If people haven't yet realized that a President DeSantis would be the end of American democracy, they need to start getting that in their head.
And no, that's not hyperbole.
If people haven't yet realized that a President DeSantis would be the end of American democracy, they need to start getting that in their head.
And no, that's not hyperbole.
Any Republican president is part of the immediate end of Democracy. Every candidate is a bloodthirsty fascist dictator. History will get what it wants, just a matter of when. Two years? Six?
But does a guy like Romney or Pence end it if they got in the White House? I don't think so. I'd disagree with most of what they did but I'd never have the fear of democracy collapsing under those guys.Honestly, American Democracy is done for when the next conservative takes office. At this point we are just postponing the inevitable.
But does a guy like Romney or Pence end it if they got in the White House? I don't think so. I'd disagree with most of what they did but I'd never have the fear of democracy collapsing under those guys.
The problem is that the popular people in that group are the fascist/authoritarian people. It's what their voters want, sadly. It's not good enough that they can live their own lives--everyone else must live by their rules, too.
If someone made me bet if we'd see rigging of elections under DeSantis, it's a no-brainer. He's the type to absolutely do it.
Yeah, with that "tease," I imagine it's best to just keep your mouth shut. Because at best it's going to be stunningly ignorant, and at worst it's just going to expose who you really are despite what "team" you allege your on.
I kind of want kids but I can't justify it to myself if I have to raise them in this country knowing things aren't going to get better anytime soon.
I honestly don't understand how the Democrats keep getting caught in this same trap. CRT and Sex Ed are not being taught to schoolchildren, why are you not just saying that as opposed to getting into debates you can't win about the virtues of CRT and Sex Ed?
The GOP is writing bills to stop all accurate discussion of history and sexual identity in schools and are getting away with it because the Dems gave them a year head start to frame the issue instead of responding to it immediately. They do this every time, it's just how they got blown out in 2010. They ignored all the "death panel" fear mongering until it was too late.
One will never know and considering what I actually posted you're way off, allegedly though but you're a mind reader right.
Well, when you say you're afraid to say something because it'll get you banned and then make vague allusions to how 'certain movements' have backfired because of their 'priorities' along with the context of this being about the assault on LGBT+ people in education, it's hard not to draw some lines. But feel free to stop the obfuscation and put me on the right track.
It's pretty much why me and my wife are going to adopt now honestlyI kind of want kids but I can't justify it to myself if I have to raise them in this country knowing things aren't going to get better anytime soon.
I won't drag out a tired phrase and say something I to get banned, how boring.
Maybe I could tease the fact that some priorities of some movements have backfired on them, don't take out your pitchforks considering what team I'm on.
Nope too easy maybe the next 20 years dems and their allies can get good at marketing their information. Republicans since nixon and if you go back to FDR have cranked up their efforts meanwhile team milquetoast has what going on this election to fire up people they need for wins.
We gave trump shit for fucking up covid, yet what their excuse on not going after some of their own or republican interest who want to protect big oil profits? The public has known it since manchin and sinema caused a stink with reconciliation bills they are useless without more people who want to change shit, yet aren't doing much to get those wins necessary for that equation. How do others not go insane seeing them fail at this decade after decade. The public likes anger and yet one team isn't taking easy layups for more power and clout.
I totally agree with the premise lets just point out a lot of those parents have no problem indoctrinating them with the bullshit of the church.
Same people with these worries about their kids being used as social experiments can't respect their god saying treat people with respect regardless. The virgina governor's race is totally as establishment fuck up and as usual nit wits with almost no social awareness or charisma are in the lead to fight this shit.
Whether it's this issue voter fraud, medicare in general, or blm the top is consistently bad at messaging. They fuck up bathrooms despite the other team having a guy that caught trying to get it on in the stall.
Don't need to draw some lines, considering how Desantis has used some issues against either can't really say the marketing or timing of some issues was good for people in those groups. Marriage and jobs a great start trying to integrate with christians who hate you, don't need hindsight for that.
What messaging though? You can't beat fear mongering. Period. Particularly since its so effective with Americans generally hate each ofher.
Voter Fraud is fake, but even if you carve out your 'fiscal republicans' you have 30% of the political establishment pushing it; I mean Giuliani had one of the worst nationally televised conferences ever and was dunked on for weeks but still, people believe.
Medicare, it feels that 'This is what you earned and your gonna need it to retire' vs 'The poors get a free ride' wins out because see my hateful Americans above.
BLM, well that's America's dirty secret, you run on anything pro-minority a large amount of Americans will vote 'no' just by default.
What would help is calling a spade a spade but America has made a national past time of getting called a bad person 'me, a raciat?' worse than the actual behavior of being bad. Its why Evangelicals have this sheen on them when reported as opposed to the civilization destroying ghouls that they are.
