Being Thankful For A Few Surprising Things
Since it is Thanksgiving week, I am going to write a positive article today about Donald Trump (well, semi-positive, at any rate...).
Of course, there is indeed a whole universe of negative aspects of having Trump as president again, but even I have to admit that Trump has had a few positive effects on the Republican Party -- mostly by his insistence that they blindly follow him in all things. This has meant the party as a whole has had to largely accept some of Trump's very non-traditional stances on issues (non-traditional for conservatives or Republicans, that is). Trump, unlike many of the ideologues who used to set the party's direction and policy objectives, has the ability to occasionally spot an issue where the GOP's traditional position is so unpopular that it winds up hurting them at the ballot box. Two of these issues in particular stand out. Trump can't truly be said to be "on the right side" of either of these issues, and his objection to the more-extreme positions the Republicans traditionally have taken is rather thin and transactional. But it's better than where the party was headed without Trump, so he at least deserves partial credit for how he's changed the party's orthodoxy. And then finally, Trump has now made one cabinet pick that even plenty of Democrats will likely get behind in the Senate, when it comes time for their confirmation vote.
The first issue Trump has changed Republican dogma on is Social Security and (to a lesser extent) Medicare and Medicaid. Republicans have a long tradition of hating all these programs ever since Democrats initially created them, and they've tried various different ways of either undercutting them, slashing their budgets, or eliminating them entirely. Trump has sworn to protect them from cuts, which has (somewhat) muted the calls from the GOP to attack them.
As I said, Trump is not exactly a pure-of-heart champion of what Republicans like to sneeringly call "entitlement programs." But he is politically savvy enough to have realized that Democrats are on the winning side of the argument in elections. Cutting Social Security, in particular, is never going to be popular, no matter how Republicans try to do so. Social Security is almost universal -- virtually everyone is going to benefit from it if they reach a certain age -- so it's hard to scapegoat as some sort of program for "freeloaders." Which Democrats effectively point out, in highly emotional terms, every time Republicans get a creative new idea for how to undermine it.
Trump is nowhere near as strong on the other two programs, however. He promised in his most-recent campaign to "protect" Medicare and Medicaid, but he's already reportedly considering jettisoning Medicaid from that campaign promise. Medicare, like Social Security, is also near-universal since it covers everyone of a certain age or older. Medicaid, however, is for those who are permanently disabled or for those whose low income precludes them affording health insurance. It is a "safety net" program, in other words, and is nowhere near as universal. Pretty much every family in America has either had or currently has members in it receiving Social Security and Medicare benefits, but plenty of families will never have to resort to applying for Medicaid. This makes it an easier political target for Republicans, and as mentioned there are already ideas being floated for how to make it even more difficult to qualify for Medicaid. Medicaid was expanded under both Obamacare and during the COVID pandemic, and Republicans (even those Trump has now nominated) are looking for ways to tighten up the rules (like adding work requirements, for instance).
However, now Republicans will have to tread carefully, since Trump is obviously aware of the political repercussions of cutting these programs. He knows the effectiveness of Democratic ads showing granny in a wheelchair being pushed over a cliff, to put this another way. This doesn't guarantee that Trump won't sign budgets with cuts or new restrictions -- each of his White House budget proposals in his first term did indeed suggest cutting the programs -- but it'll all really depend on how Trump feels about it at the time. Trump's support is, as mentioned, transactional. He doesn't really care how any proposed cuts would actually affect people on these programs, but he does care about his own political brand, so it remains to be seen whether his support will be mere lip service or actually telling his own party to back off such proposed cuts. [This is all before Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy weigh in, I should mention -- who knows what they'll suggest?]
The other big change in Republican dogma was a lot more obvious during this election cycle. Trump figured out -- a lot sooner than most Republicans -- that the abortion rights issue was causing the Republican Party some serious damage with the voters. Even in a very Republican election cycle, abortion rights were on the ballot in 10 states and won in eight of them. New laws protecting the right to an abortion were approved by majorities of the voters in eight states, although the laws only passed in seven of them. The discrepancy: over 57 percent of Florida voters voted to enshrine the right to an abortion in the state's constitution, but this failed to meet the supermajority (of 60 percent) needed to pass. Laws protecting the right to an abortion passed not just in blue states but also in purple states (Arizona, Montana, Nevada) and one very red state (Missouri).
