USA Today Columnist: Do we still agree on beating Trump? After your LGBTQ forum, I'm not sure.

RDreamer · Oct 14, 2019

Garbage article. Garbage person. Garbage sentiment.

It's so fucking infuriating that we've accepted as normal things like gay marriage and haven't held anyone in power accountable for the stupid fucking shit they spewed against it. Public opinion is overwhelmingly for it now. The fucking country didn't die. Everything's fine. But no one's harassing politicians that are still in fucking office on why the hell they spewed their shit. Their shit views on other LGBTQ issues are still viewed as valid despite being horrifically fucking wrong here. Fucking why?

And we get scare articles chastising the left for doing issues that are largely popular ones fear mongering that they'll lose if they push away the bigots. Well where's the fucking articles every time Trump and all actually do take away popular rights for these people? Where's the fucking article that Trump is going to lose the middle ground?

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 14, 2019

emag said:
This sounds like something the South Bend, Indiana, Democrats Club would write (This American Life Episode 683).

"Democrats are all about Immigrants and Gays and Muslims and Blacks instead of pandering to people like me. I voted for Obama in 2008 and Clinton in 1992, but now I like Trump."

Lol I listened to that the other day. It is pretty much the logic those people were using. I did feel bad for the guy who's wife died though.

vitamind · Oct 14, 2019

SugarNoodles said:
Stop. We don't need shitty conservative votes. We need democrat votes. And what makes democrats stay home and not vote is caving to shitty conservatives.

As someone also in the community quite honestly I don't care if a dem candidate comes out and lies about hating LGBTQ people if it means we'll win the election. This one is too important to lose.

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 14, 2019

Replicant said:
I think some of you need to accept that a lot of people only see politics as for what relates and benefits them. Not everyone who sees LGBTQ discussion and gets annoyed is a homophobe bigot..they are just lazy and don't give a shit about anything but themselves and the items they want change in. When they see time and energy being spent on things that don't apply to them or what they see as every day American values, they don't care about, they get annoyed and frustrated.

welcome to the average voter in America. Fuck you, I want mine. Labeling them as a bigot because they don't give a shit about LGBTQ rights isn't going to help your cause. They are just going to go out of their way to spite you.

No that is bigotry. If you get mad every time a candidate talks about an issue that doesn't pertain to you (or in reality, every time they talk about LGBT people, since that is the subject of this article) then you might be a bigot.

Hours Left · Oct 14, 2019

Why the fuck was this even posted? Get this homophobic trash out of here.

fontguy · Oct 14, 2019

What a hateful douche.

Wilsongt · Oct 14, 2019

A temporarily embarassed Never Trump Republican thought it was okay to write and publish this garbage.

Erpy · Oct 14, 2019

Captain Tuttle said:
I'm not going to read that crappy article but maybe the writer is worried about what happened in 2000 with Bush Jr and Gore. Karl Rove (Bush guy) pushed gay marriage as a threat to "tradition" and the Republicans put a bunch of anti-gay marriage ballot initiatives in battleground states, hoping to drive the Evangelicals to the polls where they'd pull the lever for Bush. It wasn't even like there was a mainstream push at the time for gay marriage, the Republicans just made it an issue and their bigoted voters went to the polls in droves. It worked, I'm convinced that's a big reason why Gore lost.

That said, it's not 2000 anymore, gay marriage is the law of the land and voters aren't as motivated against LBGTQ issues as they once were (some are but not in the numbers in 2000. Just my gut). Democrats should keep doing what they're doing

I think it was the 2004 election that Rove managed to poison with doomsday scenarios about gay marriage and what it would do to the fabric of society, despite Democrats not really pushing on that issue. What the writer is warning about, I imagine, is making the culture wars the primary arena in which to fight the election. Because that's the one area where Republicans have the home field advantage. Heck, it's the one area where Trump can even function. (the dude probably already forgot what the nuclear triad means) The GOP's voting base is more culturally homogenic than the Democrats' big tent. Their media ecosystem is all culture wars all the time, so they excel in their quick and spiffy messenging. Whenever the economy comes to the forefront (1992, 2008) or the opponent can be defined as "the distant manager type who fired your dad" (2012), Democrats tend to prosper. Whenever the culture war or identity politics become the main playing field (2004, 2016) Republicans tend to benefit.

Democrats shouldn't worry that white evangelicals are turned off by stuff like Harris' pronouns-introduction or Beto's easily twistable words on churches and gay-dependent tax excemptions, because white evangelicals are already gonna turn out en masse for Trump. What they should be more wary of is how their statements play among older black church-going ladies in the mid-west. The fact that Dems always have to perform their balancing act between that constituency and the liberal twitter crowd while the GOP can go full hog on "owning the libs" means the latter have a natural advantage. "Don't play on the opposition's home field" is kinda electoral politics 101, which is what the article writer's point seems to be, moreso than blatant homophobia.

