Short Answer: Baby/Bath water idiom
Long Answer: Dems lose elections because sub groups hate someone they have 98% in common with than someone who likes to bomb children.
I disagree strongly with the Democratic party. I despise a good deal of their platform, and am disgusted with about 90% of those that are elected. To me, they are an insult and an embarrassment.
... and I still voted for them in the last national election. Nobody likes them.
MLK supported getting less bad segregationists elected during the early stages of the civil rights movement because they were easier to work with, do we still have segregation today? If trans people in sports is the only contention and they agree on everything else, then that's progress. We can fight on the trans people in sports point next primary. Let's also not forget that Donald Trump is trying to end Democracy entirely and will oppress more than just trans people.
Enforced by explicit law? No, we don't have segregation anymore. In schooling, the work force, housing, literally all forms of resource distribution? Pretty much yes.
Ranked choice voting so we stop having to pick terrible Democrats. Gaining prevalence in local elections!
We had that in Washington State but both parties worked to abolish it, saying that we were somehow too stupid to understand it.
I hate them both sooooo much.
You vote for them because they are more likely to change their tune than a republican.
Plus you do everything to make their life miserable until he changes his mind.
Choosing between the party where every elected official wants to unalive you, vs the party where only a handful want to do the same…
Yeah, that is a tough one. Really difficult decision, there.
In the places where the blue candidate is a transphobe, it's transphobe vs transphobe
Yes, but if Dems remain in the minority, it’ll still be a Republican majority, giving them more time to dismantle democracy even further.
It’s the bigger picture which is most important. You cannot create lasting local change without removing the autocratic boot from above.
I mean, yes, let’s make these transphobe Dems as uncomfortable as possible. But America needs to roll back the fascism and authoritarianism, first. Without that first step, every other positive action is a house built on sand - it can be blown away from the top with infinite ease. And then it’s 1939 Germany all over again with pink triangles and pogroms aplenty.
And honestly, I see that outcome as the much, much worse one.
Yes, but if Dems remain in the minority, it’ll still be a Republican majority, giving them more time to dismantle democracy even further.
And if the transphobic Dems vote with the Republicans, trans people lose anyway. Democrats don't do party discipline, so the anti-trans laws get passed anyway under the guise of "concessions", so heads you're dead, tails you're still dead but someone somewhere feels bad about it.
I’ve started getting involved with my local Democratic Party. I no longer consider myself a Democrat, but they don’t need to know that, and I figure if I’m able to get more up close and personal, influence people in real time that would be a much better option than just not voting for these anti trans democrats or doing nothing.
I just don't get the obsession with transgender people. What did they ever do other than just wanting to be left alone? Did a bunch of them bomb a bunch orphanages with burning puppies running out of the flaming building?
It's a greatly exaggerated/manufactured culture war topic for the purpose of distracting from the very real class war.
It's not a coincidence that anti-trans rhetoric started around the same time the war on terror started losing its effectiveness as an excuse and the 1% narrative was starting to take root.
There is a large contingent of voters that are deeply religious and hate them. They are trying to appeal to those voters. America is still one of the most religious countries in the world.
There is a large contingent of voters that are deeply religious and hate them.
This is what I am asking about. Why? What is the bug up religious people's asses about transgender people.
Authoritarian personalities agress toward outgroups who violate traditional norms, including socially traditional gender roles. They become a scapegoat during times of capitalistic economic uncertainty.
We’re in part of the cycle where liberal democracy decays and fascism flourishes. A core tenet of fascist ideology is the championing of the in-group with religious fervor and nationalistic pride. This is seen as a populist way to “save the country,” when the real problem is capitalism and the exploitation of workers. This is why fascists demonize socialists, communists and even liberals.
Both the GOP (conservatives) and the far left (tankies) can reflect this personality type.
They're a pawn that bigots like to use to rile their base and distract from other issues. With enough enthusiasm, a concerted effort can make about anything the enemy to rally against. It's mostly fear mongering, but also has a serious detrimental effect to those being targeted.
One of the best responses I've heard was from the Professional Left:
(Starting around the 26:30 mark)
Boils down to: Democrats can be educated, Republicans will destroy you. Quite possibly in the literal sense.
Vote for the pro-trans Republican instead, obviously! /S
The time to oppose anti-trans Democrats is the primary. In the general election, it's too late: at that point your choice is an anti-trans Democrat or an anti-trans and otherwise fascist Republican.
