do you think winning an election is about the popular vote?
do you think the Democrats are more likely to support trans rights?
If you answered yes to both, then maybe don't suggest importing wedge issues into something that's about the popular vote?
Do you want to give Trump more voters? Because that's what you're angling for. That's what the headline is suggesting to do.
You're mistaking wanting the most minority supporting side of politics to win the election for not supporting minorities? How the fuck doesn't that even make sense.
Kamala's job is currently defensive, dodge dodge dodge, stay clean, watch Trump get dirty and sink. It's simple.
As soon as she's won, then it's time to be very very very noisy (and violent) on progressive and socialist issues again. But right now that's only going to act as a kind of sabotage.
Which is fine if you're an accelerationist who sees value to strengthening American Fascism. But I just want to try to end the Republican party.
If you answered yes to both
I answered no to both.
Do you want to give Trump more voters?
The only argument any centrist has when they move to the right like they all want to.
So you don't believe they need the popular vote to win and you believe that the Republicans would be better at defending trans rights?
I don't accept that defending trans SAFETY is a losing election issue.
Have you spent any time in right wing spaces, or listened to the new generation describing themselves as "classical liberals". They're swing voters and it's pretty important to them.
Have you spent any time in right wing spaces
Yes, let's just do everything we can to abandon every last minority centrists consider expendable in order to peel off a total of zero votes from fascists.
They're not going to vote for you, no matter how many vulnerable minorities you throw under the bus. You've had fucking decades to figure this out, and it looks like you're just throwing people under the bus because you like the thumping sounds.
All powerful me who you can attack rather than try to convince. A microcosm for your general approach of yelling. Your goals and demands, kept vague at best.
I doubt you even know what you're asking for.
There's a timeline to installing trans rights, it requires adjustments to the Supreme Court.
But I'm aware that you're not thinking that far ahead in a planned or tactical manner, and your plans are: be loud, make demands, be radical.
But you've not actually outlined much more than that, so there's nothing to debate with you.
Good day, good luck with your imaginary bus, and me as the all powerful deity controlling who gets pushed under.
No idea what you're on about unfortunately, but you seem very vocal about whatever it is.
[Edit: No, I get it, you want to create a polemic against Trump's obvious lies, treating them as if they're worth addressing rather than let him melt under the scrutiny of the general population https://i.redd.it/m2pzcfjk77md1.png... But that's not necessary. Let's not make his lies into a false balance situation. Just let him look foolish instead.]
There’s a timeline to installing trans rights,
Still settin' timeframes.
But I’m aware that you’re not thinking that far ahead in a planned or tactical manner, and your plans are: be loud, make demands, be radical.
I'm aware that you're stalling until the party can abandon trans people like it abandoned undocumented immigrants.
I'm not setting timeframes, you literally can't change Supreme Court judges during an election. You don't even understand the basics of how rights or the systems involved work.
I’m not setting timeframes, you literally can’t change Supreme Court judges during an election.
And until then, we can't acknowledge openly as a party that trans people are worth protecting. Makes sense.
It is when that's considered woke and you've got a ton of your own electors that have been brainwashed into thinking woke bad
Well fuck, if it's considered woke I guess there's nothing we can do 🤷♂️
If your goal is to not let the Republicans win? Just look at what the Democrats at the various levels of government are actually doing even though they never make it a point to talk about it while they're campaigning and understand that there's a fucking good reason why they don't.
Hell, you need to be pretty self centered to believe that trans people are the only repressed people that don't get talked about but still benefit from having the Democrats in power vs the Republicans. They can't cover every single group.
If your goal is to not let the Republicans win?
A. The goal should be to achieve progress, not win elections
B. That involves making the case for that progress, not capitulating to popular opinion that's been fabricated by conservative media
But that's only if you're not operating on a dialectical-materialist political analysis, because if you were you'd understand that real progress can't be made through simple electoral victories. Abandoning minority protections in exchange for electoral power is how America has operated since its founding.
Yeah the goal is to achieve progress and you won't do that by alienating a big part of the electorate to cater the minority of the 1% of the population that is trans and doesn't understand that open support for their cause might lead to a Republican government instead, which would be worse for them and for progress in general.