Trump, very early on in the 2024 campaign, realized that the anti-abortion faction in the Republican Party had vastly overstated the popularity of their extremist forced-birth position on the issue. So Trump made a political pivot. He used to proudly brag that he had named the three Supreme Court justices who were instrumental in jettisoning Roe v. Wade, but because this was nowhere near as popular as some in the GOP thought it would be, Trump conveniently rewrote history to make it more politically palatable. In his new telling, "everyone" wanted to see Roe overturned so the issue could go back to state governments. This was a whopper of a lie, but nobody ever adequately challenged him on it, so he largely got away with this historical revisionism. Everybody most certainly did not want to see the end of Roe, but Trump has gaslighted this falsehood successfully enough that he could then wash his hands of the entire issue. If it was up to the states, then a president and the national Congress could just ignore it, because "everyone" was happy with this outcome -- and if they weren't, well... it was merely a state matter.
Trump even castigated Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (back when they were vying against each other in the GOP primaries) for passing a forced-birth 6-week abortion ban in his state. According to Trump, this was a bad idea because it was too extreme. At the time, only Trump could get away with staking out a position within the Republican Party that any abortion ban was "too extreme" -- any other Republican would have been ostracized or even drummed out of the party for saying such a thing. Trump being Trump, he got away with it.
As with the other issues, though, Trump still can't be seen as any sort of hero championing the right side of things. Since he's a resident of Florida, the question came up of how Trump was going to vote on the ballot initiative that would have thrown out the 6-week ban. Trump waffled about it and staked out positions on both sides of the issue before finally knuckling under to the extremists and declaring he would vote against the measure. As with everything else, Trump is transactional, not some sterling champion of a woman's right to choose. He says he wouldn't sign a national abortion ban (should his Republican Congress pass one), but we simply won't know whether he changes his mind about that until it happens.
Nevertheless, Trump's realization that the issue had become an albatross around the GOP's neck has freed up the conversation within the Republican Party. Rather than a contest to see who can outdo whom on staking out the most extreme position possible, there are now Republicans who are actually vocally against the "no abortions, ever, for anyone" faction. That is progress, at least. And it likely wouldn't have happened (or would have taken a lot longer) without Trump.
The final thing to actually be thankful for with Donald Trump is his nominee to lead the Department of Labor. Representative Lori Chavez-DeRemer is an Oregon Republican with a surprisingly pro-Union record. She was one of only three Republicans to support the "Protecting the Right to Organize Act" (PRO Act) and also supported the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act, both of which were written to increase the power of Unions. She would be the most pro-Union secretary of Labor in a Republican administration in a very long time, in other words.
Her nomination was political payback to the Union support that Trump got (most notably from the president of the Teamsters), and it is already causing a few GOP heads to explode. Her confirmation hearing may be notable for having Democrats lobbing softball questions while Republicans try to grill her. And I could easily see a whole bunch of Republicans voting against her nomination while a whole bunch of Democrats support it -- which is rather unusual in today's polarized and partisan Senate.
Once again, however, Trump's support should be seen as transactional. While having a pro-Union Labor secretary is obviously better for Unions than the alternative, there are plenty of others in Trump's orbit who will be trying to rip protections away from Unions -- especially all the gains made by President Joe Biden. Elon Musk is fervently anti-Union, so once again who knows what bright ideas he will come up with to undercut Union power?
It will make for an interesting dynamic, though. After having a Union president speak at his Republican National Convention, Trump may be a whole lot more open to lobbying by Unions than any modern Republican president in memory. It's no guarantee of a good outcome, but at least the possibility exists where it wouldn't have with any other Republican in the White House.
Donald Trump has entirely taken over the Republican Party, and he expects complete loyalty from all of them. This includes supporting ideas he supports, even when they run completely counter to bedrock beliefs the party has held for decades. This has shaken up the party's ideology in a lot of big ways, more than just the ones discussed here.
But we've got to be thankful for something this week, right? So that's my list of things to be thankful for from Donald Trump. I don't fully trust him to follow through on any of them -- he changes position like a windvane spinning in a raging storm, at times -- but at least there is some hope that on a few things he will actually have shifted the dialog among Republicans for the better.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
The final thing to actually be thankful for with Donald Trump is his nominee to lead the Department of Labor. Representative Lori Chavez-DeRemer is an Oregon Republican with a surprisingly pro-Union record. She was one of only three Republicans to support the "Protecting the Right to Organize Act" (PRO Act) and also supported the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act, both of which were written to increase the power of Unions. She would be the most pro-Union secretary of Labor in a Republican administration in a very long time, in other words.
Well, that's strange.. Because just several days ago, Bashi was slamming and attacking President ELECT Trump for this VERY cabinet pick...
