• Velypso@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Did you forget the completely democratic redistricting of California?

        They arent just memeing. Lemmy really has the memory of a gold fish.

        Another good example of the bullshit purity tests.

        • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 days ago

          I know right. Already forgot his crusade on the homeless and immediately courting right wing personalities like Charlie Kirk and attacking trans people.

          How dare people not remember it

    • Velypso@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Thats because when someone left of trump stands up, purity tests rain from the sky.

      Gavin Newsom is a great example.

      Edit: people are big mad to prove my point. Wowzers, a bit of self awareness from these folks is all i ask.

      Jesus christ.

      • Sunshine (she/her)@piefed.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Riiight the one backstabbed trans people for no reason.

        Newsom’s pivot came early, and it wasn’t just rhetorical. Reporting this year revealed that his office quietly worked behind the scenes to block or bury transgender protection bills in California. One measure, requiring judges in custody disputes to consider whether parents affirmed their LGBTQ+ children, was vetoed outright. Lawmakers say others were discouraged from moving forward under pressure from the governor’s office. This caution came precisely as red states were escalating their crackdowns, enacting increasingly hostile laws. California could have served as a bulwark—a safe ground—but instead, Newsom hit the brakes.

        The rhetoric quickly followed. Newsom launched his podcast and began courting right-wing personalities. In one appearance with Charlie Kirk—the far-right activist whose network has poured tens of millions into anti-trans campaigns—Newsom declared he was “completely aligned” with Kirk on some transgender issues. He blamed a 2014 California law protecting transgender equality for allowing trans teens to compete while discussing a transgender runner at San Jose State University. Newsom also joined Kirk in targeting transgender incarcerated people and agreed that society must be “more sensitized” to what Kirk called the “butchery” of transgender youth—right-wing shorthand for gender-affirming care.

        And as we’ve seen before, targeting transgender people never stays confined to sports. Sports are simply the entry point—a wedge to justify broader anti-trans policy, just as they have been since the beginning of the modern debate over transgender rights. Newsom then appeared on the Shawn Ryan Show, another far-right podcast, where he expanded his rhetoric. He downplayed transgender people’s pronouns, saying, “I’m trying to understand as much as anyone else the whole ‘pronoun’ thing.” On medical care, he leaned on the Cass Review—a discredited report on transgender healthcare produced in the U.K. by advisors who also worked with Ron DeSantis to ban care in Florida. And in one of the most alarming moments, he speculated that 25 might be too early for someone to transition—a talking point straight out of the far-right’s playbook, where bans on transition until 25 are openly floated. In some places, they’re already close: Puerto Rico has banned transgender care up to age 21.

        Newsom is following a pipeline transgender people have seen time and again. Transphobia rarely stays confined to one small corner; it’s almost never just a one-off statement. Those who embrace it even slightly almost always end up sliding further into opposition to nearly every facet of transgender existence. We’ve watched this radicalization play out with comedians, children’s book authors, tech billionaires, and more. It’s a pattern so well known that even anti-trans activists acknowledge it. Terry Schilling of the Republican American Principles Project once admitted as much: “The women’s sports issue was really the beginning point in helping expose all this because what it did was, it got opponents of the LGBT movement comfortable with talking about transgender issues.”

        Some may argue, as they often do when transgender people raise concerns about Gavin Newsom, that the alternative would be worse. And in many respects, Trump or whatever Trump-like candidate emerges in 2028 would be worse than Newsom on a host of issues. But even here, for transgender people, the calculation is not so straightforward. Right now, the community has one thing going for it: one major political party still passes protective legislation and has not joined the litany of anti-trans policies escalating in red states. If that fragile dichotomy collapses—if Democrats too decide that transgender people can be sacrificed for political gain—the result will not be a lesser evil. It will be a political consensus that our rights are gone, and that outcome could be even worse.

        One only has to look to the United Kingdom to see what happens when both major parties decide transgender people are expendable. For years, right-leaning parties targeted trans people relentlessly, while Labour offered tepid, lukewarm support. In the lead-up to recent elections, that support collapsed. Multiple Labour leaders determined that trans people were safe to sacrifice, culminating in the party leader’s now-infamous declaration that he does not believe transgender women are women. Today, the country is pursuing a nationwide bathroom ban, and youth care has been practically outlawed. In a political environment where both left and right agree that your existence is negotiable, there is no one left to fight for you. It is untenable—and if such sentiment takes root inside the Democratic Party, it could take generations for transgender Americans to claw back even the most basic of rights.

        https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/why-transgender-people-are-not-feeling

        • drhodl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          One can be more than a single issue voter. USA is about to have a civil war, but you want LGBTQ rights? I guess you didn’t vote for Kamala because she wasn’t fighting for the Gazans? Good job, you let your country become a dictatorship because you only held ONE party to account…

              • possumparty@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                Clearly, every morning you have to look in the mirror to startling mediocrity and a shitty retail chain nametag, knowing that you’ll never accomplish anything beyond being an enlightened centrist who can’t decolonize their mind. How’s that male loneliness epidemic treating you?