Of course, "woo the base in the primary and then pivot back to the center to some degree when the general election rolls around" is also electoral politics 101 so part of what the author is complaining about is unavoidable.

IrishNinja · Oct 14, 2019

"don't have any actual values, or stand for them, in the face of victory" shows pretty clearly dude's mind didn't leave the GOP one bit

Complicated · Oct 14, 2019

I'm far past the point in caring how centrists and right-wing extremists react to politicians pushing for platforms of decency, humanity, and any kind of hope for a positive future for the world. If Americans don't want that then let's just get the whole civilization thing over with already so we can stop burdening the planet and animals with all our shit.

Maolfunction · Oct 14, 2019

so I'm guessing Tom here is a Tulsi Gabbard supporter?

PanzerKraken · Oct 14, 2019

So.... vote Trump? Yea cause that worked out so well to back the GOP and Trump. Fucking stupid article

Deleted member 1635 · Oct 14, 2019

Complicated said:
I'm far past the point in caring how centrists and right-wing extremists react to politicians pushing for platforms of decency, humanity, and any kind of hope for a positive future for the world. If Americans don't want that then let's just get the whole civilization thing over with already so we can stop burdening the planet and animals with all our shit.

So you would happily throw away everything we've achieved if we as a society cannot immediately embrace the exact vision of perfection that you have?

SugarNoodles · Oct 14, 2019

vitamind said:
As someone also in the community quite honestly I don't care if a dem candidate comes out and lies about hating LGBTQ people if it means we'll win the election. This one is too important to lose.

1) luckily there are people with more of a spine with you that won't settle for that

2) doing that won't help us win anyway

Replicant · Oct 14, 2019

Lord of Ostia said:
No that is bigotry. If you get mad every time a candidate talks about an issue that doesn't pertain to you (or in reality, every time they talk about LGBT people, since that is the subject of this article) then you might be a bigot.

Maybe, maybe not. Labeling someone that is your right, but I don't think it applies full stop. Again, people are fickle and selfish. They generally don't care about an issue unless it affects them directly.

Surfinn · Oct 14, 2019

Don't rock the boat

BWoog · Oct 14, 2019

Video of Trump mass murdering people: "YEAH, KILL THOSE LIBTARDS!"

Video of Democratic Frontrunners saying gay people should be treated equally: "MY FEEWINGS!"

TacoSupreme · Oct 14, 2019

Complicated said:
I'm far past the point in caring how centrists and right-wing extremists react to politicians pushing for platforms of decency, humanity, and any kind of hope for a positive future for the world. If Americans don't want that then let's just get the whole civilization thing over with already so we can stop burdening the planet and animals with all our shit.

I understand how you feel, but I feel it necessary to point out that if our civilization collapses entirely, the enormous thud that it falls with will almost certainly wipe out the majority of mammalian species, and culminate with fishing tons of species to death and leaving the planet a scarred craphole compared to what it was like even just 100 years ago.

We have a responsibility to fix our problems and our planet.

vitamind · Oct 14, 2019

SugarNoodles said:
1) luckily there are people with more of a spine with you that won't settle for that

2) doing that won't help us win anyway

1. Lol spine? Sorry, that I'll settle for a lie if it gets a win. I'll be sure to tell all my friends/family who have been harmed by the gutting of the ACA. Not everyone is in a privileged enough position to worry about a spine when tomorrow isn't promised to them because they can't afford treatment. I'll throw my pride away in a heartbeat if that's what it takes. People are dying and rights are being striped daily and having a "spine" is what matters?

2. Never said it was necessary but if a lie to those fools promises a win you'd be an idiot to not support that.

tsampikos · Oct 14, 2019

Religious institutions get tax breaks because they are a service to the community. If they want to deny people because of their private feelings then they should get their public benefits revoked. They should not have it both ways. They don't have a fundamental right to benefits whereas citizens should have a fundamental right to things they pay for.

Wanna deny people? Pay your fucking taxes and go wild. Otherwise fuck off the institution belongs to the people. All people.

Deleted member 1635 · Oct 14, 2019

tsampikos said:
Religious institutions get tax breaks because they are a service to the community. If they want to deny people because of their private feelings then they should get their public benefits revoked. They should not have it both ways. They don't have a fundamental right to benefits whereas citizens should have a fundamental right to things they pay for.

Wanna deny people? Pay your fucking taxes and go wild. Otherwise fuck off.

