#Sadly not just a Republican Party

[crookedfandomquill]

This is very situational, and sadly may not be realistic for everyone, but I need y’all to understand that a very important part of political activism is fucking talking to your conservative or moderate friends and family.

My dad voted for Trump in 2016. He’s a middle class white evangelical from Arkansas. He raised me with conservative Christian values, just like his parents raised him. When he voted Trump, he was holding his nose, but he didn’t feel too bad about it, and went on to vote red down the ticket in the 2018 midterms, as well.

But I started college in 2017. Higher education and independence changed everything for me, and I went home over holidays and summers with fire in my belly and a thousand arguments ready at the drop of a hat, to my father’s dismay.

I remember crying in my room after emotional, intense arguments with him. I told him over and over that I felt betrayed by his choice to vote for a man who admitted to sexually assaulting women, who built his platform on dehumanizing immigrants and the disabled, who spread overtly-racist rhetoric, who flouted the values of kindness and self-discipline that I’d been raised on. And my dad always had some justification about the “greater good”: fighting against abortion, bolstering the economy, getting other Christian politicians into office.

But over time, as we grew further apart and I lost my will to discuss anything with him at all, he softened. He started asking me why I thought the way I did about the things we disagreed about. He would listen to my answers without interruption, and mull them over afterward instead of expressing his own opinion. And all the while, he watched the Trump presidency become cruel and absurd and devastating.

The first time he openly expressed regret to me, I had come home for a weekend after Kavanaugh was confirmed to SCOTUS. My dad realized he had helped elect a man who preyed on women… and that man had opened the door to more predators. I can’t tell you what it felt like for him to admit that he’d made a mistake, not just in voting for Trump but in defending him for so long. We kept arguing, but it was more debating than fighting. I knew he was capable of seeing my side of things, even if it took a while, and he knew I wasn’t just a sensitive college student with shallow new ideas about the world.

And then 2020 hit. Specifically, George Floyd was murdered, and the events that followed played out on the national stage. My dad was incredibly shaken by it. He asked me if I had any books from college about racial issues. I loaned him The New Jim Crow, one of the required readings for my Race and the Law class. Then I gave him Just Mercy. Then he watched the documentary 13th. Then he joined a racial harmony group he learned about through one of the few Black families at our church and insisted our whole family come. He held up signs at a protest against Confederate monuments in our conservative southern town. In three years, he went from defending Trump’s comments about “Black-on-Black crime” to publicly advocating for racial justice and opposing the death penalty.

We went together to vote in the 2020 primaries. I couldn’t help asking who he’d voted for; I didn’t even know if he’d asked for the Republican or Democratic ticket. He admitted he’d voted for Bernie. fucking. Sanders, then made me promise not to tell my grandma he’d voted liberal. When the election rolled around in November, he voted Biden. I’m sure he held his nose to do it, just like he held his nose voting in 2016. But I know he doesn’t regret it.

I am, of course, unbelievably lucky to have a parent who loved me enough, and was empathetic enough, to choose his relationship with me over his strongly-held opinions. He kept searching for truth because, as much as he’ll deny it, he’s a very smart and curious person. No degree of intelligence or curiosity makes you immune to propaganda, especially if you were raised not to question the party line. It’s easy to dismiss our conservative, conspiracy-pilled loved ones as stupid, hypocritical, and cruel. Sometimes they are. But sometimes they aren’t. Sometimes they will bend to keep their relationships from breaking. Sometimes, if they can be made to understand that their beliefs and actions are harming someone they love, they will make concessions. And sometimes they just need one person in their life to put a foot down, to be vulnerable and assertive and argumentative, to bring the impact of their politics close to home.

As the most important election of our lifetimes approaches, do not put peace over progress. If you have someone like my dad, someone who is good-willed and smart and loves you more than their own opinions, tell them how you feel. Tell them what their choices will mean for you, for your friends, for your community. Tell them what they could lose: your trust, your affection, your respect. Don’t avoid conflict if it could be productive. Because my conflict with my dad didn’t just win him over–it won over my moderate mom and one of my conservative brothers. And it put us in community with other like-minded people and led my parents to a healthier and kinder faith.

All of this to say, there is hope in conflict. There is hope in our relationships with people who think differently from us. There is hope in exposing your fear and anger and pain to people you love. And hope is a form of activism.