In the Weird category, Lori Chavez-DeRemer has been tapped to Secretary of Labor. We just defeated this one termer of no known accomplishment. I wonder how Trump knew about her? Or is the pool to choose from that shallow? It was one of the more competitive and expensive house races nationally. Maybe the dollar signs?
-Bashi
Anyone wanna lay bets Bashi changes his tune?? :D Or else decides to look like the moron he is for opposing her selection.. :D
Place yer bets!!! :D
I don't fully trust him to follow through on any of them -- he changes position like a windvane spinning in a raging storm, at times --
Oh yea.. Because DEMOCRATS would never do that, right!!??? :eyeroll:
But, OK... OK... I said I wanted to see some POSITIVE things from 2024 CW about President ELECT Trump and 2024 CW {somewhat} delivered..
So, KUDOS to 2024 CW for the {very VERY} rare glimpse of bipartisanship..
There may be hope for him yet.. :D
We'll see how everyone else responds, though.. :D
Lori Chavez-DeRemer as a pick is maybe, slightly not as bad as his mostly unqualified and inexperienced bozos he has nominated so far. She ran as a dyed in the wool Trumper with way too many commercials that were full of lies and fearmongering. Probably why she lost. I'll have to agree to disagree as Chris did not have to suffer her media barrage. She is still a one termer with no known accomplishments. Before the house she was mayor of Happy Valley, no not the one where all unhappy people and trade union leaders were sentenced to death and if found morose you would be hanged by the neck until you cheered up, but a small satellite city in the Portland metro that is known for having just about double the property taxes of everywhere else in the area.
Lori Chavez-DeRemer as a pick is maybe, slightly not as bad as his mostly unqualified and inexperienced bozos he has nominated so far.
Funny how Bashi changes his tune about Chavez-DeRemer... :D
She ran as a dyed in the wool Trumper with way too many commercials that were full of lies and fearmongering.
In other words, she was dead on ballz accurate but the looney tune Demon'rats in the shithole of Portland OR didn't like the facts and reality.. :D
Oh well, as long as 2024 CW likes her, I guess we're in good shape.. :D
No, she still sucks.
Yea, you can try and back pedal all you want... But the change in tune is obvious...
BBBBWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Yer busted dood..
And.. apparently... STILL not too bored.. :D
I see you moved your lack of reading skills to this thread. You also forgot to add the very next comment after the one you quoted.
Though I am impressed you finally actually backed something up. See it's not that hard.
And yer STILL posting..
So all your fake YAWNING was just you lying again..
Got it.. :D
And, since we're all being PRO President ELECT Trump here.. :D
Trump's approval ratings jump in post-election poll, while Biden's figures sink to 4-year low
Trump's favorability jumped 6 points in an Emerson College poll, while Biden struggled with low job approval ratings
President-elect Trump is enjoying a bump in favorability since winning a second White House term earlier this month, while figures for outgoing President Biden sank to a four-year-low, according to a new poll.
An Emerson College poll found both men trending in opposite directions, with Trump's favorability jumping six points to 54% after the Nov. 5 election. Biden, on the other hand, has a 36% job approval rating.
President ELECT Trump is the bee's knees...
And Basement Biden is even a BIGGER turd then he was before... :D
How awesome is that!?? :D
President ELECT Trump's representative's words to Democrats..
"Don't test us"
Democrats should heed the warning...
If they don't, it will not end well for Democrats..
See, we don't need to prove Trump is Hitler/fascist/authoritarian. You are doing it for us!
i have another positive to add. Donald truly understands and responds well to the middle east, because the leaders there largely function the same way he does.
Michale
1
Well, that's strange.. Because just several days ago, Bashi was slamming and attacking President ELECT Trump for this VERY cabinet pick...
If that is what qualifies as "slamming and attacking President ELECT Trump," then your problem definitely and demonstrably lies in your inveterate inability to understand simple written words. If you had any ability whatsoever to connect dots, you'd have easily realized that this is Bashi's district wherein Chavez-DeRemer is his soon to be former congresswoman having been recently defeated and conceding the election to his future congressperson merely days prior. Wondering why Trump chose a one-term losing candidate from his district to become Secretary of Labor doesn't constitute either a "slam" or an "attack" unless you are an idiot running with a hammer and seeing nails where none exist.
So Anyone wanna lay bets Bashi changes his tune?? :D Or else decides to look like the moron he is for opposing her selection.. :D
It would take a moron of unusual ignorance to take bets on something that never happened, unless of course your head is jammed firmly up your own ass (still running with a hammer) and since Bashi never said he opposed her selection.