No. Religious institutions are exempt precisely because it helps ensure the free exercise of religion and separation of church and state.

kittens · Oct 14, 2019

if anything I feel like we should view this article as a flag for how important it is that we rally the youth vote

The Albatross · Oct 14, 2019

pokeystaples said:
What are your thoughts, OP?

Aye, I really wish we had more pressure to espouse a view when you share an opinion piece, or even a news story. Agree, disagree... present an original thought.

Parthenios · Oct 14, 2019

Erpy said:
I think it was the 2004 election that Rove managed to poison with doomsday scenarios about gay marriage and what it would do to the fabric of society, despite Democrats not really pushing on that issue. What the writer is warning about, I imagine, is making the culture wars the primary arena in which to fight the election. Because that's the one area where Republicans have the home field advantage. Heck, it's the one area where Trump can even function. (the dude probably already forgot what the nuclear triad means) The GOP's voting base is more culturally homogenic than the Democrats' big tent. Their media ecosystem is all culture wars all the time, so they excel in their quick and spiffy messenging. Whenever the economy comes to the forefront (1992, 2008) or the opponent can be defined as "the distant manager type who fired your dad" (2012), Democrats tend to prosper. Whenever the culture war or identity politics become the main playing field (2004, 2016) Republicans tend to benefit.

Democrats shouldn't worry that white evangelicals are turned off by stuff like Harris' pronouns-introduction or Beto's easily twistable words on churches and gay-dependent tax excemptions, because white evangelicals are already gonna turn out en masse for Trump. What they should be more wary of is how their statements play among older black church-going ladies in the mid-west. The fact that Dems always have to perform their balancing act between that constituency and the liberal twitter crowd while the GOP can go full hog on "owning the libs" means the latter have a natural advantage. "Don't play on the opposition's home field" is kinda electoral politics 101, which is what the article writer's point seems to be, moreso than blatant homophobia.

Of course, "woo the base in the primary and then pivot back to the center to some degree when the general election rolls around" is also electoral politics 101 so part of what the author is complaining about is unavoidable.

This is basically my take too.

The article is missing the point that it was an LGBTQ forum in the first place though (unless the point is that they shouldn't have even done the forum at all, which is BS).

ReAxion · Oct 14, 2019

Zefah said:
No, it's more like, what will "normies" who aren't tuned into this shit on Twitter 24/7 think? Even here in the Seattle area, I wager the majority of residents would think you were crazy if you started any kind of discussion by announcing your preferred pronouns.

The fact that even a "woke" journalist like Cuomo thought that he could make light of the idea should tell you all you need to know about how ready the majority of America is for this kind of thing.

It's a bad faith shell game with one shell. This man should not be listened to for a second. He's a fraud.

Complicated · Oct 14, 2019

TacoSupreme said:
I understand how you feel, but I feel it necessary to point out that if our civilization collapses entirely, the enormous thud that it falls with will almost certainly wipe out the majority of mammalian species, and culminate with fishing tons of species to death and leaving the planet a scarred craphole compared to what it was like even just 100 years ago.

We have a responsibility to fix our problems and our planet.

Which is why I don't care what people think of those trying to save the planet through democratic and legal processes today. If that doesn't work then overthrowing failed democratic institutions by any means necessary quickly becomes the only option besides sitting quietly and waiting for death.

clearacell · Oct 14, 2019

Is he saying it should never be part of their platform or they should ignore it altogether? LGBTQ+ is part of the democratic base so of course it cant be ignored.

Mona · Oct 14, 2019

the average voter wont even remember this in a week, if they even know about it in the first place

Deleted member 20630 · Oct 14, 2019

TacoSupreme · Oct 14, 2019

Complicated said:
Which is why I don't care what people think of those trying to save the planet through democratic and legal processes today. If that doesn't work then overthrowing failed democratic institutions by any means necessary quickly becomes the only option besides sitting quietly and waiting for death.

I agree completely. But that's not really what you said. Signalling a willingness to shrug your shoulders and saying "wellity doo, might as well just give up on civilization. It'll totes be better for the animals and planet that way" if we suffer setbacks due to the shittiness of some Americans is irresponsible and shit. We have a responsibility to fight for all of this to the absolute and bitter end.

Titanpaul · Oct 14, 2019

Don't bend for losers like this, you don't want their vote.

Blue Skies · Oct 14, 2019

Mona said:
the average voter wont even remember this in a week, if they even know about it in the first place

Ding ding

What where the ratings even

Deleted member 1635 · Oct 14, 2019

ReAxion said:
It's a bad faith shell game with one shell. This man should not be listened to for a second. He's a fraud.