[jacensolodjo]

Some of y'all like communism a little too much and act too much like it's communism or else you're a big ol' conservative republican who loves capitalism and 'Merica. (P.S. not everything is about the United States of America. No, not even if you dig. Misery can be brought by more than the US of A.)

It's concerning as someone who spends half their time trying to tell children about communist atrocities and wondering how many of them go home and rant about how evil I am for being against communism. Even after knowing/learning communism has killed far more millions than we will ever really fully know because they figured out how to do it a little too well in an age when you just have to toss everything into a fire to get rid of the evidence.

How much generational trauma is still going along the bloodline because of communism. How many victims feel like they have to be silent or else they get dogpiled by children. Telling them they're wrong.

Do you even know who the Khmer Rouge killed? Why?

Do you even know what the Holodomor is?

How many millions of Ukrainians and Cambodians are gone because of communists? Because their ideology literally says to murder en masse? I'm sorry that isn't what you took out of your little commie manual.

How much bigger, fuller, wonderful would life be in dozens of places if not for communism? Communism does not encourage art. It does not encourage writing (except for the machine of communism). It does not care if you are disabled, it will kill you for being useless as a worker. If you think it cares a fucking whit about people like me, you're sadly mistaken.

Queer people are an abomination. They will not/can not produce future workers. They are things to be killed and dumped into pits because they are not proper members of the Party. Some even got forced sterilization just for that extra bit of misery and humiliation.

It is not the amazing, wonderful, loving, caring ideology you take it for.

It cares not for true science. If a scientist disagrees with the Party Scientists, they have to go. Communist Science looks like putting hundreds into the freezing cold. Forcing them to have children. For the sole purpose of making the children immune to the cold. That's not how that works. So many dead for science that isn't real science. Where is your concern for ethics? For humanity? It does not exist in communism.

Communism is not what you think it is. Communism has murdered millions. Communism has hurt the families of people you claim the glory of communism in front of.

Better dead than red? Dead because of Red.

Communism is not 'people of color winning' in South America, in Cuba. In Cambodia. In China. It's people of color dying because of an ideology that should have been stopped in the 1800s.

[noir-fem]

we need to be scared of project 2025, like, seriously fucking scared. and we need to vote these Christofacists out of office.

"How seriously should we take “Project 2025”? Isn’t this all just the abstract raging of feverish minds? Just empty threats far removed from any chance of implementation? Mostly just a messaging effort intended to placate and mobilize a frenzied base? If only.

'Project 2025' is evidence that the American Right has concrete plans and a detailed strategy of how to take over and transform American government into a machine that serves only two purposes: Autocratic revenge against the “woke” enemy – and the imposition of a reactionary vision for society against the will of the majority."

[olderthannetfic]

At the time of writing this, Audrey R. has already resigned from running for OTW board, and the way people have acted about her candidacy the past few days has been disturbing, but also sadly unsurprising. Please, to anyone who may read this- I know those immediate gut reactions of shock, horror, disgust, I personally find that I can't stand Republicans and conservatives, I generally hate their views and what they stand for.

But please, don't just blindly spread misinformation and fear. I know there's little nuance to be found on tumblr, but people were misrepresenting her and her policies and unnecessarily riled each other up to the point where people took it upon themselves to go after her and her employer under false beliefs.

She's a Republican, yes. But how many people have taken the time to actually look her up? She's run as an independent before, her policies aren't the conservative bs people are making it out to be, and quite frankly, in her district, there is no realistic chance for a Democrat or an independent candidate to win elections.

In one of her Q&As, she had this to say:

"One of the most important things I learned on the campaign trail was this: it does not matter how loud your voice is if you don’t have a seat at the table. My advice to #EOTWR is recruit and/or run so they can get a seat, and find ways to involve the people currently in the positions to make change."

Combining her locale, statements, and platform, she's at worst a centrist who's running with the Republicans for a chance to win and actually try to change things within the system in which she's contained.

There's no evidence of her being pro-censorship. There are legitimate concerns about the effects of social media, screens, and the internet on youths, especially because they're so relatively recent in our history. People saw her party, her organization, other people's reactions, and assumed the worst.

