discussion Hillary Clinton suggests trans rights are distracting Dems from "important" issues

[khalyan]

I can’t believe I used to like her back in 2016. 
 

And I’m disgusted a primarily LGBT forum like ours has members openly supporting this.  

[BeenTheShit]

This thread is a reach.  She's not saying it's not important or that she doesn't support, she's saying Democrats, thus minority groups, are on the verge of losing everything and need to win back control.  Then we can re-visit these issues and put legislative protections in place.

[BeenTheShit]

3 minutes ago, khalyan said:

I can’t believe I used to like her back in 2016. 
 

And I’m disgusted a primarily LGBT forum like ours has members openly supporting this.  

She's speaking the truth though.  We need every single vote this election and unfortunately certain issues need to take a back burner because of this.  If Democrats lose the majority, we will lose everything as Republicans will dismantle and take away everything from LGBTQ+, voting, and women's rights.  They're already doing it on state levels where they have majorities and can't wait to be able to enact these laws federally.  Plus they have the backing of the Supreme Court so they're basically unstoppable. 

 

It's honestly terrifying how bad things may get soon and that Democrats could have virtually no way to ever gain back control.

[khalyan]

7 minutes ago, BeenTheShit said:

She's speaking the truth though.  We need every single vote this election and unfortunately certain issues need to take a back burner because of this.  If Democrats lose the majority, we will lose everything as Republicans will dismantle and take away everything from LGBTQ+, voting, and women's rights.  They're already doing it on state levels where they have majorities and can't wait to be able to enact these laws federally.  Plus they have the backing of the Supreme Court so they're basically unstoppable. 

 

It's honestly terrifying how bad things may get soon and that Democrats could have virtually no way to ever gain back control.

I’m not leaving the trans community behind just to vote for a party that likes to sit on their ass and not get anything meaningful done when they have power. 

[BeenTheShit]

2 minutes ago, khalyan said:

I’m not leaving the trans community behind just to vote for a party that likes to sit on their ass and not get anything meaningful done when they have power. 

We're not leaving them behind by any means.  If anything we're protecting and sheltering them from the **** storm ahead. 

 

So you're essentially going to throw your vote away or give it to the party that wants to ban and/or execute them? 

[ClashAndBurn]

11 minutes ago, BeenTheShit said:

She's speaking the truth though.  We need every single vote this election and unfortunately certain issues need to take a back burner because of this.  If Democrats lose the majority, we will lose everything as Republicans will dismantle and take away everything from LGBTQ+, voting, and women's rights.  They're already doing it on state levels where they have majorities and can't wait to be able to enact these laws federally.  Plus they have the backing of the Supreme Court so they're basically unstoppable. 

 

It's honestly terrifying how bad things may get soon and that Democrats could have virtually no way to ever gain back control.

It's pretty much already baked in. Democrats have ceded the ground  on economic policies and have decided collectively that they don't care about doing anything substantial to improve people's lives while they're being ravaged nonstop by inflation. Republicans have nothing to offer economically either, other than doing away with the social safety net. Something that Joe Biden has historically believed that he could find common ground with them on: defunding social security, raising the retirement age, and slashing medicare and medicaid.

[BeenTheShit]

3 minutes ago, ClashAndBurn said:

It's pretty much already baked in. Democrats have ceded the ground on economic policies and have decided collectively that they don't care about doing anything substantial to improve people's lives while they're being ravaged nonstop by inflation. Republicans have nothing to offer economically either, other than doing away with the social safety net. Something that Joe Biden has historically believed that he could find common ground with them on: defunding social security, raising the retirement age, and slashing medicare and medicaid.

Baby Formula Shortage bill... blocked by Republicans.

Gun control legislation... blocked by Republicans.

LGBTQ+ protections... blocked by Republicans.

Voting Rights bill... blocked by Republicans.

Gas/Oil price gouging protections bill... blocked by Republicans.

 

I mean it's not for a lack of trying.  Republicans, plus Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, have basically blocked their efforts at every turn. 

[Communion]

2 hours ago, ZIVERT said:

Well ultimately you said Americans don’t care about anything but gas prices, so you must agree with her here.

That people care more about economic policy is explicitly why you don't have to throw trans people under the bus and can win elections even if you support trans people and don't parrot right-wing talking points.

 

Why did you think you ate? 

[BeenTheShit]

Just now, Communion said:

That people care more about economic policy is explicitly why you don't have to throw trans people under the bus and can win elections even if you support trans people and don't parrot right-wing talking points.

 

Why did you think you ate? 

Nobody is throwing trans people under the bus just because they're not a central focus in the Democratic campaign.  Again, if Democrats lose this election, trans people, along with the whole LGBTQ+ community, will lose everything.  It's not rocket science. 

[ClashAndBurn]

3 minutes ago, BeenTheShit said:

Baby Formula Shortage bill... blocked by Republicans.

Gun control legislation... blocked by Republicans.

LGBTQ+ protections... blocked by Republicans.