Why are you focusing so much on who he is rather than what he's saying? I don't know who this guy is and I don't really care. I didn't even click on the article, but I think the argument presented in the quotes in the OP likely have some validity, whether we like it or not, given how things have gone in the past.

Or this, basically:

Erpy said:
I think it was the 2004 election that Rove managed to poison with doomsday scenarios about gay marriage and what it would do to the fabric of society, despite Democrats not really pushing on that issue. What the writer is warning about, I imagine, is making the culture wars the primary arena in which to fight the election. Because that's the one area where Republicans have the home field advantage. Heck, it's the one area where Trump can even function. (the dude probably already forgot what the nuclear triad means) The GOP's voting base is more culturally homogenic than the Democrats' big tent. Their media ecosystem is all culture wars all the time, so they excel in their quick and spiffy messenging. Whenever the economy comes to the forefront (1992, 2008) or the opponent can be defined as "the distant manager type who fired your dad" (2012), Democrats tend to prosper. Whenever the culture war or identity politics become the main playing field (2004, 2016) Republicans tend to benefit.

Democrats shouldn't worry that white evangelicals are turned off by stuff like Harris' pronouns-introduction or Beto's easily twistable words on churches and gay-dependent tax excemptions, because white evangelicals are already gonna turn out en masse for Trump. What they should be more wary of is how their statements play among older black church-going ladies in the mid-west. The fact that Dems always have to perform their balancing act between that constituency and the liberal twitter crowd while the GOP can go full hog on "owning the libs" means the latter have a natural advantage. "Don't play on the opposition's home field" is kinda electoral politics 101, which is what the article writer's point seems to be, moreso than blatant homophobia.

Of course, "woo the base in the primary and then pivot back to the center to some degree when the general election rolls around" is also electoral politics 101 so part of what the author is complaining about is unavoidable.

--

Titanpaul said:
Don't bend for losers like this, you don't want their vote.

If their vote means you win, you do.

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 14, 2019

Zefah said:
No, it's more like, what will "normies" who aren't tuned into this shit on Twitter 24/7 think? Even here in the Seattle area, I wager the majority of residents would think you were crazy if you started any kind of discussion by announcing your preferred pronouns.

The fact that even a "woke" journalist like Cuomo thought that he could make light of the idea should tell you all you need to know about how ready the majority of America is for this kind of thing.

Since when is Cuomo 'woke' exactly? This is a primary, you want to secure the base. Guess who are a significant part of the Democrats' base? LGBTQ people. That's why they had a fucking LGBTQ townhall in the first place

Arkanim94 · Oct 14, 2019

well, that's is a brain rotting article if I ever saw one.

rjinaz · Oct 14, 2019

Worry about your own fucking party, and not Democrats. It's Republicans that need to change and be less extreme, not Democrats that need to be more Right.

I think I'll rewatch that Warren video again from that LGBTQ+ town hall in honor of this moron that is too chickenshit to call out his own party and instead blames Trump and Democrats.

KtotheRoc · Oct 14, 2019

Republicans don't like what their party has become and want Democrats to become more bigoted? What a shock!

Complicated · Oct 14, 2019

TacoSupreme said:
Signalling a willingness to shrug your shoulders and saying "wellity doo, might as well just give up on civilization. It'll totes be better for the animals and planet that way" if we suffer setbacks due to the shittiness of some Americans is irresponsible and shit.

Nah you've clearly misread what I said.

Arkanim94 · Oct 14, 2019

btw: this article at least lay bare what really drives conservatives all over the world:
it's not the economy, taxes, or shit like that, it's fighting against the disenfranchisement of the lower classes.

big shocker, I know.

Keio · Oct 14, 2019

Let's stop pandering to people who want to restrict the freedoms of others to enjoy their humanity. No time to apologize what consenting adults and responsible parents do in their lives.

Version 3.0 · Oct 14, 2019

Promoting gay rights = "doing something stupid and pointless that will take the spotlight off Trump".

I doubt it, but if so, then so be it. Run on what is right. Not on what you think some asshole Trump voter might want to hear (or not want to hear).

SugarNoodles · Oct 14, 2019

vitamind said:
1. Lol spine? Sorry, that I'll settle for a lie if it gets a win. I'll be sure to tell all my friends/family who have been harmed by the gutting of the ACA. Not everyone is in a privileged enough position to worry about a spine when tomorrow isn't promised to them because they can't afford treatment. I'll throw my pride away in a heartbeat if that's what it takes. People are dying and rights are being striped daily and having a "spine" is what matters?

2. Never said it was necessary but if a lie to those fools promises a win you'd be an idiot to not support that.

You don't seem to understand the actual consequences of what you're endorsing. Resistance is what saves lives. Not selling your soul for the promise of a return to the status quo.