If people actually did research and came to their own conclusions or simply decided that a republican affiliation in and of itself was an automatic deal breaker, I completely understand that. I personally wouldn't have voted for her either way. It's understandable that candidates will be discussed and criticised, but don't make things up to make her worse than she actually is.

--

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved in our archive

A very long but worthwhile read chronicling the liberal descent into antimask/vax madness and the doctors who led the charge.

The full article includes a wealth of helpful links I can't reasonably transfer. Follow the link to find them! I'll try to transfer as many images and videos as I can.

Emily Oster, Leana Wen, Ashish Jha, and Zeynep Tufekci Betray America

Public Health in America is having its Budd Dwyer moment.

We were told time and time again how crucial it was that Kamala Harris defeated Donald Trump this past November. Well, it was recently revealed that Harris' internal polling never showed her defeating Trump. Instead of retooling her campaign and doing what's necessary to defeat Donald Trump, even if it meant giving Wall Street the middle finger, Harris and the Democrat Party burned over a billion and a half dollars praising Dick Cheney and putting Donald Trump back in the White House - as well as leaving 65% of races uncontested nationwide, simply handed to the Republicans on a silver platter. Giving Oprah a million dollars, spending six figures to re-create a podcast set that resembled a dentist's waiting room, and countless other thoughtless grifts, made it clear that Kamala Harris and the Democrat Party were never serious about defeating Trump - a blatant insult to every liberal and Democrat voter that put their faith in the opposition party which insisted "democracy was on the ballot" as their Vice Presidential nominee livestreamed Sega Dreamcast games.

Now we all get to live with the consequences of such a horrific act of political irresponsibility and cowardice. David Gorski of Science Based Medicine, Walker Bragman of Important Context, and the Death Panel podcast have all done extensive breakdowns of how Trump's handpicked crusaders against vaccines and public health have a long history of getting countless children sick, hospitalized, disabled, and dead. This isn't an article about retreading the same territory as the above-mentioned outlets, which have covered these nominees and their long history of failures and moral depravity in excruciating detail.

What's most important about these appointees is what they all share - a dangerous combination of two traits: utterly incompetent and arrogantly dishonest. We are talking about scientifically illiterate narcissists who, when soundly rejected by the overwhelming consensus of their colleagues in medicine and science, as well as...reality, instead embraced sadistic billionaires such as Peter Thiel and the Koch oil dynasty, taking to social media to spread their message amongst right-wing cranks and contrarian media in the hopes of fooling Americans into embracing their unethical delusions. The fantasy of these inept contrarians being brave medical geniuses, censored by The Man, became a popular fiction amongst conservatives and conspiracy theorists across social media; adolescent fantasies of the brave Rebel Anti-Vax Alliance hero Luke Skywalker brandishing his fully erect lightsaber against the evil giga-vaxxed Lord Vader of the Galactic Public Health Empire.

Sadly, we are now watching liberals in journalism and academia begin to embrace and even endorse this depraved crankery in a total betrayal of the public that puts their trust in them, legitimizing the same old tired anti-vaccine crankery that has haunted us for centuries - at one point, smallpox was even advertised as harmless and beneficial. We are witnessing the beginning of a total rewriting of the history of the past five years, even when the facts are readily available, in order to push false equivalences or outright lies to grant legitimacy to the utterly illegitimate, just weeks before a second Trump Administration is set to be sworn into office. There is no excuse for such a gross violation of every professional and ethical standard in the world of medicine, science, and public health - yet liberals in academia and journalism are happy to openly engage in such obscene banjaxing.

Lobbyist Leana Wen and Economist Emily Oster Endorse RFK Jr. on Raw Milk, Fluoride, and Vaccine “Choice”

Take it from a cattle farmer with over a decade of hands-on experience shoveling manure: Unpasteurized or “raw” milk can make you very sick and possibly even kill you. (FDA) This is a well-documented, basic scientific fact that has been well-established for a very long time. (Wikipedia) Pasteurization is, essentially, the process of boiling milk in order to kill bacteria and other threats to human health, because humans are not cows - or bats. There are no meaningful health benefits to drinking "raw" milk, a frankly bullshit term that is an insult to any serious farmer. We are also now at a point where H5N1 is being detected in "raw" milk products, risking the start of another pandemic within our own borders. Dr. Noha Aboelata of Roots Community Health breaks this down in detail in a 30-minute briefing:

Potential head of the HHS under Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. - who has already gotten countless children killed from his anti-vaccine advocacy (Mother Jones) - pushes the imaginary health benefits of this garbage to his easily deluded audience. Unsurprisingly, liberal pundits like Leana Wen and Emily Oster are rushing to defend these sorts of "choices" using fraudulent data, just as much as they worked overtime to confuse parents about COVID-19, which has already killed and disabled many children; a fact that both paid opinion havers are still in serious denial of.