"A big part of the electorate" doesn't care one way or the other about trans rights. All throughout centrist apologists have been saying "most people don't care about Palestine enough to affect their vote", they just want kitchen table progress. But somehow when the issue is trans rights, you people think it's some vote-defining issue that will sink the election if there's a single trans speaker in a weeklong convention.
Just the same old fucking white moderates doing the white moderate things King talked about.
I 100% believe that it's the same thing with Palestine and you'll notice that no more support for Gaza was announced either. Why? Because it's not worth alienating Jewish voters when you can use their votes to win the election and then adapt the government's stance on the question.
Trans rights are never brought up during the various electoral campaigns, yet Democrats actually do something to help when they're elected at the different levels of government so maybe you should get the message that is not an issue that's popular enough to increase the popular vote and that the votes gained from mentioning it will be less than the votes lost.
As I said, the same old white moderates doing white moderation.
cater the minority of the 1% of the population that is tens and doesn’t understand that open support for their cause might lead to a Republican instead
I'm sorry, their ""cause""? Is "we have a right to exist" the 'cause' you consider to be the thing alienating 'a big part of the electorate'?
Why are you here? Go back to reddit, jesus christ.
Yes, open support by a politician for your right to exist alienates part of the electorate even on the Democrat's side, open your eyes buddy, the trans right cause is controversial! Hell, people imagine trans everywhere at this point, just look at what happened during the Olympics! It's not fair, it's not right, it's the fucked up world we live in, sometimes it's better to shut up and guarantee a more progressive option takes power and does things to improve your situation without making a big fuss of it than to be loud and guarantee a more conservative option takes power and takes what little rights you've got at the moment. Unless you're an accelerationist in which case all I would say is fuck you, but I don't think you are!
Yes, open support by a politician for your right to exist alienates part of the electorate even on the Democrat’s side, open your eyes buddy, the trans right cause is controversial!
Trans rights aren't up for debate you spineless chud. How could anyone suggest the democrats are a left-wing party (or expect 'progress') if the democrats can't even acknowledge that trans people have the right to exist? Why should anyone vote for them if they abandon civil liberties as soon as they become politically inconvenient?
Fuck off with your transphobic apologia. Democrats can fuck off, too, if they think they can abandon minority rights in exchange for political power.
Transphobic? Fucking hell, I said that it's not fair and it's fucked up. Open your fucking eyes, Harris comes out and says "All trans people need to have the right to transition and to live a healthy life." she loses tons of votes and loses the election, what did you win outside of the pride of having made sure that only people who support trans rights voted for the Democrats? The alternative is her not mentioning it, waiting to get elected and then applying pro-trans policies, which is exactly what other Democrats have done all over the USA!
Same for Gaza, better shut up and solve that after getting elected than promising to support them and losing a big chunk of the Jewish vote, not getting elected and having the Republicans (which are anti Gaza as much as they are anti trans) take power.
I believe that the popular vote isn't sufficient to win, as it wasn't when Clinton lost with the popular vote.
I believe Democrats won't protect trans rights, either.
You've chosen to be dishonest as fuck about my positions.
She didn't get the popular vote where it mattered, popular vote is still what is needed
So you think it's just as likely they won't protect trans right as it is likely the Republicans won't? Because that was the question.
Looking at Democrat's States vs Republican States it's pretty clear you're wrong about that second part.
She didn’t get the popular vote where it mattered, popular vote is still what is needed
Trump won without it.
So you think it’s just as likely they won’t protect trans right as it is likely the Republicans won’t?
I don't trust either of them at all on this issue. I think they're just itching to throw another vulnerable minority under the bus like they did with the undocumented immigrants you're using Republican talking points about.
Republicans do bad thing
Democrats try but fail to completely stop it
"Why did Democrats do this bad thing??" - Ensign_Crab
Every time without fail, it's a classic
How does adopting Republican border policy count as trying and failing to stop Republican policy?
Oh wait, you don't care. You're just happy they moved to the right.
If the Democrats nominated Karl Marx himself you'd call him right wing.
If they nominated Trump, you'd expect everyone to believe that he was the most progressive candidate ever.
Again, she didn't get the popular vote WHERE IT MATTERED, first past the post still requires popular vote, just not at a national level.
Again, she didn’t get the popular vote WHERE IT MATTERED
That wasn't the question I initially answered, is it?
