politics

Yes, and the vast majority of Americans have no interest in voting for what they consider niche culture issues. Defeating fascists will protect everyone’s rights.

That's a lot of words to just say that you don't understand how politics works in the real world.

Bruh

I’m debating whether or not to even engage with you here given that you just gaslit a stranger because you’re upset about what the ruling class isn’t doing for you (presumably) - are you assuming maliciousness where ignorance might’ve sufficed?

You tell me. If you knew that you had all these great ideas and support for people but knew if you didn’t complete this first step, someone else’d be elected and do the opposite of those things, would you willingly lose and put those people you support at risk??

Do you really and truly think that progressives/liberals don’t care about trans rights? After all the bickering these rich assholes do on every damn channel on TV?

Give me a break.

You are valid in being frustrated You are allowed to have feelings and emotions about your treatment/mistreatment

But none of that makes it okay for you to take it out on your neighbors during a discussion which was trying to emphasize that politics are about strategy, not only morals.

This country operates via a leader person who’s voted for by majority count. In other words, that’s one person who needs to cater to 345 MILLION people.

Sometimes that means keeping your mouth shut on a particular issue temporarily to secure the win. When you’ve won, then you can start acting on those things you held off on emphasizing.

The alternative is that the other rich asshole not only comes in and withholds support, but also comes in and takes active measures to make it worse for these groups.

If it’s between regression and stagnation, I’m not happy with either. I will still take stagnation however because walking something back after it’s been walked back will only be harder.

When I go to pride festivals/parades I’m there to show my support. That’s active support.

Just because I don’t bring up LGBTQ+ rights and arguments at work doesn’t mean I don’t support them. Sometimes, by giving new dem voters some time to acclimate to the waters, you can give them the food later and they’ll be more likely to eat then, rather than when they’re first getting in the pool.

As much as some would like it to be true, you can’t just cram “new” morals down people’s throats and expect miraculous results. You can’t just tell people they’re a POS for not believing in what you believe in and expect them to be like “yo! I am an ignorant, holier-than-thou asshole… you’re right!” There is grace (growing thinner by the election cycle) and strategy in politics. Not everything is as shallow or malicious as people want them to be.

1. do you think winning an election is about the popular vote?

2. 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.

Are you an accelerationist? What’s your point?

Is not mentioning trans rights during an election speech the same thing as being against trans rights?

Nope. They are very different things. I'm all for trans rights, but I don't bring it up in every conversation I have about politics. That's not setting aside my morals or abandoning them.

Hypothetically, what if talking about trans rights turned off more voters than it brought in? What if that led to trump getting elected? Would it have been better to not mention it in the first place, or was the morality of mentioning it more important than trying to get elected during an election speech?

With all the time they allocated for Republicans, Israel, and cops there wasn't much left for actual marginalized people. At least they're finally being open and who they represent.

Ah that's right. When we're tired of nitpicking and purity testing we can always fall back on the "both sides" argument. It's so transparent at this point.

Sure. Except the policies they pass represent their electorate and are diametrically opposed to Republicans.

Listen, I'm for all the same things everyone on this platform wants. The issue is our generation is terminally online but doesn't bother to vote. If you want to make changes disengaging from the political system altogether is not the answer. Building coalitions and doing the hard work is. But that takes work and is not exciting, so it's just easier for accounts like @[email protected] to keep spamming non-stop about how "both parties are equal" and "corpo overlords". It's just more fun, isn't it?