Place yer bets!!! :D
^^^ REPOST a.k.a OUR DE FACTO EDIT FUNCTION ^^^
Michale
1
Well, that's strange.. Because just several days ago, Bashi was slamming and attacking President ELECT Trump for this VERY cabinet pick...
If that is what qualifies as "slamming and attacking President ELECT Trump," then your problem definitely and demonstrably lies in your inveterate inability to understand simple written words. If you had any ability whatsoever to connect dots, you'd have easily realized that this is Bashi's district wherein Chavez-DeRemer is his soon to be former congresswoman having been recently defeated and conceding the election to his future congressperson merely days prior. Wondering why Trump chose a one-term losing candidate from his district to become Secretary of Labor doesn't constitute either a "slam" or an "attack" unless you are an idiot running with a hammer and seeing nails where none exist.
So Anyone wanna lay bets Bashi changes his tune?? :D Or else decides to look like the moron he is for opposing her selection.. :D
It would take a moron of unusual ignorance to take bets on something that never happened, unless of course your head is jammed firmly up your own ass (still running with a hammer) and since Bashi never said he opposed her selection.
Place yer bets!!! :D
BashiBazouk
4
No, she still sucks.
So you're now saying you oppose her. Okay, but would you like to perform some "slamming and attacking President ELECT Trump" since you actually haven't done that... yet?
And Basement Biden is even a BIGGER turd then he was before... :D
Since Trump's approval rating on his way out was worse than Biden's (to date), you have de facto admitted that Trump is the bigliest turd.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx
Congratulations on your breakthrough. It was my understand that this was the column wherein we were supposed to praise Trump and not shine a ginormous spotlight on the deepest depths of his unpopularity.
JL,
i have another positive to add. Donald truly understands and responds well to the middle east, because the leaders there largely function the same way he does.
Good point. Yep.. President ELECT Trump has been awesome in the Middle East..
Hezbollah and Hamas would have **NEVER** started this shit under President Trump as Commander In Chief...
I think it was JMCT in the previous commentary (or maybe the one before that) that was whining and crying about the poor Palestinians..
But the funny thing is, THIS is ALL the fault of the Palestinians..
Due to the Pals support of terrorism and actually VOTING for a terrorist regime, they deserve NO SYMPATHY for what happens to them..
Israel has a blank cheque in dealing with the Palestinians up to, but not including, terrorism itself..
Israel has ALWAYS had the moral, ethical and legal high ground.. ALWAYS...
And, if the Palis continue to support, advocate and condone terrorism, Israel will ALWAYS have the moral, ethical and legal high ground..
ALWAYS..
And don't pull that PALIS ARE INNOCENT CIVILIANS crap... Hamas doesn't distinguish between Palestinian combatants and non combatants..
For HAMAS, EVERY Palestinian is a combatant...
Since EVERY Palestinian is a combatant, Israel has the right to attack ANY Palestinian...
But it's great JL that you recognize President ELECT Trump's skill and expertise in handling the Middle East..
That alone is reason enough to vote for him.. :D
if wolf woman can wear clothes, pay taxes, and refrain from biting strangers, she ain't mentally ill. but as i said, that's completely irrelevant to the existence of people with male sexual characteristics and female brains, or the reverse, or both, or neither. what ain't real is the world you think you live in, where everyone is either one or the other and nothing else.
Fine.. Give me the facts whereas a woman believes she is a wolf and it NOT being a case of mental illness..
Democrat "science" sources don't count..
Go ahead.. Show me your facts that a woman who actually believes she is a wolf and demands others TREAT her as a wolf...
Show me the FACTS that *PROVE* she is not mentally ill..
I'll wait..
And by "wait" I mean, I am going to bed and will check in the morning.. :D
Michale,
So a person who is born with both male and female genitalia, which gender are you gonna tell them that they must be? Are they a male who was born with an unwanted vagina or are they a female who was born with unwelcome nads?
What about a female born with a birth defect to their sex organ? She was born with defective vagina… it looks and functions just like a penis for a male. How do you prove that her being born with a penis was simply not a birth defect and she should not have been born with a vagina as she claims?
WEEKEND UPDATE... Okay, Wednesday Update
Remember those outstanding seats in the House CW blogged about recently?
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2024/11/19/republicans-fail-to-make-major-gains-in-the-house/
If all the outstanding districts do wind up as they stand now then Republicans will hold 221 seats in the incoming House while Democrats will hold 214.