We previously profiled Leana Wen in January 2023, a Brookings Institute lobbyist and M.D. who has experienced the COVID-19 pandemic from the safety of her couch. We've also talked extensively about Emily Oster over the past two years: an economist with zero medical or scientific credentials and a long history of morally depraved garbage to her name - from claiming “it isn’t economical” to give Africa drugs to treat AIDS, (Forbes, Archived) to declaring that the right of pregnant women to drink alcohol (Twitter) is a feminist issue, to taking money from bloodsucking fascist Peter Thiel (Twitter) to publish fraudulent data in order to get countless children killed and disabled by COVID-19. These are not legitimate medical or scientific experts.

Both Emily Oster and Leana Wen took out opinion editorials (Oster in the New York Times, Wen in the Washington Post) recently citing the same JAMA Pediatrics study claiming that fluoride in drinking water is potentially a biohazard - using the racist, long-debunked concept of "Intelligence Quotient points," in order to legitimize Robert F. Kennedy's depraved conspiracy theories and baselessly attack one of the most effective public health initiatives in our lifetime. If you actually read this study for yourself, you will find the results to be…utterly inconclusive. Epidemiologist Abby Cartus breaks this down in extensive detail on her newsletter Closed Form. Wen and Oster think you are too inept to read for yourself and form your own conclusion from the reality that this single study is... worthless!

Why any self-respecting woman would carry water for a depraved, exploitative wretch who drove his wife to suicide by keeping a black book of all his affairs, rating each woman he had sex with based on how extreme a sex act he was able to perform with them, is utterly beyond belief - achieving absolutely nothing but completely destroying their own professional reputations in the process. If you truly hate yourself on this level, you're supposed to either seek professional help or drown out your sorrows with a bottle of whiskey in the privacy of your own home, instead of publicly humiliating yourself in service of an abusive, misogynistic creep that considers you subhuman for the unforgivable atrocity of having a uterus.

Unsurprisingly, Biden's final COVID-19 Czar Ashish Jha went to bat to endorse his fellow Brown University laptop class academic Emily Oster, writing on Twitter that this was merely a crisis of "public health messaging:"

"Great [Emily Oster] piece about how to do public health messaging better. Some public health experts believe the public can't handle nuance. That's nonsense. Talking to folks about the complexity of the evidence, tradeoffs, and strength of recommendations is good. Want to rebuild trust in public health? Treat the public as adults."

There is no "nuanced" argument legitimizing the selling of "raw milk" and other scam health products with serious public health risks, especially with a potential H5N1 pandemic on the horizon. It’s not “complex” to state that children should be vaccinated against COVID-19, and the overwhelming majority of pediatric COVID-19 deaths are in unvaccinated children. There are no meaningful “tradeoffs” for putting safe amounts of fluoride in water fountains. These are all basic scientific facts, and a large part of maturing into an adult is having to accept the reality of being told "no," and realizing when you're simply dead wrong. As Final COVID Czar under Joe Biden, Ashish Jha's primary goal was not to "treat the public as adults," but as bleeding piggy banks to be exploited for profit from unmitigated COVID-19 infections.

As a handpicked crusader for "privatizing the pandemic response," Ashish Jha oversaw millions of Americans winding up disabled by COVID-19, often losing their careers in the process - falling into poverty, homelessness, and deaths of despair. Women are disproportionately affected by Long COVID disability, and the messaging of the failed Harris campaign was that these women were to be abandoned (Twitter) and brutalized by the same police that the Biden-Harris administration diverted pandemic relief into buying more weapons and military toys for.