Voting Rights bill... blocked by Republicans.

Gas/Oil price gouging protections bill... blocked by Republicans.

 

I mean it's not for a lack of trying.  Republicans, plus Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, have basically blocked their efforts at every turn. 

And Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are... which party exactly? And have received what level of pushback from said party?

 

They don't even want filibuster reform. They don't want to push for anything. They want performative votes on bills they know won't pass so they can "look" like they're doing something. Nancy Pelosi's House did that all throughout the last two years of the Trump Administration - pushing bills they knew wouldn't make it through the Senate. It's performative. It doesn't get people to vote for you. In fact, Pelosi's antics ended up LOSING House Democrats several seats even though they barely won the presidency and the pathetic stalemate in the Senate that they got.

[rihannabiggestfan]

5 hours ago, Marla Singer said:

Establishment hack who lost a presidential election to a reality TV host gives advice on how to win elections.

 

4 hours ago, Bloodflowers. said:

 

Exactly  

 

This war hawk should stfu 

 

 

4 hours ago, Communion said:

I fear you're wishing see something that isn't there. She long has a habit of adopting right-wing views if she finds them electorally beneficial:

 

 

Also I think the discourse trick of TERFs is making people forget that "identity politics" is not politics about material resources for marginalized people. Identity representational politics are bad in that they suggest symbolic victories are better than material ones (ie: having a trans or gay press secretary in the White House while LGBT people face immense poverty).

 

The "trans debate" as Clinton's friend calls it is TERFs' way of framing the discussion about if transgender people should be accepted in society or rejected and denied basic resources like healthcare. That Clinton can co-sign this and not rebuke it is telling of her reactionary bias.

 

3 hours ago, Jjang said:

They have more important issues like unconditionally aiding apartheid and giving tens of billions of dollars to countries most Americans can’t name on the map, whatchu mean minority rights 

 

Tea

 

[khalyan]

2 minutes ago, ClashAndBurn said:

And Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are... which party exactly? And have received what level of pushback from said party?

 

They don't even want filibuster reform. They don't want to push for anything. They want performative votes on bills they know won't pass so they can "look" like they're doing something. Nancy Pelosi's House did that all throughout the last two years of the Trump Administration - pushing bills they knew wouldn't make it through the Senate. It's performative. It doesn't get people to vote for you. In fact, Pelosi's antics ended up LOSING House Democrats several seats even though they barely won the presidency and the pathetic stalemate in the Senate that they got.

Exactly.

 

When you have the establishment Democrats fighting for people like Cuellar (anti-choice, voted to keep marriage between man and woman) to stay in office over a more progressive candidate, it shows you everything you need to know about the party’s priorities. 

[Communion]

8 minutes ago, BeenTheShit said:

Nobody is throwing trans people under the bus 

 

[RunUpDoneUp]

The thing I admire and wish we had in this age that the groups preceding, during and post stonewall had was PRIDE. Like actual pride and value for their own existences. Current gay men and women think having a platform for trans people is why dems. lose, truly enablers of fascism.

 

What hilary Clinton and you represent is the competing of gay votes without the demonstration of a platform those votes REQUIRE, not would like, REQUIRES you to have. You do not and should not get dues for not wanting trans people dead because the other party does. Democrats have this ABHORRENT habit of wanting civility points but completely ignoring that the lgbt needs civil rights to survive, round the clock, not just during election cycles.

 

Trans people actually suffer from economic concerns more than cis women but does that matter to more tax benefits for the rich Clinton? No, be abuse she doesn't care about economic concerns either, matter of fact, she, Obama, Bill and Joe all helped pushed america towards the current soft crash almost 10 years ago, even earlier for the clintons and biden. Once again, anyone doing apologia for democrats not delivering on their promises are lending cover for the people who create issues and the use those issues as a reason why they can't do what they promised.

 

Hilary has no basis to talk about what's important, she gleefully helped trump rise to prominence and dropped the ball against him in the election, she, more than any trans person in history, is responsible for the power of the republican party.

[ZIVERT]

13 minutes ago, Communion said:

That people care more about economic policy is explicitly why you don't have to throw trans people under the bus and can win elections even if you support trans people and don't parrot right-wing talking points.

 

Why did you think you ate? 

Using your logic applied to other issues, trans people being able to use the right public bathroom is important but not if they can't afford to buy gas to get to said public restroom  I was told Americans can only focus on one issue at a time

[BeenTheShit]

This thread is exhausting.  Nobody is saying trans people or their right's aren't important.  However, tran's, or even LGBTQ+ rights in general, is not a central issue to run a campaign on, especially in the current political climate.  Democrats need every last vote, including independents and moderates.

 

However, feel free to throw your vote away or stay home, but don't come crying when Republicans take power and dismantle marriage equality and criminalize being LGBTQ+. 