Adam Gray (D)
104,503
John Duarte (R) Incumbent
104,321
As it turns out now, as California continues to count the votes, the Democrat in CA-13 has currently taken the lead in one of the last remaining three (3) outstanding districts. If (operative word there) that holds along with the others that haven't changed since the article, then Democrats will flip another seat and will hold 215 while Republicans will hold 220.
But it's great JL that you recognize President ELECT Trump's skill and expertise in handling the Middle East..
skill, yes. expertise, no. just because you're able to do something well (skill) doesn't necessarily mean you know anything about it (expertise). that's why great players don't always make great coaches, and vice-versa.
Fine.. Give me the facts whereas a woman believes she is a wolf and it NOT being a case of mental illness..
i'm sure such a thing exists, but i have no intention of wasting my time on a tangent that's not even related to the point you were trying to make. it's your ridiculous scenario, you figure it out.
Russ,
So a person who is born with both male and female genitalia, which gender are you gonna tell them that they must be
We're not talking about those with LEGITIMATE MEDICAL issues. THOSE kind of people are like .001% of the population..
We're talking about about the Dylan Mulvaneys and the moron women who thinks she is a wolf..
We're talking about the man who says "I want to be a woman because I believe I am a woman and you HAVE to treat me like a woman because you MUST affirm my delusion.. You HAVE to play along with my delusion.."
THOSE are the people that JL and I are discussing.
I already granted there are people with LEGITIMATE PHYSICAL MEDICAL issues that puts their gender in question.. But those aren't the cases we are discussing..
I asked JL, but he must have missed it..
Did you ever watch SAVING HOPE with Michale (Dr Daniel Jackson from SG-1) Shanks???
JL,
}}}Fine.. Give me the facts whereas a woman believes she is a wolf and it NOT being a case of mental illness..{{{
i'm sure such a thing exists,
Thank you for conceding what I already knew...
but i have no intention of wasting my time on a tangent that's not even related to the point you were trying to make. it's your ridiculous scenario, you figure it out.
Not only is it RELATED to what we are talking about it is EXACTLY what we are talking about.
Because the topic we are discussing about is MENTAL ILLNESS by people who claim to be trans when all they are is mentally ill..
A female human who thinks she is a wolf is mentally ill.. You tried to argue that point and claim "not necessarily".. I asked you to provide scientific FACTS to support your claim that a female human can claim to be a wolf and NOT be mentally ill and you punted..
So.. NOW we are in complete agreement that a female human who claims to be a wolf is mentally ill..
Is it such a far stretch to extrapolate that to the idea that a female human who CLAIMS to be a man and has NO underlying medical or physiological conditions that would account for this belief, that it's ONLY in her mind that she just "feels" like she is a man... Is it so hard to extrapolate that she ALSO is mentally ill??
Remember. We're not talking about the people who have real actual medical conditions..
We're talking about the Dylan Mulvaneys. We're talking about the luser males who can't compete in male sports so they claim they are women so they can beat women in sports.. We're talking about luser perverts who want to watch naked college girls so he claims he is a woman to join up with a sorority..
THOSE are the lusers we are discussing here..
skill, yes. expertise, no. just because you're able to do something well (skill) doesn't necessarily mean you know anything about it (expertise). that's why great players don't always make great coaches, and vice-versa.
President Trump had/has the skills to bring peace to large portions of the Middle East and the expertise to know what he doesn't know and rely on the experts who DO know..
JL,
}}}Fine.. Give me the facts whereas a woman believes she is a wolf and it NOT being a case of mental illness..{{{
i'm sure such a thing exists,
Thank you for conceding what I already knew...
My apologies.. I misread what you wrote..
So, you believe that a woman who thinks she is a wolf, that there is a possibility that she is NOT mentally ill??
That's Democrat ideology talking, not logic or rational thought..
Until such time as you can find REAL scientific FACT (not Democrat "science") I will consider the question settled..
A woman who thinks she is a wolf is mentally ill.. Period... END TRANS...
is the sex type in which your brain develops not medically legitimate?
Kick,
Since Trump's approval rating on his way out was worse than Biden's (to date), you have de facto admitted that Trump is the bigliest turd.
If you had a RELEVANT poll that wasn't almost 5 years old, you would have a point.
But you don't so you don't.. :D
@m
i don't know any better way of explaining this, but you really really don't understand what mental illness is. people believe all sorts of ridiculous things that most people would consider obviously false, without being mentally ill. and because you haven't provided context to explain in what way your proposed Wolf woman believes herself to be a wolf, nor what reported wolf behaviors she engages in, the entire exercise is pointless.