                • drhodl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I’m comfortably retired for 3 years, drinking a nice cup of coffee right now, while I listen to my neighborhood wake up and go to work, and I read the moans of the morons like you who could have saved the country, but chose to jump right in BEFORE flushing. You are a Shit person, thinking in one straight line and with no comprehension of nuance, and spouting more shit. You gave up your country without a whimper. Enjoy the chaos you promoted, loser.

      • Alaik@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’ll vote for him if he’s the candidate, but hell he’s worse than Kamala.

        Give me a Bernie or AOC type.

              • Postimo@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                6 days ago

                It is so depressing to have these conversations and learn just how many people that are otherwise deeply political think their duty ends at the ballot box. Yes, I voted in the last election, I will vote in the next, and I vote down ballet, now what? Because voting for the subtler fascists is not going to solve problems. It’s not going to repair the conditions that gave rise to right-wing populism, so what are you doing until then to deal with the political realities? Or are you going to do your bare minimum and vote in a couple years and hope that democrats have learned enough to actually fight harder this time around?

                • Velypso@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  Way to assume things.

                  I attend protests and canvas for my local left-leaning politicians.

                  I do what i can, when i can.

                  Edit: But im also not ignorant enough to assume my actions will be enough.

                  Thats why i will vote for the viable candidate left of trump when i am able to.

      • smayonak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 days ago

        A lot of liberals find Newsom’s slightly left of Trump politics to be a refreshing alternative to pure fascism. This is a direct consequence of two policy choices our leaders have made:

        The two biggest barriers to democracy are our defective voting systems and the propaganda networks which enabled fascism in the first place. The entire reason the dems have to court right wingers is because the electoral system suppresses the votes of anyone in poorer urban areas. And the fact that rural voters prefer fascism is because of the propaganda networks being protected by the legal system.

        • Velypso@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          I will definitely not disagree with you there. FPTP sucks big ol’ donkey balls.

          Land shouldn’t vote.

      • anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        If redistricting california is the kind of ‘fighting back’ that was required, then Trump wouldn’t be a fascist.

      • Velypso@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Well thats not true.

        People like Bernie, AOC, Newsom, and even Walz are fighting.

        Granted, they are not all in the same political spectrum, but they are trying in their own ways.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    6 days ago

    Relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism

    Stochastic terrorism is a form of political violence instigated by hostile public rhetoric directed at a group or an individual. Unlike incitement to terrorism, stochastic terrorism is accomplished with indirect, vague or coded language, which grants the instigator plausible deniability for any associated violence.[1] A key element of stochastic terrorism is the use of media for propagation, where the person carrying out the violence may not have direct connection to any other users of violent rhetoric.[2][3][4]

  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    6 days ago

    Praying for the day another admin has the power to do the same to him and does. Fucking thin skinned dickhead

    • N0t_5ure@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      6 days ago

      Not likely. He’s not going to leave office until he passes, and he’s ~80 with poor health and fitness.

      • galoisghost@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        6 days ago

        That’s the only thing that will save the US. Even then, I think there will need to be another American revolution of some sort what that means in the modern world I don’t know.

        • Nougat@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          35
          ·
          6 days ago

          If you think Little t dying is going to make everyone sane again, you’re gonna have a bad time.

          • N0t_5ure@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            6 days ago

            Yes, unfortunately Trump is just a more recent symptom of a deeper systemic problem. When Trump is gone, there will be another authoritarian, potentially a more competent one, that will slide into his spot.

            • Optional@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              6 days ago

              More competent at governance, surely, but able to cattle-drive the fuckwits en masse? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

            • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 days ago

              I honestly would prefer Trump to helm the Confederate’s side of a 2nd American Civil War. He is the avatar of stupidity, infighting, and unchained greed: these are great for making a society fall apart, and I would like conservative society to crumble into dust.

          • galoisghost@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            6 days ago

            Not going to make anyone sane but it will be the beginning of the end of the cult. Which I also think is not enough, hence the revolution comment

            • Nougat@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 days ago

              I look at it differently. That cult has been growing for decades, and has been choosing more and more unhinged people to deify year by year.

              • Optional@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 days ago

                Growing in online (and in ‘headspace’) presence. In the actual meatspace world it’s mostly 2016 with stupid flags. Current fascist regime notwithstanding.

