After Trump called Annie Andrews an anti-trans slur, the Democrat now calls trans women ‘biological men’
3 days ago by gAlienLifeform to c/politics
Archived at https://web.archive.org/...
If you aren’t intelligent enough to just stick to the core issues Americans care about and are actually affecting all or most of them, then you aren’t going to be a politician who actually changes the bullshit we have collapsing this economy and nation today. If they ask you about their culture war shit they’re baiting you, and you have to be smart like Mamdani and respond with a line like “you guys only stick to questions like this because you can’t govern, the American people are under water, gas is high, there’s new forever wars, corruption is at an all time high, and people want someone who will actually do something about those and not just talk about culture war bullshit to distract”.
Abdul el-Sayed is also good at putting those down. Jesse Waters pressed him on the trans in sports issue and his response was "Dude, let sports leagues figure that out. I'm running for US Senate, people want healthcare and affordable groceries."
Someone wanna tell me how democrats are trans allies now?
A cis person will be along shortly to explain how objecting to transphobic Democrats is the same as voting Republican.
No group is a monolith. That said. Where they are from. This is sadly their best possibly viable alternative to the worse Republican. Hopefully they win, and someone actually worth voting for primaries them if they run again. Though not just them. All corporate, third way Democrats who's only real constituency are wealthy businesses. They all need to go, and be replaced by people who will actually represent the voters.
Oh ok, so your solution is
Vote for the person that will take away your rights, but will pretend to be compassionate about it. Then after 4 years of backsliding on your rights, just vote harder
Okay, so your solution is
Attack them furiously so someone worse will win.
We're passed the primary. Time for getting someone better is realistically passed. The back sliding is going to happen regardless of whether or not they win. It's just a matter of how much worse will it be if they don't. Seriously what's your alternative? Besides being angry. We're all angry and upset that this is acceptable. But I don't see anything better that stands a chance.
We're passed the primary, but the election hasn't occurred yet. Occupy their meetings and be disruptive until they admit they're wrong, or conduct direct action that openly defies the laws they want to make.
Regardless of who wins, I lose rights. My fight hasn't changed, just one person pretends to be confused why trans people are upset, and the other is gleeful. If my fight doesn't change regardless of who wins, why vote at all?
I can hear the screeching from here. I have multiple fights going on; all of which Republicans are always against, and Democrats are at best tepid. Voting is the least effective means of change, it barely matters outside of a single day every 2 years, and even then only some of the people taking away my rights will be replaced. Voting isn't even good enough when it goes exactly right for us in that moment.
Eldritch, I can tell you my solution to your comments is to stop reading the thread, scan the whole list to find each one of your comments --once I realize you're on a thread-- and downvote without reading them. Then go back to the top and continue reading the thread. The little red arrow is a good prescreening flag that the comment should be skipped. You, givesomefucks, and satansmaggotycumfart get this treatment, and judging by your consistent downvote totals, I am not the only person doing this.
Democrats suck, I wish there was a better alternative
On the bright side.. It does simplifiy things. Maybe we can all get back to just objecting to war crimes now. and stop it with this "lesser evil is what you should support or you're a bad person" nonsense. Dem reps should care what we think, not us just align with whatever they are bribed to prefer. I didnt get a check.
So why hasn't the party ejected them for their bigotry?
My hope is that it's a work in progress. It took the Dems about two decades to go from declaring themselves the party of civil rights at a convention to actually getting all of their pro-segregationist members out of the party.
All neo-liberals are conservatives and must be dealt with as such. Civil war is upon us. There truly is no peaceful solution to an infestation of conservatism.
@lemmy.world
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
What a wimp. She shouldn't have even entered the race if she doesn't have the moxy to punch back.
save