There are feral children raised by animals (in some cases wolves) that think they are part of the group, walk on hands and feet, vocalize like the animals that have taken them in. Not mental illness but socialization/conditioning. But the whole trans thing is just a red herring to avoid taking about Trump's disastrous day one policies. Kamala did not campaign on it and basically said she would follow the law. Trump and his supporting PAC's on the other hand...
is the sex type in which your brain develops not medically legitimate?
Elaborate...
Bashi,
There are feral children raised by animals (in some cases wolves) that think they are part of the group, walk on hands and feet, vocalize like the animals that have taken them in. Not mental illness but socialization/conditioning.
And it's STILL a mental illness brought about by the socialization/conditioning..
A human CANNOT be a wolf.. It's a scientific IMPOSSIBILITY..
A human who thinks they are a wolf is mentally ill..
WHATEVER brought about the mental illness is not relevant..
It's STILL a mental illness..
And the WORST thing one can do is AFFIRM the delusion brought about by the mental illness..
But the whole trans thing is just a red herring to avoid taking about Trump's disastrous day one policies. Kamala did not campaign on it and basically said she would follow the law. Trump and his supporting PAC's on the other hand...
"Elections have consequences."
-Barack Hussein Odumbo
You lost. Deal with it..
Bashi,
But if you DO want to talk about the election...
Carville says young 'snot-nosed' progressive staffers hurt Harris with 'hissy fit' over Rogan
"The vice president was thinking about going on Joe Rogan’s show and a lot of the younger, progressive staffers pitched a hissy fit. Supposedly the campaign said that wasn’t a determining factor, but they did.
When you put a campaign together and you hire young people to do work, let me tell you exactly what you tell these people. What I would tell them: ‘Not only am I not interested in your fucking opinion, I’m not even gonna call you by your name. You’re 23 years old, I don’t really give a shit what you think.’....
And let me tell you another huge error, a huge fucking error that was made is when people said, ‘Campaigns need to reflect progressive values.’ No, they don’t. No, they don’t. Campaigns are authoritarian by their nature.
If I were running a 2028 campaign and I had some little snot-nosed 23-year-old saying, ‘I’m going to resign if you do this,’ not only would I fire that motherfucker on the spot, I would find out who hired them and fire that person on the spot! I’m really not interested in your uninformed, stupid, jackass opinion as to whether to go on Joe Rogan or not.
You’re fucking wrong! Identity Politics was used! See in politics — in comedy, if you tell a bad joke, who gives a shit? You just tell a better joke and you throw the bad joke away. In politics, if you have a bad policy, particularly one as bad and stupid as WOKE was, you may throw it away, but the other side gets to play. Understand that. This is a two-sided thing.
I guess the progressives now have their dream. We're more of a coastal party, and we've gotten rid of all these moderates, and maybe you can all sit around some coffee house in Lower Manhattan and celebrate how fucking smart you all are.
I'll say this to Democrats. Preachy females and the feminine woke messaging drove away male voters. After Trump's victory Democrats have the stench of wokeness clinging to them."
-Democrat Strategist James Carville
THAT is why your Democrats lost..
Because they ALWAYS carry the stench of WOKE and the American people are sick of it.
NOW you have major companies tossing their DEI bullshit into the garbage can where it belongs and are now BRAGGING how Anti-Woke they are!!
The entire Democrat Party is in the garbage can for at least the rest of MY life...
It's a great day to be an American!! :D
No, your ignorance in science lost it for you long ago. As as pointed out by many your straw man does not match the subject of your argument.
The election is over, you are just avoiding Trump's disastrous policies.
Now regale us with why tariffs are not going to crash the economy. 70% of our imported oil comes from Canada. 60% of our fresh fruit and 40% of our fresh vegetables come from Mexico. How is it even legal under the constitution? There is no national emergency by any statistic outside of Trump's addled brain...
JL,
i don't know any better way of explaining this, but you really really don't understand what mental illness is. people believe all sorts of ridiculous things that most people would consider obviously false, without being mentally ill.
We're not talking about some kids playing cowboys and indians.. We're not talking about people who believe that aliens exists or that god exists or anything like that..
We're talking about ADULTS who are so deluded into thinking they are something they are not..
We're talking the Dylan Mulvaneys, we're talking the luser guys who cosplay as women because they can't handle men's sports..
We're talking about the men perverts who cosplay as women so they can live in a sorority house..
THOSE are the people we are talking about and THOSE people are mentally ill..
No ifs, ands or buts about it.. They are mentally ill..
and because you haven't provided context to explain in what way your proposed Wolf woman believes herself to be a wolf,
The fact that you think context is required is exactly the point..