Many of these Democrats such as Talarico waited until after the primary to start their anti-trans rhetoric. We would have already voted them out if they didn’t deceive us.
The only question that's valid to have about Talerico on this topic is "is Ken Paxton better, or is he even worse?" The answer is, "no, Ken Paxton is even worse." If Talerico doesn't win, Paxton WILL. End of.
For trans Texans, not voting for Talerico in order to keep Paxton out of office is objectively idiotic -- it's basically suicide by spite. That's just reality, and reality doesn't give a fuck if you like it or not.
Voting shouldn’t be a sacrifice of that magnitude.
For a lot of single-issue voters, this kind of calculation is theoretical. For trans people right now, it is not. An anti-trans Democrat in office is a harm. A Republican who is openly, aggressively, legislatively hostile to trans existence is a different order of harm. Both things are true, and genuinely hard to reconcile.
Yeah, that's an awful choice. I can't think of a better option than the article presents — name the candidates and their shortcomings/wrongs.
believe it or not, also guillotine.
Vote for them and then get them to have pro-trans rights views. Like we did with Obama and gay marriage.
That's one way to do it. Sounds like throwing in the towel at first, but if their strategy was to shift the Overton Window, it might not be a bad plan to shift it right back.
I'm so tired of these people touching kids and then fucking with trans folks.
I mean it's pretty shit, but what are we gonna do, vote in the Republicans? I'm sure that will help trans people even more /s
I like how its always a minorities job to vote against their own self interest "for the greater good" and not the job of a Democratic politician to not throw them under the bus. Especially with how seemingly extremely important this one demographic is if a significant portion of said demographic not voting will cause the candidate to lose.
Vote for lesser evil + organize, get loud and make being trans normal in red states. The American system is so screwed up with no ability to dissolve your legislatures before the 4 year cycle. If you live in a state of those races, it would be better to be ignored than your rights taken away. If you need anything go seek the support of a Democrat that is pro-trans from out of your state, with control of Congress they would be able to help you more if your state's legislators are useless but of the same caucus rather than of a caucus that is actively blocking efforts. Sorry if I sound flippant about it, but I would tell moderate voters the same about a progressive candidate.
If you're worried about the ratchet affect, the solution I don't think is to turn the screws further in the direction of the ratchet. The UK example is weird, the Labour Party's somewhat to blame but I don't fully lay it at their feet, because their justice system is biased in very old ways, negatively affecting people's rights to gender expresssion.
The USA has already tried in 2016 the "haha, let Republicans vote for Donald Trump, they'll see how bad it is when they vote for racism rather than a milquetoast candidate and they will disavow it forever after" method, that didn't work, only made things a lot worse, he got elected again. Even if you have the long game in mind, not voting appears to send, even if a Republican wins 49% to 47%, a signal that the people mandate that trans people should be hurt, rather than a more neutral signal. States that had been trending red turning blue signals nationally a change in the direction of trans acceptance, regardless of the willingness of the candidate to associate during the campaign with pro-trans advocates or not.
Do people not realize Republicans won in their messaging? Everything related to trans support is MUCH lower than it was before. The best democrats can do is dogwhistle support, because it's very unpopular right now, which it's horrible that's the case but thats not the fault of the politicians who are trying to improve things.
They won in their messaging because no one defended it and instead caved to support it.
Dems have lost in all messaging. They won’t push the quality of living and problems of capitalism, instead they agree to attack trans people.
There are a few exceptions, and they do well in their respective places when they actually push back. But most are cowards.
They didn't cave until they lost the messaging, and yes the messaging has been unbelievably bad. There's a series called the alt right playbook where one of the strategies is control the conversation, democrats are always playing defense saying no we don't want everyone to be transgender no we aren't giving 8 year olds hormones for no reason. That's just a losing strategy.
I'm not saying they couldn't be doing more, but it's like trying to stand up for black rights in an election in a community of racists, you're going to get swept by the guy who is openly racist. The media has massively failed us on the trans issue and now most Americans are anti trans, it sucks and I have trans friends who are super hurt by it, but I'm not going to let the fascist supporters win, when they are actively trying to kill Americans, and trans people, and the rest of the world.
What’s a pro trans voter anyway? Anti biggotry would be more accurate
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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