Ashish Jha smugly shrugged his shoulders and took out an opinion editorial telling everyone to "ignore COVID" whilst accepting prestigious awards. If we lived in a just society, he would be living out of a cardboard box under a freeway overpass, begging for pocket change. Unfortunately, we live in the world where the Brown University Dean of Public Health is comfortable making public endorsements of sadistic anti-vax cranks, such as Marty Makary and Jay Bhattacharya, to senior government positions.

Biden's COVID Czar Ashish Jha Endorses Mehmet Oz, Jay Bhattacharya & Marty Makary for CMS, NIH & FDA Directors You've likely heard a version of the phrase "if one Nazi is sitting at a table of a dozen people, you have a table of a dozen Nazis." The same is true of anti-vaxxers and their depraved ideals, which are often rooted in a naked embrace of fascist eugenics. You simply cannot find a "reasonable middle ground" or stake out some sort of enlightened "centrist" view that legitimizes the opinions of the arrogantly incompetent & dishonest, who champion pestilence whilst fearmongering about safe & effective vaccines for their own personal gain. By lending credence to these frauds, you establish your priorities: saving lives is less important than not hurting the feelings of sadistic cranks, or one's own personal comfort.

With a second Trump administration about to be sworn in, Democrats should be in open revolt that the Biden Administration left the COVID response in charge of anti-vax cheerleader Ashish Jha, who in a November 24th, 2024 post on Twitter wrote:

"I think [Marty Makary] at FDA, [Mehmet Oz] at CMS, and [Jay Bhattacharya] at NIH are all pretty reasonable...They are smart and experienced."

This is, undeniably and objectively, an absolute lie from the former Biden Administration official, similar to how Biden parroted the lies that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction" as head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2003. It shouldn't be surprising that rewarding failure only breeds more failures, even when a nation is gripped by a once-in-a-century pandemic disaster.

For starters, Mehmet Oz is a morally depraved quack celebrity doctor who once boldly proclaimed that the public has "no right to health," and has frequently abused his daytime television platform to peddle quack cures to exploit his elderly audience. If put in charge of the CMS, Oz's priority is privatizing Medicare and Medicaid so that he may profit from companies that he is personally invested in, leaving the elderly and disabled with substandard, privatized "Advantage" plans that do not cover essential medical needs - driving more American families to medical bankruptcy and begging strangers on GoFundMe to survive, or more likely: homelessness & deaths of despair.

This is what the Brown University Dean of Public Health, Ashish Jha, considers "pretty reasonable."

Marty Makary's claim to fame was as a cheerleader for nakedly embracing COVID-19, falsely proclaiming the end of the pandemic via "herd immunity" multiple times, starting in early 2021. In September 2021, he claimed that getting COVID-19 protects you from COVID-19 - try telling that to the countless American children who have had it half a dozen times already, and are losing their health, dreams, and futures as a consequence. When it became clear that this approach of nakedly embracing COVID-19 had obviously failed, disabling millions of Americans in the process, Makary took out an opinion editorial in the Wall Street Journal in December 2022, attacking Long COVID - claiming it was "long anxiety" on Fox News. The evidence is overwhelming at this point, and it all says that this supposed practitioner of "evidence-based medicine" was dead wrong and is too craven and pathetic to admit that he was dead wrong about the disease he simped for to millions of FOX News views.

Makary would also fearmonger about the COVID-19 vaccine, claiming that the disease - which has killed tens of millions worldwide, according to the Economist - is essentially harmless, while the vaccine is supposedly causing massive epidemics of myocarditis. Marty would falsely label COVID-19 as "omi-cold" and "nature's vaccine," both objectively false lies that got countless thousands of Americans killed and disabled in the winter of 2021-22. Makary openly celebrated parents not vaccinating their children against COVID-19; of the thousands of pediatric COVID-19 deaths in America, they were overwhelmingly unvaccinated. Their parents would likely prefer a child with a sore arm instead of a child who is now six feet under, in a coffin. Marty has never apologized to these parents or lifted a finger to help pay for the funerals of these children who have been forever silenced.

This is who Biden's COVID Czar, Ashish Jha, considers "smart."