People like you seem to genuinely believe that progress happens on its own, without fighting for it on a daily basis. Accepting anti-lgbt rhetoric for a shot at a "win" is completely antithetical and it's sad that you can't see that.

You would have been one of the affluent gays finger wagging at the Stonewall Riots for "causing trouble"

vitamind · Oct 14, 2019

SugarNoodles said:
You don't seem to understand the actual consequences of what you're endorsing. Resistance is what saves lives. Not selling your soul for the promise of a return to the status quo.

People like you seem to genuinely believe that progress happens on its own, without fighting for it on a daily basis. Accepting anti-lgbt rhetoric for a shot at a "win" is completely antithetical and it's sad that you can't see that.

You would have been one of the affluent gays finger wagging at the Stonewall Riots for "causing trouble"

Get fucking real. You have no idea what I do on a daily basis. I see real consequences of policy every single day. You seem to think I advocate for status quo. I said I would accept a LIE if it meant we'd win and be able to truly put into place real change. Not for a "shot" at a win.

Nowhere did I say anything about not resisting. I said in a hypothetical situation what I would accept. You completely misrepresented what I said to rail against some straw man. Shove your affluent gay bullshit, it's offensive. The personal attacks are uncalled for.

Garlic · Oct 14, 2019

How are you supposed to enact policy you think is so unpopular you're terrified to even campaign on it?

Also it's funny because Trump didn't win by campaigning on culture war issues, and the people most likely to be offended by standing up for LGBTQ (white evangelicals) are completely in his bag regardless

ItIsOkBro · Oct 14, 2019

being an ex-republican doesn't make you an ex-terrible person

FILE_ID.DIZ · Oct 14, 2019

abutteredpig said:
It's a classic Tom bit to write an article designed to antagonize people, and then complain later on twitter when people tell him he's wrong that the mob is just proving his point by coming after him.

"These police are being so rude and uncivil! Clearly this proves how right I was to rob that bank!"

May he itch all over and have all his fingernails fall off so he can never scratch.

ReAxion · Oct 14, 2019

Zefah said:
Why are you focusing so much on who he is rather than what he's saying? I don't know who this guy is and I don't really care. I didn't even click on the article, but I think the argument presented in the quotes in the OP likely have some validity, whether we like it or not, given how things have gone in the past.

Because who he is is the reason he's saying such stupid things. It should matter to you who is saying what because you're getting scorpion-frogged every time you don't pay attention to the fact that the scorpion is a scorpion.
But just to address what he's saying: here is exactly why it is stupid: He's wondering why Dems, during the Dem primary, are, for a moment, focusing on this Dem-centered issue instead of the multitude of reasons why Trump shouldn't be in office. Dems already agree that he's unfit for office, he's committing crimes, he's destroying the Constitution. That is a waste of time in the primary where you're sorting out the Dem candidates. But he insists they should do this because that's what Never Trump Republicans like him came to the party for. He's worried about winning back electoral votes during a primary when two of the key states have closed primaries. This man is ostensibly smart enough to know this but he's saying this bullshit anyway. It's bad faith. It's old hat bad faith.

tsampikos · Oct 14, 2019

Zefah said:
No. Religious institutions are exempt precisely because it helps ensure the free exercise of religion and separation of church and state.

Nope. You're confusing two completely different ideas.

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 14, 2019

vitamind said:
Get fucking real. You have no idea what I do on a daily basis. I see real consequences of policy every single day. You seem to think I advocate for status quo. I said I would accept a LIE if it meant we'd win and be able to truly put into place real change. Not for a "shot" at a win.

Nowhere did I say anything about not resisting. I said in a hypothetical situation what I would accept. You completely misrepresented what I said to rail against some straw man. Shove your affluent gay bullshit, it's offensive. The personal attacks are uncalled for.

You said you would be fine with a Democrat politician saying they hate gay people on the campaign trail. It being a 'lie' is irrelevant, it still spreads homophobia. That's literally what Trump did to get the Evangelicals to vote for him, lied about hating gay people. Problem is...when you campaign on something you have to make good on it once in office. You are getting called out because your statement was bizarre and pointless.

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 14, 2019

Zefah said:
No. Religious institutions are exempt precisely because it helps ensure the free exercise of religion and separation of church and state.

That's not why tax exempt status exists.

USA Today Columnist: Do we still agree on beating Trump? After your LGBTQ forum, I'm not sure.

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Attempted to circumvent a ban with an alt

User requested account closure

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

One Winged Slayer

Happy New Year!!

User requested account closure

User requested account closure