326

MEGA THREAD - 2023 Ohio Special Election - Voters Reject Issue 1 (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

53 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Ohioans vote Tuesday on a measure that would make it harder to pass future changes to the state constitution. Ideastream's Karen Kasler explains the possible implications for abortion access in Ohio.

Sources:

NPR: A look ahead at the Ohio special election

Five Thirty Eight: Everything You Need To Know About The Ohio Ballot Measure That Could Block Abortion Rights

CNN: Ohio special election becomes proxy for abortion rights fight

PBS News Hour: Ohio voters to decide on constitutional change before determining abortion rights

The Guardian: Republicans pushed a special election in Ohio – what does it mean for abortion rights?

Slate: The Cardboard-Box Billionaires Are at It Again, This Time in Ohio The Uihleins have put millions of dollars toward preventing a vote on abortion in the state.

AP: Voters in Ohio reject GOP-backed proposal that would have made it tougher to protect abortion rights

NY Times: Ohio Voters Reject Constitutional Change Intended to Thwart Abortion Amendment

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] paddirn@lemmy.world 78 points 1 year ago

This measure is so blatantly anti-democratic that I can barely understand how anyone could justify it. I get text messages from right-leaning groups though and these are the kinds of things they’re using to push this initiative:

“Radicals are targeting Ohio children. Leftist amendments to the Ohio constitution will allow children to undergo dangerous sex changes without parental consent, and allow men to dominate women's sports. Protect your parental rights. Protect your children.“

It’s so ridiculously stupid and over-the-top, do Republicans actually believe this trash? It’s obviously about abortion, I’m surprised they don’t come out and just say it.

I voted ‘No’ on the measure, however, Brexit, of all things, did make me think about this a little more. I think Brexit was a universally stupid move for Britain and I can’t imagine something so incredibly important was left up to a slim ~51-49 vote result, when it should’ve been something more like 60-40, which could’ve prevented Brexit altogether.

Yet I’m doing the exact opposite in voting against Issue 1, which I should be in support of, since it would make it harder for potentially catastrophic initiatives from getting passed. I guess it’s painfully obvious what Republicans are trying to do here AND they’re sneaking it in during a low voter turnout special election, it’s literally the only thing on the ballot in my area. I’m contradicting myself because I don’t trust the motives of the people pushing it.

[-] Sciaphobia@lemm.ee 32 points 1 year ago

This measure is so blatantly anti-democratic that I can barely understand how anyone could justify it.

This very thing inspired me, a person who currently works nights, to screw up my sleep schedule to vote against it.

[-] Just_Not_Funny@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Same. This is the second time I've ever voted, and I'm 35.

I guess I have to thank the Republicans for becoming insane enough to make me feel like I can no longer afford not to vote.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Wouldn't it be nice if you could just vote by mail at your leisure?

load more comments (8 replies)

this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023

326 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19002 readers

4227 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News