Tomato tomato, you need the popular vote to be elected, no matter how you want to twist it
Trump lost the popular vote. That doesn't count for some reason.
He won the popular vote where it mattered.
I bet they don't answer you.
I hope you had money riding on it.
Geez, you're a bit crabby, aren't you.
Don't call me a trumper for not trusting your shit party not to be shit, then.
do you think winning an election is about the popular vote?
do you think the Democrats are more likely to support trans rights?
If you answered yes to both, then maybe don't suggest importing wedge issues into something that's about the popular vote?
Do you want to give Trump more voters? Because that's what you're angling for. That's what the headline is suggesting to do.
You're mistaking wanting the most minority supporting side of politics to win the election for not supporting minorities? How the fuck doesn't that even make sense.
Kamala's job is currently defensive, dodge dodge dodge, stay clean, watch Trump get dirty and sink. It's simple.
As soon as she's won, then it's time to be very very very noisy (and violent) on progressive and socialist issues again. But right now that's only going to act as a kind of sabotage.
Which is fine if you're an accelerationist who sees value to strengthening American Fascism. But I just want to try to end the Republican party.
I answered no to both.
The only argument any centrist has when they move to the right like they all want to.
So you don't believe they need the popular vote to win and you believe that the Republicans would be better at defending trans rights?
I don't accept that defending trans SAFETY is a losing election issue.
Have you spent any time in right wing spaces, or listened to the new generation describing themselves as "classical liberals". They're swing voters and it's pretty important to them.
Yes, let's just do everything we can to abandon every last minority centrists consider expendable in order to peel off a total of zero votes from fascists.
They're not going to vote for you, no matter how many vulnerable minorities you throw under the bus. You've had fucking decades to figure this out, and it looks like you're just throwing people under the bus because you like the thumping sounds.
All powerful me who you can attack rather than try to convince. A microcosm for your general approach of yelling. Your goals and demands, kept vague at best.
I doubt you even know what you're asking for.
There's a timeline to installing trans rights, it requires adjustments to the Supreme Court.
But I'm aware that you're not thinking that far ahead in a planned or tactical manner, and your plans are: be loud, make demands, be radical.
But you've not actually outlined much more than that, so there's nothing to debate with you.
Good day, good luck with your imaginary bus, and me as the all powerful deity controlling who gets pushed under.
No idea what you're on about unfortunately, but you seem very vocal about whatever it is.
[Edit: No, I get it, you want to create a polemic against Trump's obvious lies, treating them as if they're worth addressing rather than let him melt under the scrutiny of the general population https://i.redd.it/m2pzcfjk77md1.png... But that's not necessary. Let's not make his lies into a false balance situation. Just let him look foolish instead.]
Still settin' timeframes.
I'm aware that you're stalling until the party can abandon trans people like it abandoned undocumented immigrants.
I'm not setting timeframes, you literally can't change Supreme Court judges during an election. You don't even understand the basics of how rights or the systems involved work.
And until then, we can't acknowledge openly as a party that trans people are worth protecting. Makes sense.
Actually it already happened 5 days ago:
Biden administration restores protections for gay and transgender Americans seeking health care.
It is when that's considered woke and you've got a ton of your own electors that have been brainwashed into thinking woke bad
Well fuck, if it's considered woke I guess there's nothing we can do 🤷♂️
If your goal is to not let the Republicans win? Just look at what the Democrats at the various levels of government are actually doing even though they never make it a point to talk about it while they're campaigning and understand that there's a fucking good reason why they don't.
Hell, you need to be pretty self centered to believe that trans people are the only repressed people that don't get talked about but still benefit from having the Democrats in power vs the Republicans. They can't cover every single group.
A. The goal should be to achieve progress, not win elections
B. That involves making the case for that progress, not capitulating to popular opinion that's been fabricated by conservative media
But that's only if you're not operating on a dialectical-materialist political analysis, because if you were you'd understand that real progress can't be made through simple electoral victories. Abandoning minority protections in exchange for electoral power is how America has operated since its founding.
Yeah the goal is to achieve progress and you won't do that by alienating a big part of the electorate to cater the minority of the 1% of the population that is trans and doesn't understand that open support for their cause might lead to a Republican government instead, which would be worse for them and for progress in general.
