there is enough money on the table.

Or finding much of it poor quality.