• Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    It is when that’s considered woke and you’ve got a ton of your own electors that have been brainwashed into thinking woke bad

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        If your goal is to not let the Republicans win? Just look at what the Democrats at the various levels of government are actually doing even though they never make it a point to talk about it while they’re campaigning and understand that there’s a fucking good reason why they don’t.

        Hell, you need to be pretty self centered to believe that trans people are the only repressed people that don’t get talked about but still benefit from having the Democrats in power vs the Republicans. They can’t cover every single group.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          If your goal is to not let the Republicans win?

          A. The goal should be to achieve progress, not win elections

          B. That involves making the case for that progress, not capitulating to popular opinion that’s been fabricated by conservative media

          But that’s only if you’re not operating on a dialectical-materialist political analysis, because if you were you’d understand that real progress can’t be made through simple electoral victories. Abandoning minority protections in exchange for electoral power is how America has operated since its founding.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Yeah the goal is to achieve progress and you won’t do that by alienating a big part of the electorate to cater the minority of the 1% of the population that is trans and doesn’t understand that open support for their cause might lead to a Republican government instead, which would be worse for them and for progress in general.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              cater the minority of the 1% of the population that is tens and doesn’t understand that open support for their cause might lead to a Republican instead

              I’m sorry, their ““cause””? Is “we have a right to exist” the ‘cause’ you consider to be the thing alienating ‘a big part of the electorate’?

              Why are you here? Go back to reddit, jesus christ.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Yes, open support by a politician for your right to exist alienates part of the electorate even on the Democrat’s side, open your eyes buddy, the trans right cause is controversial! Hell, people imagine trans everywhere at this point, just look at what happened during the Olympics! It’s not fair, it’s not right, it’s the fucked up world we live in, sometimes it’s better to shut up and guarantee a more progressive option takes power and does things to improve your situation without making a big fuss of it than to be loud and guarantee a more conservative option takes power and takes what little rights you’ve got at the moment. Unless you’re an accelerationist in which case all I would say is fuck you, but I don’t think you are!

                • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Yes, open support by a politician for your right to exist alienates part of the electorate even on the Democrat’s side, open your eyes buddy, the trans right cause is controversial!

                  Trans rights aren’t up for debate you spineless chud. How could anyone suggest the democrats are a left-wing party (or expect ‘progress’) if the democrats can’t even acknowledge that trans people have the right to exist? Why should anyone vote for them if they abandon civil liberties as soon as they become politically inconvenient?

                  Fuck off with your transphobic apologia. Democrats can fuck off, too, if they think they can abandon minority rights in exchange for political power.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Transphobic? Fucking hell, I said that it’s not fair and it’s fucked up. Open your fucking eyes, Harris comes out and says “All trans people need to have the right to transition and to live a healthy life.” she loses tons of votes and loses the election, what did you win outside of the pride of having made sure that only people who support trans rights voted for the Democrats? The alternative is her not mentioning it, waiting to get elected and then applying pro-trans policies, which is exactly what other Democrats have done all over the USA!

                    Same for Gaza, better shut up and solve that after getting elected than promising to support them and losing a big chunk of the Jewish vote, not getting elected and having the Republicans (which are anti Gaza as much as they are anti trans) take power.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              “A big part of the electorate” doesn’t care one way or the other about trans rights. All throughout centrist apologists have been saying “most people don’t care about Palestine enough to affect their vote”, they just want kitchen table progress. But somehow when the issue is trans rights, you people think it’s some vote-defining issue that will sink the election if there’s a single trans speaker in a weeklong convention.

              Just the same old fucking white moderates doing the white moderate things King talked about.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                I 100% believe that it’s the same thing with Palestine and you’ll notice that no more support for Gaza was announced either. Why? Because it’s not worth alienating Jewish voters when you can use their votes to win the election and then adapt the government’s stance on the question.

                Trans rights are never brought up during the various electoral campaigns, yet Democrats actually do something to help when they’re elected at the different levels of government so maybe you should get the message that is not an issue that’s popular enough to increase the popular vote and that the votes gained from mentioning it will be less than the votes lost.

                • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  As I said, the same old white moderates doing white moderation.