politics
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
view the rest of the comments
I'm sure the Republican opponents in these states will be much better for Trans rights.
In fact, if we just allow another Republican majority in the legislative branch, they'll probably just fix the whole thing.
I never called to vote for Republicans, I didn't even say you shouldn't vote for those Democrats and neither does the article.
All the article says is that those Democrats are transphobic and that the author, and that's only his view, wouldn't vote for them. I, myself would probably vote for them if I could vote in the US, but I can still understand why the author wouldn't.
If there was an election between Hitler and Stalin, would you have voted for either one because he was slightly less worse than the other one? I personally wouldn't have, if that is your case too then clearly there is a point where a candidate can be so bad you wouldn't even vote for them if their opponent is worse, that threshold is just different for everyone
This article does argue for abstaining, it's literally the entire point of writing this article just before midterms:
And it's such a fucking idiotic take.
It's an article calling out politicians for their answers on "gotcha questions" like 'do you want biological males playing women's sports'
It's interesting you quote that without showing the previous sentence
Also, these politicians didn't just answer poorly to gotcha question, they actively helped pass bills that took away the rights of trans people
Should I keep going or do you think all these bills that marginalize trans people were only "gotcha questions"?
Oh please... Just because the author framed the statement with some weasel words doesn't make the intent any less clear. "I'm not telling you what to do, but..."
When you pile weak examples like this into your list, it's clear that you're just trying to discredit any Democrat and discourage voting.
Taking away an oppressed minorities right is "weak", what would you consider strong evidence of them being transphobic then? Would they have to start directly beating trans people while calling them slurs? Because if you don't consider taking away trans people rights transphobic then you don't have any right to say who trans people should vote for.
Edit: Also I'm not trying to discredit all Democrats, only the transphobic ones
The right to play women's highschool sports isn't the one we're fighting for right now. Yes, it's a long road to acceptance, yes we have to pick our battles.
No, opening that can of worms on a low rent conservative talk radio show is not worth jeopardizing a Democratic politicians' overall viability with the general voting public.
Beyond that, the sports issue does have nuance, and for the 95% people in Iowa who've never had a conversation with a person they knew was trans, and the 68-80% of the state who can't read at a highschool level... Yes nuance in the subject doesn't really exist.
I'm not talking about the right to play women's sports being discussed on radio though. I'm talking about the votes that you seem to be ignoring that are meant to take away access to trans healthcare or restrict access to bathrooms or force trans women to go into men's prisons where they are at a higher chance of being raped. You say the rights to play women's sports isn't the one you're fighting for, but these people aren't fighting for any transgender rights and are actually taking them away, a fact that you have not yet talked about other than calling it ''weak" even when it makes the lives of trans people miserable
More than half of the people listed in this article are solely on it for trans sports issues (15 out of 27).
It's an article who's sole purpose is discouraging Democrats from voting in the midterm.
The author is likely not even a real person.
Do you think Republicans running against those Democrats would be better for trans rights?
No, that's clearly not what I'm saying
How many of those bills do you think would have even been up for consideration if republicans weren't the majority?
Yeah, democrats could be a lot better, but of the two options we have, a democrat majority is clearly the better choice.
But neither me nor the article is saying to vote for Republicans, it's just showing that these democrats voted for transphobic laws, if readers decide that that makes them not want to vote, then maybe the blame should be on the Democrats that willingly took away the rights of an oppressed minority and not on the people that don't want to compromise on trans rights