NO CONTEXT is required to say that a woman who thinks she is a wolf, who demand that others treat her as a wolf is mentally ill... Period.. End Trans...
What we are discussing is the very fabric of reality..
If we can't agree on the reality that a human female CAN'T be a wolf, in essence the very FABRIC of fact and reality....
How can we ever agree on ANYTHING???
I want to hear you say it..
A human CANNOT be a wolf... Period.. End Trans...
Go on... I KNOW you can do it...
At a 10% tariff, it's been estimated that will come to a $1500 tax to every household. At 25% that is some tax increase. You really think people are going to vote Republican when they are considerably worse off in 21 months?
Bashi,
No, your ignorance in science lost it for you long ago. As as pointed out by many your straw man does not match the subject of your argument.
I know that you have to tell yourself that to make it thru your day.. I understand..
The election is over, you are just avoiding Trump's disastrous policies.
He isn't even POTUS yet... He doesn't HAVE any "disastrous" policies at all!!
You are simply projecting your PTDS and your Trump/America hate..
Why not wait until he actually DOES something before you bitch and whine and cry and stamp your feet about it??
Hmmmm???
Now regale us with why tariffs are not going to crash the economy. 70% of our imported oil comes from Canada. 60% of our fresh fruit and 40% of our fresh vegetables come from Mexico. How is it even legal under the constitution? There is no national emergency by any statistic outside of Trump's addled brain...
NONE of that has happened yet..
It's simply a manifestation in your head due to your PTDS and your Trump/America hate..
Yes... Wallow in your hate... Good.. Good...
:eyeroll:
At a 10% tariff, it's been estimated that will come to a $1500 tax to every household. At 25% that is some tax increase.
NONE of which has even HAPPENED yet..
You really think people are going to vote Republican when they are considerably worse off in 21 months?
Considering you have just got your asses MAJORLY whipped by President Trump and the Republicans..
Why in the cosmos do you feel you have even a SHRED of credibility???
Can you defend using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 for Trump's deportation plans?
He isn't even POTUS yet... He doesn't HAVE any "disastrous" policies at all!!
Bullshit. He has been announcing them constantly. And "day one" policies have to be fleshed out otherwise they are not day one...
Considering you have just got your asses MAJORLY whipped by President Trump and the Republicans..
Did they? Democrats in the house have gained a seat and possibly two. Lost a few senate seats and Trump got less than 2% more votes. If that is "MAJORLY whipped"...I know that you have to tell yourself that to make it thru your day.. I understand..
Can you defend using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 for Trump's deportation plans?
It hasn't happened yet..
So no defense necessary...
Bullshit. He has been announcing them constantly. And "day one" policies have to be fleshed out otherwise they are not day one...
And yet, ya'all have been harping on how President ELLECT Trump ***NEVER*** follows thru on ANY of his promises..
NOW... Because it suits your Trump/America hate agenda... NOW You are claiming President ELECT Trump is going to do EVERYTHING he says he is going to do..
This is EXACTLY why it's IMPOSSIBLE to think you have ANY shred of credibility...
You say what your TRUMP/AMERICA hate tells you to say at one moment, even if it is diametrically opposite of what your Trump/America hate told you to say the previous moment..
You have NO CREDIBILITY, Bashi..
You are simply a cauldron of hate and bigotry with no real sense of reality..
You are ruled by your Trump/America hate and say whatever it tells you to say...
Sad
How about Musk publicizing the names of government employees he wants to cut. Dude is not even in government yet. Do you support this intimidation tactic? Can you defend his plans to cut the federal government? Twitter has failed quite often in unusual circumstances like a live town hall the day before the election that Musk just walked away from. Is that your model for the federal government? Fail when needed?
You know it's just pathetic that all you can do is toss ad hominems instead of defending Trump's incoming policies.
Speaking of policies, is Trump really planning a soft invasion of Mexico? What if Mexico says no? Is he going to break international law?
There is nothing to defend..
YOU always claim President ELECT Trump "never follows thru"..
So YOU have nothing to complain about because NOTHING has happened yet...
How about Musk publicizing the names of government employees he wants to cut.
It's called "notice" you dumbshit..
And Musk is a helluva guy for giving it to those who are about to be fired...
You didn't mind when Democrats summarily fired everyone on the campaign without NOTICE nor severance..
Why is that??
Once again..
NOTHING but a hypocritical manifestation of your PTDS... Your Trump/America hate..
Nothing else...
YOU always claim President ELECT Trump "never follows thru"..
