In the continuing race to see who can throw transgender people under the bus most quickly, South Carolina Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate Annie Andrews has released a new direct-to-camera campaign ad in which she states that she does not support trans athletes playing in sports that affirm their gender identity.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 15 hours ago* (17 children)

Voting Democrat: long term self-destruction.

Voting Republican: immediate self-destruction. This is not better. This is worse.

You don't have to say that a Democrat winning is "worse" than a Republican winning in order to criticize the Democrats.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago* (15 children)

    Once again, read the comment you originally responded to. This specific Democrat is running on a platform that has no place in the Democratic Party. If we allow it, we are worse in the long run than a Republican winning this seat.

    You should read Letter From a Birmingham Jail and try to understand which part is about you.

    Also you realize those aren't the only two choices right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 child)

    They are the only two choices right now. No one else is on the ballot, the Senator will be Andrews or Lindsay Graham's sister.

    The time to make other choices was the primary. Andrews' two opponents each raised barely 1/100th of the campaign support, and Andrews won that primary 62:30:8. Continuously re-running primaries and making best the enemy of better is how we keep getting worst.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 5 hours ago

    In most cases I agree and that's how I vote. But it is possible for a candidate to go so far to the right on an issue that support of them is poison to the Democratic Party. The more we condone this, the further the controlled opposition slides to the right.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 7 hours ago (12 children)

    Also you realize those aren't the only two choices right?

    Yes, and that fact is irrelevant to the statement "Her winning is worse than the Republican winning"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago (11 children)

    No, it isn't. It is possible to signal an active voter is available for a better candidate. Equating not voting Dem = voting Republican is just a tired manipulation tactic (and mathematical absurdity) used by people who can't defend the Democrats any way other than "but Replications."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 hours ago (10 children)

    I never said that not voting Dem is the same as voting Republican. In fact, I hate that sentiment. And it is again irrelevant to this point.

    "there are better candidates than the Democrat" ≠ "the Democrat is worse than the Republican"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago (9 children)

    Sure sure, you never said it but you 100% framed it that way. If you hate that sentiment you should know full well how your comment comes across. If it's irrelevant then why did you bring it up?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago (8 children)

    What??? I never framed anything that way. I also didn't bring it up, you did. I've only been responding to your points.

    My stance is that the Republican winning is worse than the Democrat winning. Not that the Democrat is the best, not that voting for anyone else is the same as voting Republican, none of these stances you have placed in my mouth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago* (7 children)

    This was you. You brought up voting Republican. No one here was at all suggesting voting Republican. And you framed it as what someone is doing if they are not voting Democrat. I don't understand lying about this when it's right there?

    Voting Democrat: long term self-destruction.

    Voting Republican: immediate self-destruction. This is not better. This is worse.

    You don't have to say that a Democrat winning is "worse" than a Republican winning in order to criticize the Democrats.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 55 minutes ago (6 children)

    My guy and/or gal, this entire conversation is about framing the Democrat vs the Republican! It began with me saying this:

    Her winning is worse than the Republican winning

    Absolutely unhinged take.

    So, the original commenter compared the Dem to the Republican, said the Dem is worse, and I called out that specific stance. That is why me later pointing out the two is on topic, and you bringing up other candidates is irrelevant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 52 minutes ago (5 children)

    But they didn't say to vote for the Republican. You did. I don't even think it's a subtle distinction but even if it is, it's a crucial distinction that cannot be as hard to understand as you're acting like it is.

    You chose that framing, stop pretending you didn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 45 minutes ago (4 children)

    I certainly didn't say to vote Republican, but you're right in that I should have said "Democrat wins =" and "Republican wins =". I think I used the word vote because your comment said Democrat voters, and I was replying to that.

    I did not, at any point, tell anyone how to vote or who to vote for. Nor meant to imply that I was.

    To clearly reiterate: my only stance in this conversation is that the Republican is worse than the Democrat winning for Trans rights, and pretty much everything else too.

    I hope that confusion has been cleared up and maybe we can find common ground in that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 39 minutes ago* (3 children)

    You're right, I didn't finish that sentence. I should have said "They didn't say to vote Republican. You said that that's what we were saying."

    And now to get back to the argument: We both strongly disagree with you that the Republican winning is worse for Trans rights than this specific Democrat. That's the entire point. This specific Democrat winning erodes the only source of trans rights in our government.

    It is better for the known anti-trans Republicans to continue to be anti-trans than it is for the supposedly pro-trans Democrats to become less pro-trans. One continues the same level of anti-trans government action, the other actively increases it by normalizing the reduction of pro-trans support.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 33 minutes ago (2 children)

    I think the disagreement is in the assumption that Republicans will continue to be anti-trans in same way or that it will be some status quo. That is why I made my comment that Dems = long destruction, whereas Republicans will be immediate destruction. And for what it's worth, I think more complete destruction. There may not be future elections with Republicans in charge.

    Now that we've cleared up the confusion in our comments, I'm happy to agree to disagree.

    Have a good day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 26 minutes ago* (1 child)

    Where has incremental change gotten us over the last all-of-time? It doesn't work. We are currently experiencing the destruction that the Democrats have wrought. That the Republicans are the ones in power enacting it was a foretold conclusion, what we have always needed was a party that would stand up to them and fight for the people. Instead we have one that enables the Republicans and placates people into thinking they've done something by voting for a "lesser evil."

    If we had been unwilling to enable the Democratic slide to the right from the start or from any other point since we would be in a better position right now because the Republicans would have a harder time staying in power without stemming their sprint towards fascism. The best time to refuse the erosion of Democratic principles was the founding of the party, the second best time is today. That it may already be too late isn't a reason not to try.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 minutes ago

    I don't disagree with any of this, for the record, and why I didn't push back on democrats being the long death. But none of it changes my opinion that the Republican winning is worse. And I don't really see how any of what you've said refutes that.

    The Democrats sliding to the right is bad. I agree.

    A currently and actively further right party than that winning is worse than that. I'm honestly baffled that this is contentious. Especially after the last two years of total Republican control.

  • source
  • parent