Last but not least, we have Jha's endorsement of Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford "health economist" who made bold proclamations about the alleged harmlessness of the SARS-CoV-2 virus from the comfort of his couch, taking money from the Koch oil dynasty - which has already funded an incredible amount of unscientific climate collapse denial propaganda as well as the "Tea Party" which would evolve into Trump's "MAGA" hordes - to champion a mass infection strategy for COVID-19 as it was overwhelming hospitals, driving some doctors and nurses to suicide. Bhattacharya was happy to openly demand millions of American teachers risk death and disability from COVID-19 in early 2020, long before a vaccine was available, in order to preserve “normalcy.” It’s worth noting that teaching is a predominantly female-dominated profession.

These sorts of Little Eichmanns (Wikipedia) have always existed in society in one form or another; morally depraved sadists desperate to play God with the lives of their supposed inferiors. They must always be condemned, combatted, and outright rejected by polite society. Instead, liberals like Ashish Jha are openly lying in public displays of support for these lecherous, vapid narcissists who can only derive self-worth via forcing suffering upon others.

Much like how the Third Reich was helmed by incompetent scam artists cooked to the gills with methamphetamines, Stanford's Jay Bhattacharya looked at the COVID-19 pandemic and his inability to do anything to treat COVID-19 patients & save lives - as he never bothered to put in the work to attain a medical license - and decided to make the largest mass death event in the history of the United States all about how he could promote the most important "health economist" in America: himself. Starting off 2020 by conducting a fraudulent seroprevalence study (Twitter) and publishing false conclusions, Smilin' Jay never bothered to stay grounded in reality whilst his fellow Americans were dying and being disabled by COVID-19. Jay's priorities were rooted in growing the public profile of Jay Bhattacharya, no matter how wrong he was or how many Americans he would get killed in his sycophancy for a deadly and disabling virus he refused to learn a single thing about.

Employed by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis, Jay Bhattacharya would get countless Floridians killed in 2021 by failing to vaccinate the population before the Delta variant struck, after boldly proclaiming that he "protected the vulnerable." Smilin' Jay never apologized for this failure, or his many others - and why would he? He's been generously rewarded for his loyalty to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, with liberals like Ashish Jha cheering him on. As part of his narcissistic fetish for spouting unscientific nonsense in front of any camera he could find, Jay Bhattacharya would also fearmonger about the COVID-19 vaccine, fearmongered about PPE, falsely portrayed himself as a victim of "censorship," falsely proclaimed getting COVID-19 protects you from COVID-19, openly embraced anti-vax conspiracy theorists, and even endorsed Canadian white nationalists whilst tweeting "Honk Honk" - a dogwhistle for Heil Hitler.

This is what Ashish Jha considers "experienced." This is who Biden and the Democrats put in charge of the final months of the COVID-19 response: a vocal supporter of abusive, scientifically illiterate anti-vax cranks that nakedly endorsed conspiracy theories whilst advertising pediatric illness as beneficial for your child’s health. If you voted for Biden in 2020 in the hopes that he would treat the very real domestic threat of COVID-19 more seriously than the blatantly false threat of a "smoking gun" from Saddam Hussein, you should be outraged: you have been made a fool of, and the anti-vaccine movement is now primed to unleash a torrent of pestilence upon you and your children via the federal government.

Liberal pundits, such as sociologist Zeynep Tufekci of the New York Times, are now working overtime to try and rewrite history - even if it means legitimizing anti-vax cranks like Jay Bhattacharya in a craven attempt to save face.

Desperate to establish herself as some sort of Enlightened COVID Centrist in "the paper of record," Zeynep was a vocal loyalist to the Biden Administration's vaccine-only strategy of mass infection from 2021 onwards. As the consequences of such a failed strategy came to light, such as COVID-19's negative impacts on the immune system - a well documented fact now in 2024 (PAI) - Zeynep would frequently cherry pick experts that validated her pro-viral opinions, and abuse her own platform to attack developing science in a failed crusade to falsely equate COVID-19 reinfections as "mild," on par with the common cold and influenza. This required endorsing obscene, unscientific views like "immunity debt," (PAI) a myth easily debunked by opening any Immunology 101 textbook.

The Pandemic Accountability Index will provide a full profile of the years of disinformation that Zeynep Tufekci peddled to the public in due time, but for now, it's worth noting that on November 27th, 2024, Sociologist Zeynep Tufekci would write an opinion editorial in the New York Times titled "Trump's Pick to Lead the N.I.H. Gets Some Things Right." Zeynep would open this drivel by making an objectively false statement that disqualifies anything which might come after:

"It's a welcome sign that, unlike many of Donald Trump's picks to lead parts of the nation's health system, his pick for director of the National Institutes of Health, Jay Bhattacharya, is actually qualified."