Did I? Or was it the nebulous "left" said it somewhere and we are assigned the claim? Lets face it, the incoming administration is talking about it so I'm perfectly justified in talking about it. If Kamala had won you would be talking about her incoming policies. Why would you vote for someone you can't defend their policies?
@m
the reason i refuse to engage with your analogy is that it's ridiculous. you're taking multiple lay terms and arbitrarily assigning them scientific meaning, which they just don't have. at some point you need to accept that you're not saying what you think you're saying. thus:
1. can a human female exist who is also a member of the species canis lupus? not possible.
however:
2. can a clinically sane woman believe herself to be a "wolf?" yes, absolutely.
3. do these things have anything whatsoever to do with humans whose brains are transgender? no, not a damn thing.
JL,
Yes it's ridiculous..
But it HAS happened..
The fact you refuse to engage on it is because there is NO rational or logical argument you can make...
As for #2, you can't provide ANY facts to support your assertion. You provide facts, I'll consider your claim. But until then, the facts stand. Any human who claims to be an animal and truly believes that they are that animal is mentally ill. Period.
Any psychiatrist or psychologist who is NOT enslaved by ideology will tell you the same.
As to #3. Brains can't be a gender. Any more than a humans brain can be a wolf's brain..
Unless you want to make the argument that a woman's arm can be a male arm...
Now look who is making ridiculous arguments... :eyeroll:
@m[29],
neurologists in recent years have used MRI technology to learn a lot about how human brains work, and have found brains to have just as wide an array of sex based characteristics as other parts of the body. people of the two most common sexual karyotypes, XX and XY, tend to have very different brains, but the trend is not absolute. people who identify as transgender (about 1 out of every 200 people globally) have a strong tendency toward brains that lie closer to female characteristics than their male cisgender peers, though not so close to cisgender females either.
tldr: transgender people have different brains just like hermaphrodite people have different junk.
and vice versa for transgender females.
Re: Trans people have different brains.
Yea.. Thats the claim. Let me know when you have relevant and REAL science (not the Democrat faux science) to support the claim...
I'll be around. :)
Hay... I just got the new Galaxy Fold 6 and I seem to have lost my Text To Speech capability.
Anyone know why??
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-020-0666-3
"Specific transgender neural signatures were observed, suggesting a unique brain phenotype"
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0018506X24001260
No one actually doubts that some people are intersex. No one who can formulate the concept above an elementary-school level actually doubts that the usual variations exist, including XY but no SRY locus (anatomically female, and chromosomally male), XY with complete androgen insensitivity (also anatomically female and chromosomally male), and so on, through less dramatic variations all the way to (for example) a woman who's unambiguously cis but whose vocal timbre is unambiguously tenor rather than contralto. No one who actually thinks about it doubts that people with such variations are people, and should be treated with basic human decency.
But it's not about them. It's about degree to which people with basically typical anatomy, endocrinology, karyotype, and so on can coerce other people who also have basically typical combinations of biological sex characteristics into overly-narrow boxes of gender identity that just aren't authentic for them. If you can enforce inauthenticity, you have a lot of psychological leverage. That's what anti-trans people actually want.
Michale
26
If you had a RELEVANT poll that wasn't almost 5 years old, you would have a point.
Gallup is a relevant poll, but more important than that: Wow! You really suck at simple math. Even if your math wasn't totally and demonstrably pathetic, it doesn't take a rocket science to understand the irrefutable fact that a presidential term isn't "5 years," so Trump's prior presidential ratings couldn't be "almost 5 years old." Duh!
But you don't so you don't.. :D
Actually, you suck at facts, and I'll definitely remind you that a poll not yet even 4 years old isn't relevant the next time you contract and compare one president's ratings to another. Obviously, everyone here (with the possible exception of yourself) already knows you've posted similar information comparing presidents, but if you'd like to herein proclaim your ignorance by discounting all those past posts, knock yourself out.
It seems you cannot stop kicking your own ass repeatedly... even retroactively and into the future, you're rendering yourself pointless. :)
@dan,
what do you mean by psychological leverage?
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2417690-ai-can-tell-a-persons-sex-from-brain-scans-with-90-per-cent-accuracy/
similar vein of research, doesn't bear directly on transgender, but very interesting.
For the record, y’all, a Google search reveals that there is an estimated 300,000 trans kids in America or 1.7-ish percent. And overall all there are an estimated 3.2 million LGBTQ+** youth which is 7 to 9% of the population.
**You know, sometimes I wonder if I’m getting this right because it has changed somewhat from the original LGBT. So I thought why not call this group queer and call all the rest simply vanilla?
I’d appreciate y’all’s feedback on this, if you please.