Trans journalist Erin Reed has published a list of Democratic midterm candidates with anti-trans records, and the question she is forcing is one the party would rather not answer: if trans voters keep rewarding Democrats who harm them, what signal does that send? The calculation is real, the stakes are high, and there is no clean answer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 35 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (9 children)

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.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago* (7 children)

    Or it backfires if enough semi-transphobes get seats in Congress and join forces with the GOP on the issue, and this trans rights will be further set back.

    Don’t tolerate the intolerant. If the GOP wins, the anger of the people builds. It should’ve happened years ago, but here we are. Americans have become too distracted and complacent.

    Trump and the GOP are merely symptoms of problems within the average American consumeristic voter. And now with the attraction of social media outrage clickbait, Trump and the GOP are leveraging this for even more attention and notoriety.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 days ago (6 children)

    Fuck off with the “it’s better to elect the GOP so they make people more angry” bullshit logic. That’s just stupid accelerationist thinking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 days ago* (5 children)

    You probably have the privilege of being cis, so telling someone to fuck off because they’re defending someone who’s vulnerable isn’t very on-brand for a liberal.

    Actually, yeah it is. You only care about money and property, like every other American. That supersedes human rights.

    Your opportunistic lib candidates will absolutely sell out the queer community to maintain their seat. After all, capitalism is their thing too. They just like to mask it behind platitudes and promises.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    You're not defending anyone. You're making it easier for the GOP to erase all of our rights, including the rights of trans people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 2 days ago* (3 children)

    Maybe cis people should keep their mouths shut and not lecture trans people on how to advance for our own rights. Maybe have the humility to realize people understand their needs better than you do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    You may understand your needs better, but you apparently don't understand our electoral system. That's why I'm here to educate you. You are welcome!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    And then liberals wonder why people refuse to vote for them, out of no other reason than a rejection of liberal arrogance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    Don't be silly. I don't wonder why naive leftists don't vote in their best interests. It's because they're immature and unable to come to terms with doing something positive for themselves that doesn't feel good at the time.

  • source
  • parent