MUH STATES RAIGHTS!
no, not like that!
this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
202 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19283 readers
1938 users here now
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 politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Hey, anyone who was pushing people to not vote for Harris before the election want to weigh in? Still confident in your decision?
They all disappeared immediately after the election because they got what they wanted, a Trump win.
I voted for the Dems in 2024. And honestly, I wish I hadn't. I was disgusted by their stance on Palestine, but I figured at least they would support trans people against conservative extermination efforts.
For my vote and vocal support, how did Dems reward me? Democrats rewarded me by voting for the first anti-LGBT federal law in 30 years, willingly sentencing several hundred trans children to death for cheap political points. All Republicans had to do was attach their persecution bill to a "must pass" defense spending bill, and Democrats folded like a house of cards. And they also refused to stand to defend the first trans person elected to the House. I have no doubt that this pattern will continue. To laws that must pass to fund the government, Republicans will just attach one rider after another that strips my civil rights away one at a time. And Democrats will tit tit and say, "well, I really wish we could prevent Republicans from murdering innocent people, but this bill simply has to pass, so our hands are tied."
Even AOC, who was one of the few people to say anything in defense of the new trans representative, didn't have the courage to actually stand up for trans people directly. She said bathrooms bans were bad because cis women might get caught up in them. And they demonstrated this complete surrender to fascism before Trump even came into office.
In the end, I did not get the satisfaction of a clean conscience. I held my nose and voted for a pro-genocide party, because I hoped they would at least stand up for my rights. But I didn't get even that. Instead I got a party that is perfectly willing to throw people like me to the wolves, as long as Republicans give them a fig leaf excuse to use. Honestly, I wish I hadn't voted for Kamala. Democrats aren't going to stand up for my rights, and I still have the guilt of voting pro-genocide on my conscience.
I suppose it should have been pretty obvious. Dems were willing to throw one minority group to the wolves for political expediency, why wouldn't they do it to another?
i was in your shoes back in the 90's when clinton said he was gay positive and wanted to end the violence in palestine; so we voted for him. instead we got dont ask, don't tell (aka gay military ban); defense of marriage act (aka anti-gay marriage law); and he forced arafat to resign from control of the plo.
the democrats have been doing this for atleast 50 years and will continue to do this and they rely on people who aren't paying attention or are too young to have the memory of them ditching vulnerable communities at the first instance it became politically costly.
biden himself used to be a very proud anti-gay bigot when he ran for president back in the 80's and people back then though that he was too much of a wacko conservative because of it; but young democrats called him the most pro-gay president we've ever had back during the 2020 campaign (as they said of clinton in 2016). so you can expect the next democratic candidate to be treated the same way during the next election.
Fuck, that's depressing.
only if you refuse to recognize the game for what it is: 2 parties both controlled by oligarchy.
the democrats will do better if they were by themselves; but they'll always acquiesce to the republicans "for the greater good"
Yeah we're all disappointed with the Democratic party... But I think you're in for a rude awakening because there is a very big difference between being indifferent towards trans people, and actively wanting to eradicate them.
Is there really a difference? If Democrats are willing to vote for anti-trans bills, then on that issue, they're no different than Republicans. At that point, they're just saying, "well, we support extermination, but we have pronouns in our bios, so it's OK!"
Yes, there is a big difference.
I think even Chomsky said a "dime's worth of difference"....is still a difference. And he said that long before donvict's fascist cult started its rise to power.
All of this to say “democrats bad because republicans”.
You can argue on whether or not the bill was “must pass” but let’s be honest here, there weren’t many other options.
Unless you have a solution? I’m not just defending democrats blindly here, I’m very open to hearing of an alternative way to have handled this.
You refuse to vote for the bill that targets a minority group. Even if that means shutting down the government or delaying a crucial defense funding bill. Ultimately it would be the Republicans' fault for attaching extraneous shit to the must pass defense bill.
If Democrats will vote with Republicans and not fight against them, then there is no difference between the two.
So your solution is to essentially sit on people’s paychecks for over a month, to then have the same if not worse bill passed after millions of people’s lives have been turned upside down?
Like, kudos to your gumption I suppose, but how is that anything more than virtue signaling and giving republicans ammo for the future?
Ah yes, fighting for people's civil rights is "virtue signalling." And they wouldn't be able to automatically pass something the next session, as the filibuster still exists. Nothing is getting passed without some cooperation from the Democrats. They have the ability to hold the line, they're just choosing not to.
Just how many people are you willing to let die in order to get some paychecks through? They literally voted to let several hundred children die. Just how many people are you willing to sacrifice in the name of political expediency?
For historical comparison, do you realize how Jewish people there were in pre-Nazi Germany? They were about 1% of the population, right around the figure for the percentage of the population in the US that are trans. Centrists then made the exact same calculus you're using. "Oh, there aren't that many of them. We can compromise on their rights, they don't really matter anyway."
Seems like a lot of the tankies and "leftists" and Enlightened Centrists (TM) have faded into the woodwork.
Yes. The role of the Democratic Party is to offer an alternative which is slightly less objectionable than the Republican party, to give people the illusion of choice. Both parties are bought and paid for by the elites. Harris would not have changed the status quo. You will never have decent health care or education or public transportation, the country remains an oligarchy.
We need 2/3 majority Democrats in the House and Senate before you can claim that.
Last time all we got was checks notes. The aca and an end to preexisting conditions...
And forcing people to buy private healthcare insurance, propping up an industry that has no right to exist.
Yeah, they wouldn't even do the most basic of popular issues like enshrining the right to an abortion into law or passing an equal rights amendment.
Or just some random low level bureaucrat who has more power than both the presidency or congress whenever things like the minimum wage or the equal right amendment comes up.
If not; then 1 or 2 Democrats to do the same thing with affordable healthcare ... Twice
...still better than someone stoking stochastic terrorism from the very top, a party that has some members seeking an actual shooting civil war, putting people like Brainworms in charge of our health, and so on.
I get it, the choices are not great. But I'd take sound stewardship, even if it's suboptimal, over the complete chaos-stoking and outright plunder the qons plan.
No, the bots and foreign psyops working to get Trump elected aren't going to weigh in now. They were never real or serious people.
Still beating this strawman?
The Uncommitted movement warned Trump would be bad. Everyone knows this. They gave clear minimal criteria for Harris to get their endorsement like allowing just one Palestinian to speak at DNC to endorse her and her campaign said no despite allowing Israeli-Americans to speak. She was more willing to throw away votes than cave an inch, in hopes that voters vote for her anyway, and most still did, by that point the loss is on her.
The solution to this is to organize state militias and ask the agents sent to arrest if they want to leave walking or in body bags.
Well that's infuriating. So these people wanna lock up our elected representatives, then complain when we don't wanna serve them at restaurants.
Sounds like something a CEO would do.
When these cities literally enact a policy of obstructing justice, their officials can and should be prosecuted.
Federal laws you don't like don't just become optional because you say so, and entering a country illegally or overstaying a visa is a crime under federal law. This isn't something unique to the US where the US government is literally Hitler; it's a well established international norm.
Miller's reasons for supporting this are the wrong ones, but he says isn't necessarily incorrect under federal law as it stands. Not to mention that supporting brazen violations of the law like this is part of the reason why Democrats have alienated ordinary voters and let the far right basically take over.
I'm sure they have zero worries about going to prison.
I'm not sure they have zero worries about being adjusted.
Remember the time when this asshole painted on a fake hairline for a TV interview?
There will probably be "investigations" into anyone involved in filming that.