"A big part of the electorate" doesn't care one way or the other about trans rights. All throughout centrist apologists have been saying "most people don't care about Palestine enough to affect their vote", they just want kitchen table progress. But somehow when the issue is trans rights, you people think it's some vote-defining issue that will sink the election if there's a single trans speaker in a weeklong convention.
Just the same old fucking white moderates doing the white moderate things King talked about.
I 100% believe that it's the same thing with Palestine and you'll notice that no more support for Gaza was announced either. Why? Because it's not worth alienating Jewish voters when you can use their votes to win the election and then adapt the government's stance on the question.
Trans rights are never brought up during the various electoral campaigns, yet Democrats actually do something to help when they're elected at the different levels of government so maybe you should get the message that is not an issue that's popular enough to increase the popular vote and that the votes gained from mentioning it will be less than the votes lost.
As I said, the same old white moderates doing white moderation.
I'm sorry, their ""cause""? Is "we have a right to exist" the 'cause' you consider to be the thing alienating 'a big part of the electorate'?
Why are you here? Go back to reddit, jesus christ.
Yes, open support by a politician for your right to exist alienates part of the electorate even on the Democrat's side, open your eyes buddy, the trans right cause is controversial! Hell, people imagine trans everywhere at this point, just look at what happened during the Olympics! It's not fair, it's not right, it's the fucked up world we live in, sometimes it's better to shut up and guarantee a more progressive option takes power and does things to improve your situation without making a big fuss of it than to be loud and guarantee a more conservative option takes power and takes what little rights you've got at the moment. Unless you're an accelerationist in which case all I would say is fuck you, but I don't think you are!
Trans rights aren't up for debate you spineless chud. How could anyone suggest the democrats are a left-wing party (or expect 'progress') if the democrats can't even acknowledge that trans people have the right to exist? Why should anyone vote for them if they abandon civil liberties as soon as they become politically inconvenient?
Fuck off with your transphobic apologia. Democrats can fuck off, too, if they think they can abandon minority rights in exchange for political power.
Transphobic? Fucking hell, I said that it's not fair and it's fucked up. Open your fucking eyes, Harris comes out and says "All trans people need to have the right to transition and to live a healthy life." she loses tons of votes and loses the election, what did you win outside of the pride of having made sure that only people who support trans rights voted for the Democrats? The alternative is her not mentioning it, waiting to get elected and then applying pro-trans policies, which is exactly what other Democrats have done all over the USA!
Same for Gaza, better shut up and solve that after getting elected than promising to support them and losing a big chunk of the Jewish vote, not getting elected and having the Republicans (which are anti Gaza as much as they are anti trans) take power.
I believe that the popular vote isn't sufficient to win, as it wasn't when Clinton lost with the popular vote.
I believe Democrats won't protect trans rights, either.
You've chosen to be dishonest as fuck about my positions.
She didn't get the popular vote where it mattered, popular vote is still what is needed
So you think it's just as likely they won't protect trans right as it is likely the Republicans won't? Because that was the question.
Looking at Democrat's States vs Republican States it's pretty clear you're wrong about that second part.
Trump won without it.
I don't trust either of them at all on this issue. I think they're just itching to throw another vulnerable minority under the bus like they did with the undocumented immigrants you're using Republican talking points about.
Republicans do bad thing
Democrats try but fail to completely stop it
"Why did Democrats do this bad thing??" - Ensign_Crab
Every time without fail, it's a classic
How does adopting Republican border policy count as trying and failing to stop Republican policy?
Oh wait, you don't care. You're just happy they moved to the right.
If the Democrats nominated Karl Marx himself you'd call him right wing.
If they nominated Trump, you'd expect everyone to believe that he was the most progressive candidate ever.
Again, she didn't get the popular vote WHERE IT MATTERED, first past the post still requires popular vote, just not at a national level.
That wasn't the question I initially answered, is it?
Tomato tomato, you need the popular vote to be elected, no matter how you want to twist it
Trump lost the popular vote. That doesn't count for some reason.
He won the popular vote where it mattered.
I bet they don't answer you.
I hope you had money riding on it.
Geez, you're a bit crabby, aren't you.
Don't call me a trumper for not trusting your shit party not to be shit, then.