SwingingTheLamp

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

That is exactly what they were hoping for, actually.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Harris seemed hyper focused on avoiding any criticism by Trump or Republicans.

Compare that with, "They are unanimous in their hate for me — and I welcome their hatred." That line came from some four-term-President loser.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

I feel like the very existence of TERFs shows daylight between cis and trans women. In any case, even if it may not matter politically at the moment, I'm still interested in the answer to the question.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

That's a bold statement only a day after a campaign based on going hard-center crashed and burned.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 days ago (13 children)

Yeah, but that's democracy. Those 75+ million people wanted something, and they voted for it, and they got it. Anything else is irrelevant. There's no asterisk in the Constitution with a footnote that says the election is invalid if one side consists of hateboner-stroking bigots. If Democrats want something different, then they have to convince enough people to show up and vote for something different. They have to get good at public messaging and at running campaigns. Righteous indignation changes nothing whatsoever.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I disagree. At the risk of oversimplifying, American voters tend to respect strength of conviction, even if they don't always agree with the policy, over milquetoast candidates. That's why Sanders attracted so many voters who went on to vote for the other party's candidate in the general election. Democrats need to decide what they believe in, and say it long, loud, and proud.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Oh yes, sorry, I try to use Lemmy as a place for discussion, not an arena for rhetorical warfare. I had enough of that at the red site. So, I'm not challenging you, but building on your point.

Thanks for the Devil's Advocate explanation. That's what I suspect the answer is, too.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

See, that's the thing: It's the passing lane, not the fast lane. A lot of semis are speed governed to 65MPH, so if I'm doing the 70MPH speed limit, I need to use it to pass them.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 days ago (4 children)

I wasn't the first to ask the question, but I haven't heard an answer: If the genocide of Palestine is an acceptable price to pay to get a Democrat elected, then why wouldn't trans genocide also be an acceptable price because of the threat to cis women? The utilitarian ethical calculation still works just fine.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago

Think of it like chemotherapy, when you have to invest poison in order to get better.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 days ago (12 children)

The left lane, and how no, it's not for going as fast as you want to drive.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

They're missing out, then.

Villagers: Let's sacrifice a virgin to the volcano god.

Virgin: Help me, step-bro!

"Plot": proceeds as one would expect

view more: ‹ prev next ›