[ClashAndBurn]

10 minutes ago, ZIVERT said:

Using your logic applied to other issues, trans people being able to use the right public bathroom is important but not if they can't afford to buy gas to get to said public restroom  I was told Americans can only focus on one issue at a time

They certainly don't give two fucks about spending seemingly unlimited billions of taxpayer dollars on foreign wars in countries they don't know about or care about, so I don't know what you thought you were getting out of this.

 

I myself don't want billions of dollars in equipment being handed over to the neonazi Azov Battalion, but I don't get to make that choice even as a citizen. That's up to my warmonger president, apparently.

[Communion]

20 minutes ago, ZIVERT said:

Using your logic applied to other issues

Sis, I get you're resentful and thus are lashing out, and you having my genuine empathy due to such, but I genuinely do not have time to help you overcome what is either illiteracy or an angry desire to troll. 

 

Economic policies ARE popular, yes, that's our point. In fact, they're so popular that you can win people over with them even if you support trans people and they don't. Corporate Dems who refuse to support progressive economic policies - which are objectively popular - find themselves stuck in this loop that Luce and Clinton are stuck in where they debate no longer supporting trans people.

 

They're not talking about bridging demographics through progressive economic policy- they're literally against such. They're talking about how to defeat a polling deficit (that they refuse to recognize they're in cause their views are from the 1980s), so to them, if that means no longer vocally supporting trans people or immigrants, so be it!

 

I know you fundamentally disagree with people who recognize that Biden's in a bad position (I'm not sure how you can disagree with quantifiable approval numbers, but do what you need to) and so you're going to do this weird lashing out thing towards progressives, but you're ironically supporting my point of the dangers in centrist Democrats. Yes, the conclusions you're coming to thinking it's a gotcha are genuinely how anti-poor Dems think!

Edited June 19, 2022 by Communion

[Communion]

12 minutes ago, BeenTheShit said:

Nobody is saying trans people or their right's aren't important.

Why did John Bell Edwards not veto an anti-trans bill? You can argue that the legislature had a super-majority and would be able to still pass it after his veto, but that didn't stop Mormon Republican Spencer Cox, the governor of Utah, from vetoing a similar style of bill and putting out a message of support to trans people.

 

Why are centrist Democrats being out-done in vocal support for trans people by Republican Mormons? 

[ZIVERT]

13 minutes ago, BeenTheShit said:

This thread is exhausting.  Nobody is saying trans people or their right's aren't important.  However, tran's, or even LGBTQ+ rights in general, is not a central issue to run a campaign on, especially in the current political climate.  Democrats need every last vote, including independents and moderates.

 

However, feel free to throw your vote away or stay home, but don't come crying when Republicans take power and dismantle marriage equality and criminalize being LGBTQ+. 

You can't use logic with illogical people unfortunately 

[RunUpDoneUp]

Can someone remind me why dems. were heralded as protectors of gay rights again? The dem leadership seems to believe it's not a concern that they should have a position on even though the agenda of their alleged enemies is to attack said gay rights. I thought they were diametrically opposed to republicans and would defend the civil liberties of all Americans? Aren't they the ones who will fight for the gays? Seems like they want to lay down arms and fight for the straights to me, as only one hand can be held by the most powerful "leftwing" party in America.

 

This choice of uppermind pragmatism is confusing, maybe it's not true that dems are the party for trans people after all? Repubs will continue to harm and call for the murder of trans adults and children but alas, we have to win the election that requires trans matters to take a backseat even though the incoming vehicle has their bodies on their dashboard.

[rihannabiggestfan]

NNN at the sarcasm

 

 

 

[Cruel Summer]

Well, at least the interviewer can see that Democrats are intentionally losing elections against actual fascists, but wow, that’s the literal furthest possible thing from the actual reason! Very bad, weird takes from both of them. And from a lot of people in this very thread that don’t see that this is intentional deflection from their intentional refusal to govern to the will of the American people! Throwing trans people under the bus while also still using them as vote bait for another round of “the most important election of our lives!” is definitely the literal point here.

[Jotham]

2 hours ago, BeenTheShit said:

This thread is a reach.  She's not saying it's not important or that she doesn't support, she's saying Democrats, thus minority groups, are on the verge of losing everything and need to win back control.  Then we can re-visit these issues and put legislative protections in place.

Exactly. The thread title is so misleading.

[Bloo]

I’m not sure how trans rights are a distraction for Democrats when they’re not really doing anything at the moment. This just sounds like the set up for trans people to be the excuse for the inevitable loss of the Democrats in the upcoming midterms. When they lose, they’ll say it was because of trans issues and will ignore the reality that they failed to meet the moment to pass anything that they promised (even including voting rights).

 

The truth is Democrats could win the midterms and the current assault on LGBTQ+ people will continue and the Democrats will do nothing to prevent it. The fact that they’re in power and this massive surge in anti-gay and anti-trans legislation across the country began is dismantles the idea that electing Democrats is enough to protect the LGBTQ+ community. The fact that many Democrats have said the quiet part out loud that our community’s plights are distractions is horrendous. Like, obviously Republicans are “worse”, but they’re getting their way regardless of the Democrats.