It’s because you live in a society.
If you don’t want that then go full on Grizzly Adams and live in some remote area.
Most US citizens live in big cities with all sorts of different people. And (mostly) we learn to get along. Which is great.
As a society, helping others helps you.
…why would I vote for a politician that would give such a bullshit response? I want to know if a politician aligns with my values: and it is crystal clear that this politician is not aligned with mine. This administration is actively working to take away LGBTQ rights. Standing up for those rights is not “taking focus off of the criminal and corrupt President they support.” Its entirely possible to do more than one thing at the same time.
I haven’t seen much.
For the purposes of this discussion, who gives a shit? This thread is about a former campaign strategist talking about an election campaign.
…so my point stands then.
Because you said something, and I responded directly to words that you said. If you didn’t want me to talk about activism then don’t bring up the word activism.
And i’ve been entirely on topic.
Lol, what point of yours “stands” ?
…
Your avatar is perfect. Your sig is perfect. I like the message. Good luck with this.
Sure, good luck with promoting that idea. People as a rule look out for themselves and fuck everyone else. It’s about time I finally get something.
So, you would not vote for Sanders if he said that? You would vote for Trump?
Banquet Bear, let me guess: You’re a diehard Warren supporter. I agree with Warren on probably 95% of things. But her messaging strategy, the one you’re advocating for here, has been a disaster for her campaign. It’s covering too much on things that aren’t resonating with the voters she needs to win. It’s not earning her any support, among the general population or even Dem voters. And her detailed views/plans on this overabundance of topics is allowing her opposition to create talking points against her.
But, yeah, let’s continue advocating for candidates to actively campaign on issues that aren’t going to the win the votes needed to win the Electoral College, just because it’s the Right Thing To Do.
…in the primaries? And if I lived in America? Nope.
I would never vote for Trump.
The Greatest Generation would like to have a talk with you.
You are espousing an Ayn Randian philosophy (objectivism). A bankrupt philosophy in my view.
I’m not espousing it. I’m saying that it is absolutely true. Almost everyone does it especially in the voting booth.
Just ask yourself this. Who do you care about more? Your family or my family?
Uh, ok. I didn’t notice Carville bring up transgender issues in the article. Happy brought it up as an example iirc, but he didn’t mention a candidate who’s doing that atm. So if for some reason you were arguing that no one has made that their big issue, your point stands.
But the thing is, most of the gains by the LGTBQ community have been brought through the courts, not political party campaign promises. In the USA, important judges are appointed by the political party in power, not the loudest activists.
I meant in the general when you only have two choices. Unless you personally are running you are going to have to put up with things about who you vote for that you disagree with. To you transgender rights is a very important issue. To most people it is not.
But the one that is closest to you knows that you are trapped. Whether it is Bernie, Pete, Biden, Klob, or Warren, they can pretty much ignore transgender issues and still get your vote. They know you aren’t voting for Trump. So they can cast you aside and focus on the issues that will win the middle.
The specific issue is not important. Carville’s overall point is do not run on issues that your base cares about but the public is neutral on. And by neutral, I don’t mean cite a poll. I mean something that will get them fired up.
And his further point is that issues really do not drive most people. If you look at almost every successful presidential candidate, he won because he best conveyed to people that “he cares about me.” That was true of Clinton, Bush, Obama, and yes Trump.
The fact that largely the same electorate voted for all four of those candidates should tell people that issues don’t matter.
…I don’t even live in America. I have my own battles to fight.
I’m advocating that candidates should be authentic, should tell the truth, should fight for what they believe in. So her messaging strategy is entirely on point. “Disaster” is subjective and the campaign isn’t over yet by a very wide margin.
Those “voters she needs to win” are probably going to vote the way they did last time anyway. The key, IMHO, is to get those that stayed home out to vote this time, and her messaging may resonate with them.
Of course its earning her support. Not as much support as her campaign would certainly like. But abandoning those plans **would **be a disaster for her campaign.
And as I stated earlier in the thread: this is not a normal election. Trump and co have looted, pillaged and effectively mangled the Federal Government. Its fucking chaos. You can’t tame chaos if you go into this without a plan. Whomever takes over from Trump (assuming Trump looses the next election) will have to It would be real fucking stupid to not have a plan for that beforehand.
And Warren isn’t responsible for what other people choose to do with her words. People have agency. **You **chose to use GOP talking points in this very thread and when you choose to do that you become part of the problem.
Are you guaranteeing that if we don’t “do the right thing to do” you will get the votes needed to win the electoral collage? That if Warren were asked about transgender rights and Warren were to respond with UltraVires’s “politician answer” then this will mean Trump is guaranteed to lose?
He lives in New Zealand, so it’s a little easier to “do the rght thing” when it doesn’t involve actually doing anything and will have zero effect on your life. Though to be fair, I’m sure he’s the same way with NZ politics.
I live in Canada, so I’m certainly more buffered from Trump than most Americans but still a buttload more connected than him but it’s not my country. That’s why I try not to get so emotionally involved even though I think it’s important.
…Trumps ban on transgender people in the military was done by tweet. The original ban was overturned in part due to activism. The courts are of course important. Which is why talking about these issues and keeping them from being swept under the carpet is (IMHO) important.
Projection is amazing
…then you should have said that.
No shit sherlock. Of course I would vote for that politician if it were a binary choice between them and Trump. It doesn’t matter who wins the nomination, people need to get out and vote for them because the alternative will be another giant step towards authoritarianism and a white supremacist regime.
But the primaries? A completely different story.
Transgender issues aren’t a matter of life or death for me. They are a matter of life or death for transgender people. So its important to me: but in a very abstract way. I don’t lose sight of the fact that this is important to other people in ways I really can’t imagine.
That doesn’t just apply to transgender issues. It applies to the entire spectrum. Its what this debate is about. People are advocating they cast niche issues aside to focus on issues that will win the middle. But if you are willing to throw transgender people under the bus then I have no doubt they would throw black people under the bus and any other marginalised people under the bus in the pursuit of “votes from the middle.”
Marginalised people are used to being “cast aside.” Nothing you say is a revelation. The only way to stop being cast aside is to speak up and be heard.