                • Nougat@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  The Republicans trotted out “family values” in the late 80s as a thinly veiled denigration of anyone not in a “traditional” (Narrator: It’s not.) nuclear family.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 days ago

          It means an independent (read not-ad-supported) national news media that can ably use the words “lie”, “fascist”, and “insurrection”.

          Now you see why that won’t happen.

    • BigFig@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Praying for the day another admin has the power to do the same to him order an assassination on him as an “executive action” and does. Fucking thin skinned dickhead

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Praying for the day another admin has the power to do the same to him and does.

      That wouldn’t be civil. We’re going to form an independent commission to study the possible effects of changing the rules on how the Secret Service operates. Then we’re going to issue all politicians a stipend to hire their own private security.

      Then Dems are going to lose an election cycle after running Gavin Newsom and Charlie Kirk on the same ticket… Then we’ll get an earful about how the LGBTQ caucus and the black voter base are dragging the party down, we need to appeal to more rich white old people.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        I find your lack of faith disturbing. If highly warranted. And pretty accurate.

        It’s almost like everyone here isn’t communicating with their Democratic representatives. And expecting the party stuck in the 90’s to magically figure it out. And pretending the workers are going to seize the means of production any day now.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 days ago

          It’s almost like everyone here isn’t communicating with their Democratic representatives.

          I’ve had face-to-face conversations with my House Reps on a number of occasions. Thanks to how gerrymandered my neighborhood gets, it’s been alternately Dan Crenshaw and Liz Fletcher by turns. Even got to chat briefly with Beto O’Rourke on a couple of occasions.

          I used to get very enthusiastic at the opportunity to be at a rally and get a handshake or sit at a GOTV kick-off meeting and get greeted by the candidate, even asked a few questions. Dan straight up went into “debate mode” with me, then sent his wife out as I was leaving to say how much he appreciated the chat.

          But at the end of the day, what I always only ever get from these people is “Yeah I really hear you and I agree with what you’re saying. It’s really important and I value that.” And then a mailer asking for money. And then… they do what their mega-donors tell them. My words are wind, if I’m not showing up with a five-figure check. Even then, the influence I see people buying is marginal - enough to get a special favor or access to a higher level official, but never anything that changes public policy.

          I assure you that people are communicating with their representatives. People are marching in front of offices. People are bombarding their reps with phone calls - good and bad. People are answering polls. People are showing up to rallies. People are heckling and cheering in turns. But any individual is always read as “marginal”. The mythology of “losing one activist and picking up two of the silent majority” is repeated day in and day out in campaign offices all over the country.

          The only way to be heard is to speak as a really big crowd. Like, big enough to swing an election. And as soon as you’re that big… what you become isn’t necessarily even “influential”. More often, you just become the scapegoat for why this or that candidate lost.

          • Optional@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Well you make some very good points. I guess we have to monitor the midterm races very closely. If one of you run in each state we only need 50 people . . . .

          • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            The only way to be heard is to speak as a really big crowd. Like, big enough to swing an election.

            I’d contend that you then need to do something with that crowd. Otherwise, as you said, you just become a scapegoat.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 days ago

              you then need to do something with that crowd

              That’s ideal. So much of our time, labor, and infrastructure is privatized that it can be difficult to find an opportunity to mobilize large numbers of people to useful purpose.

              But the truly great organizers figure out how to snowball a small activist base into a lively community wide movement.

    • alekwithak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s like comparing cyanide to a can of Pepsi. Yeah maybe Pepsi isn’t great for you, it’s not what the body needs but the other one is literal fucking poison.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 days ago

        That’s the thing: Both are literal fucking poison, only one will kill you fast while the other will kill you slowly. Giving the former latter to someone suffering from the former isn’t just “not great for you;” it’s going to hasten the host’s demise.

        • alekwithak@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 days ago

          No they are not both literal fucking poison. One is mostly water and the other one is actual poison. You CHUDs going around spreading that Harris is equally as bad as Trump are half the reason we’re in this mess that we absolutely would not be in even with the worst of the Dems in charge. If you want to spread Russian propaganda to tell it to a mirror, at least that way you’re only hurting yourself. Or if you really believe the shit you’re saying then go drink both and report back on your findings!

          • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            6 days ago

            Or if you really believe the shit you’re saying then go drink both and report back on your findings!

            Why should I? America already has and we’re seeing the results now. Or do you seriously think the onset of fascism had nothing to do with decades of worsening quality of life that neoliberals did nothing or barely nothing to address while blocking all serious progress for as long as possible?

            • alekwithak@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              Right, why should you back up the point you already made when you can double down and make another. Do you have a personalized copy of Foundations of Geopolitics or do you work for The Heritage Foundation?

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    In this the normal schedule for it to be revoked? I thought it was 6 months after the election.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      Biden extended her protection by a year via an EO, and now Trump is revoking it so she’s going back to the normal six-month period.