This is the part that drives me nuts. So many people support the things Democrats want to do, right up until it comes to actually voting Democrats into offices that will let them do those things…
Ironic that they chose her on the day it was reported that a state auditor ordered her to return $450,000 in covid money that she misused.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/auditor-iowa-gov-reynolds-return-450k-covid-funds-83182550
It doesn’t. The borders are not “open”. Violent crime is down, although there was a uptick recently.
Pretty much all their talking points are lies.
Open Borders- lie
Crime is rampant- lie
Election was stolen- lie
Critical Race Theory is being taught in our primary schools- lie (and they don’t even know what CRT is, anyway)
The Democrats want to Defund the Police-gross exaggeration.
Inflation and gas prices are Biden’s fault- gross exaggeration.
Yep.
I don’t see that here. No one, even Joe himself, would say he is a orator on the level of Obama.
These two are ignorant bully wannabees. They deserve many insults. Still I think we do ourselves no favors when we default to calling them “pigs” and “bitches”.
Surely we can come up with more creative insults that do not resort to sexism?
Well, “bitch” certainly, and agreed. But I don’t see “pig” as sexist or gendered. Trump is a pig in a bunch of ways.
Moderating:
Let’s all refrain from using specific gender-based insults. Thanks.
ETA: And let’s not derail the thread with a debate over whether “pig” is a gender-based insult. It is not.
Please explain. I’m using conservative (yes, it probably should be 'C’onservative) to describe the group of people who support Trump and people like MTG & Boebert, et al. It’s a common term for this group, and I don’t know of a better description. How am I using it incorrectly?
What’s sexist about calling them pigs?
Now if I had called them sows, you’d have a point there.
And we’ve discussed elsewhere that “bitch” may or may not be mysoginist depending on the context. Is this a particularly gender-specific context?
And then they blame the Democrats for not doing the things they wanted to do after they voted them out of office.
How about “fish-faced Enemy of the People?”
The Innsmouth Party.
[quote=“running_coach, post:71, topic:960322, full:true”]
That’s what she reminds me of!
Then complain that Democrats can’t win elections.
Moderation advises no further discussion so I will not debate the point. FWIW my criteria is simply how I would it if I heard it being used by Trump to describe a female Dem politician. YMMV and obviously does.
Agreed that they are disgusting excuses for human beings who have to take turns using the one neuron that they share between them.
Note, though, that neurological activity only really happens when a spark jumps across a synapse from one neuron to the next. These two, having only one neuron for the both of them, can’t even accomplish that!
Toddlers throwing tantrums?
Conservatives are people who oppose progressivism but recognise that it must exist and while resisting progress, are willing to grudingly allow some to seep through. The modern R party has a conservative or two, but most of the party is actually made up of reactionaries – regressivists who actively want to stop all progress now and begin dismantling any that has already happened. They want to drag us back to the '50s (of some undetermined previous century).
Hence, I say, please stop calling Republicans “conservatives” – unless you fastidiously spell/pronounce it “conservative”.
That is certainly what it used to mean.
In most of the rest of the world, it still does. If you look at stories in al Jazeera, for instance, you will see the labels flipped: “liberal” is the right-wing faction, short for “neoliberal” (Chicago School/Milton Friedman/Hayek/von Mises/glibertarianism). When a Lib-Dem party gains the plurality, they will coalesce with Tories rather than the left for a majority.
For the average person, “conservative” continues to carry a non-negative connotation. We can utter it as invective all we want but most people still perceive it as a sort of comfort word. The hard RW regressivists use it to their advantage when their agenda absolutely does not fit the term. There needs to be a campaign to strip the word from them, as there is nothing non-negative to their agenda.
I invite American Conservatives to kick this off the moment they stop voting for RW regressivists.