When you talk about 'certain movements' without naming them, and all the 'priorities' they pushed that backfired without naming them, there is some need to draw lines because you're deliberately being coy. If you can't name and attack those groups and those priorities (while the added dash of 'don't get the pitchforks out, I'm on your team, honest') don't know what you expect anyone to assume except that you're referring to oppressed groups and how their 'messaging wasn't good enough' and they are at least partially to blame for this situation.
As I said, if you want to drop the coyness and correct me, by all means do so. If not, then your instinct to keep quiet probably was a good one.
Given how this pattern keeps repeating itself it's getting difficult to not feel like it's intentional. It's like the Democratic Republican party split and has just been playing the longest game of "good cop / bad cop" for the last 150 years.They couldn't even response to a global financial crisis or swiftboat vets. republicans would've bombed them all day for 2008 and they let a draft dodger act like he was better than a real vet who went to war.
If this guy gets the nom he's gonna win. We've got a much better shot vs Trump
I was just talking about this with someone this morning. It happens almost every election cycle around this point. Does anyone else remember back in 2006 when Giuliani was a lock for the 2008 nom? I don't even think he actually made it to the primary.Oh god are we truly already starting to migrate the "Nothing can stop teflon Trump! He will win any election!" over to Desantis already?
K... 🙄
I was just talking about this with someone this morning. It happens almost every election cycle around this point. Does anyone else remember back in 2006 when Giuliani was a lock for the 2008 nom? I don't even think he actually made it to the primary.
Or rapists. This is such an insane time in American history.Seems like republicans would rather children learn about sex from politicians and clergy members.
And folks this is why conservatives win, because so many don't actually take time to learn what the conversation is even about, they just follow the sound bites.
No one is suggesting that 3rd graders need to be taught the biology of sex or have sex ed classes that young. That isn't happening. That's not at all what the conversation is about.
Notably though, the idea that it should be isn't without some merit or at least consideration. Studies have consistently found kids who understand sex are far less likely to be abused and more likely to report it when they are. You know, if this was actually at all about protecting kids.
That said, there's little to no discussion of actually doing that. When conservatives talk about "teaching sexuality" to these kids and insist this is happening, they're not talking about biology. They're talking about acknowledging gay people exist. That's what they consider "teaching sexuality".
They get out and make a big show about protecting kids from a problem that doesn't exist and they can provide no real examples of happening. But they say it is generic enough terms that it sounds reasonable. That even some moderates think they're talking about sex ed or biology. Which if they really wanted to ban at that age wouldn't be that big a deal simply because it isn't being done anyway.
That's not what they do though. They instead pass laws that are incredibly broad and open to interpretation. Which say not to teach sexuality but don't say what they mean by that.
These laws could be interpreted to mean only the biology side of things. Or they could be interpreted to simply mean acknowledging gay people in any way. Can a gay teacher mention he and his husband went to the beach this weekend on Monday when the class is sharing what they did over the weekend? If kids make family trees and have two moms, can the class talk about their family? Does a lesbian teacher have to hide she has a wife entirely? If a kid mentions his two dads and a kid asks how that's possible, can they give a basic answer about how all families are different?
No one knows! Which is the entire point. They don't actually want to specially ban those things. Then it becomes obvious this is about their bigotry and not "protecting kids", even to those not paying much attention. Keeping it broad scares everyone into assuming the worst though. Because schools don't want to get sued and principles don't want to get fired. Which effectively enforces the worst interpretation of the law while giving Republicans deniability. After all, if it does end up in the courts most of the state Supreme courts in these stated and controlled by Republicans. And if this fear of saying the wrong thing forces teachers out of the profession, so much the better. Republicans love when our public schools get worse. More ammo to push for private and charter school funding and leave the poor behind.
Republicans win on messaging because they keep their talking points broad. They aren't concerned about misinterpretation because the whole point is to exaggerate and work people up. To make a broad statement and let people run away with it. But also to let say it broadly enough that uninformed people can think they're being reasonable.
Democrats can't reply in those same simple terms. Because they can't just say "we want to teach your kindergarten kids about sexuality". They have to spend time bringing nuance to the conversation and getting into what's meant by that, and assuring parents that they're not trying to teach first graders how to do oral sex. But most people don't like nuance. They prefer a simple soundbite, even though most real things in the world that matter can't be distilled into an eight second blip.
I am aware of these arguments and understandings. But you cannot expect such nuance from a 5 second question over the phone.Just want to reiterate that by viewing it in this way, you fell into their trap.
You say not to teach sexuality to kids. They take that mandate to implement rules that male teachers can't mention their husbands; and if a student brings up that they have two moms and another student is confused, teachers can't step in to explain and they even have to shut down the conversation; and if a student expresses confusion about their gender, teachers can't help them through it; and if parents are helping that student try out another gender identity, teachers will be obligated to call child services. That's the intention behind this framing.