Donald Trump says he'll revoke Joe Biden's protections for trans people 'on day one'

jeffw@lemmy.worldmod to News@lemmy.world – 937 points –
Donald Trump says he'll revoke Joe Biden's protections for trans people 'on day one'
advocate.com
280

You are viewing a single comment

I just had a disagreement with someone on Lemmy a couple days ago who said Biden did nothing for the LGBTQ+ community. Maybe we just need more Trump headlines to educate people? Y’know, since they don’t read headlines about Biden

Biden did a lot of good shit. People saying he's the same or even worse than Trump have completely lost the plot or are just RuZZian bots / useful idiots parroting RuZZian propaganda.

He certainly has passed a lot of pork and convinced low information voters that it's something to celebrate, yeah.

Low information voters

Oh, the irony

Americans and their stupid word salads...

I can translate you you need: the legislation that he passed has nice names but in reality each bill is filled with spending for corporations and special interests (colloquially known as 'pork barrel spending').

For example his climate change bill has subsidies and payouts for the coal industry, his CHIPs Act had no oversight or specification about how the money should be spent etc. Biden has approved more oil and drilling contracts than even Trump.

Many Democratic voters get their information from big corporate media outlets, who have a vested interest in protecting corporate interests themselves. These voters end up recieving very little factual information to base their decisions on, and instead end up thinking Biden has "Done a lot of good" because they were given a vague feeling that he has by the corporate media.

You are clearly not well informed. Are you not American?

Presidents don't make legislation. They don't introduce bills and except in unusual circumstances are expected to sign them. They can't modify them.

Secondly, your claims that there is a bill that subsidizes the coal industry is without a source. Please provide a reference to this bill as "climate change bill" is to vague for me to know which you mean.

Thirdly, your claim that the CHIPs Act has no oversight is incorrect. Here's a helpful quote from a helpful FAQ provided by the Congressional Research Service:

Congress may wish to exercise its oversight authority with respect to implementation of the programs and policies in the act and their effectiveness in addressing U.S. economic and national security concerns. Among other potential oversight issues: the allocation of incentive funding among various types of chip manufacturing (e.g., logic chips and memory chips, mature chips and leading-edge chips); the adequacy of funding to meet the act’s objectives; and the effectiveness of guardrails established in the act to prevent the use of incentive funding from enabling further investments in countries of concern or from being used for stock buybacks or dividends.

My suggestion, for future reference, is that if you are going to make claims you source them. They will be much more forceful and factual and you won't sound like you have vague feelings about something.

The president does have the ability to block legislation, it's why you often hear it referred to the president signing various items into law.

My suggestion, for future reference, is that if you are going to make claims you source them. They will be much more forceful and factual and you won’t sound like you have vague feelings about something.

My suggestion, for future reference, is that if you are going to make claims you source them.

What are you? 12?

Presidential vetos come at a cost and can be over-ridden by congress.

That has very little to do with my statement. I'm very much aware of Biden's shortcomings, I'm just not as delusional to think that Trump would be the better, let alone a good option here. And if we look at it historically he's still, for what it's worth, one of the better US presidents too.

The climate topic is just a mess anyway, because ultimately neither politicians, CEO's, nor voters actually want actual climate action being taken, because of how it would affect them. It's simply too late at this point to have sufficient climate action without major repercussions, so people rather live out their remaining comfy life and blend out what it means for younger people (who are, small minority aside, just as deluded on that topic) and future generations.

1 more...
1 more...

Lemmy is infested with right wing trolls pretending to be leftists.

They’re using the classic Republican move of encouraging abstaining from voting by highlighting Biden’s poor decisions. Trump’s supporters will vote him in if enough abstain. Inaction is action.

It's like half of the general population supports him, and the other half supports Biden. Who would have thought different opinions on the topic would arise in a public forum.

It's like half of the general population supports him, and the other half supports Biden.

Less than a quarter support Trump.

The bigger problem is that almost thalf of the population doesn't vote at all.

How can the polls show trump ahead and only a quarter support Trump? Are you saying most democrats don't vote and only Republicans do?

Yes, also polls call landlines. What demographic of people have landlines and will sit in the phone answering questions.

Okay fine. I'll accept that. How do you know that he has 25% of the vote? Is there some other method other than polls to determine support? Genuinely curious what your logic behind the numbers are and where 25% comes from. I just feel like both sides are so entrenched in their opinions on their party that they can't possibly think there are people who would support the other.

I'll look but the article took how many registered voters and how many votes for trump and votes for Biden. Depending on what you are thinking, trump gets 25% if only 25% of registered voters vote for him.

This has numbers at the end. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/12/30/fact-check-fals-president-than-were-registered-u-s/4010087001/

But the article states in the last election trump had 48% of the popular vote with Biden at 52%. The polls last time were pretty even at around 50%. If the polls back then were accurate why would they no longer be accurate? Did a disproportionate amount of democrats get rid of land lines vs republican in the last 4 years?

Different measurements. 52% of who voted, not 52% of registered voters.

72% of registered voters voted 155000 out of 238000. Of those registered voters who voted was who the article referred to.

I think this is something I've come to realize about every candidate, even trump, when we get to the polls.Through 4 years - unless something specific stands out(like how Bush got to ride 9-11 sympathy 3 years later for reelection) most of their accomplishments and failures (especially the ones in the first 2 years) are hard to remember and require a primer before November.

"What did turnip do that was so bad in his first 2 years? Shit can't remember, but he fucked up covid real bad and that's enough to vote biden"

So yes its nice that he is refreshing us all on what actually had been accomplished to ensure we are all informed voting. Even if he is trying to be an ass about it.

Yes it's kind of mind-boggling. People pushed for decades and decades and decades for marriage equality. The Obama administration had no intention of tackling it at all. Until Joe Biden spoke. He's literally one of the reasons we already have marriage equality. For however long we might keep it. Not to mention the nlrb union busting decision. Or the recent FTC abolishment of non-compete contracts for most people. There is no question that Biden is an outdated crusty old dumbass. Who may be far less Progressive or left-leaning than most of us would like. But he's also ironically one of the most positively consequential presidents of the last 50 to 70 years since FDR.

The reason most people have no idea about all this. Is because they were all victories against the ownership / capital class. The ones who own all the major media. They may make a low-key passing mention of these victories. Then never bring it up again ever. But they will harp for days months and years about how some policy hurts businesses or "wealthy" americans. Manufacturing consent for their owners. It's all by design. No one should get their information from publicly traded companies.

It doesn't matter. Cognitive dissonance is a lifestyle for these people. Which is why they're the perfect tools for fascists

You need to reelect Trump in order to stop electing people like him in the future

Nah, I think Republicans are so deranged that they would be convinced any shortcomings are some deep state, woke, FBI, Democrat sabotage.

my enemies are my enemies because they are dumb

Stop that narrative. It will lead you nowhere

I mean, I speak from experience. I personally know a lot of Republicans (all boomers) and they would genuinely believe that. At every opportunity they are talking about the deep state, some woke shit and how corrupt the FBI is, and how there's this massive conspiracy to assassinate trump. They all have a nearly religious view of him saying that if he dies, he'd be a "martyr" for Republicans, so that the "silent majority" will finally take a stand.

When it comes to Trump it's literally only naive, stupid or evil that are possible explanations. All are bad.

No, I just need to post a shit ton of article about him on Lemmy lol

1 more...