Fact Check! There is zero tradition of the National Institute of Health employing "health economists" such as Jay Bhattacharya, especially in a leadership position, and especially when they have a morally depraved history of making obscene claims like "health insurance encourages obesity." Jay is, by any serious definition of the term "qualified," utterly unqualified for the responsibilities of heading the NIH. We know this, because thanks to his previous experience under Ron DeSantis, he got countless Americans killed by COVID-19.

To pretend otherwise, one has to completely erase the history of Jay Bhattacharya's activities over the past five years. Zeynep Tufekci of the New York Times is either too dangerously incompetent to handle the responsibilities of medical journalism, or so utterly dishonest that one has to wonder if she's been contracted by the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself to function as a Public Relations spokesperson. This sure as hell has nothing to do with sociology, but this hasn't stopped Zeynep from asserting her supposed expertise on topics she clearly knows very little about.

Zeynep would also claim on Twitter that Bhattacharya "has made valid points about the pandemic;" mainly her insistence that SARS-CoV-2 must have come out of a laboratory, and that repeated COVID-19 infections are protective against... COVID-19. Zeynep is too scientifically illiterate and devoid of ethics to answer the very serious question raised by such "valid points:" if you seriously believed SARS-CoV-2 was designed in a lab, why would you take money from the Koch oil dynasty to argue that we should rapidly infect hundreds of millions of unvaccinated Americans, including children, with said lab-designed virus less than a year after it touched our shores, well before we had any comprehensive understanding of the harms it posed to the human body? Are working Americans and their children little more than lab rats?

Tufekci would also make more absurd, blatantly false claims in defense of Jay Bhattacharya via Twitter:

"[Jay's] dismissal as 'fringe' by public health authorities, and even censorship on social media, was unjustified and wrong. Not every point was completely wrong, and besides, they deserved addressing, not silencing. The public has a stake in such major decisions."

In reality, Jay Bhattacharya and his deranged ideals of letting COVID-19 ravage hundreds of millions of Americans well before a vaccine was widely available *was* addressed by an overwhelming consensus of scientists, doctors, and public health experts...in the fall of 2020. David Gorski for Science Based Medicine, Epidemiologists Abby Cartus & Justin Feldman with the Death Panel podcast, and countless other voices from experts around the world, including the Royal Bank of Canada Global Asset Management, published extensive rebuttals about such a horrific idea from the same mind that brought you "the thin are subsidizing the gluttony of the obese via health insurance premiums." Liberal pundit Zeynep Tufekci is outright lying and rewriting history, silencing critical voices in order to construct a false legitimacy to anti-vax social media grifter Jay Bhattacharya’s appointment to lead the NIH.

To claim that Jay Bhattacharya is an "unjustified" victim of "censorship" is a morally depraved and outright fictional statement. A laptop-class loudmouth being told "you're dead wrong" by doctors and scientists with real-world responsibilities isn't censorship. Privately owned social media networks, such as Twitter and YouTube, are entitled to moderate their platforms as they see fit and does not qualify as "censorship." Jay Bhattacharya isn't some oppressed dissident voice that the public needs to hear; to embrace his sage wisdom about how COVID-19 infections protect against COVID - Jay is backed by wealthy billionaires that have, for decades now, peddled the same unscientific propaganda that alleged liberal journalists like Zeynep Tufekci are supposed to vigilantly oppose - not launder - in the newspaper.

Every single "point" that Jay Bhattacharya has spouted about COVID-19 has been completely wrong, time and time again. This is a well-documented phenomenon, all across the Internet, because Smilin' Jay simply cannot shut his own goddamn mouth for five minutes. Yet again, Zeynep Tufekci of the New York Times thinks the general public is too incompetent to verify her outlandish claims in defense of a cruel, manipulative fraud that has incited violence against doctors and scientists that are tasked with actually saving lives.

In Closing People are rightfully afraid to fear of what might come to pass if America's federal public health apparatus is put in the hands of a gaggle of unscientific anti-vax cranks who already have the blood of countless Americans on their hands. It will be crucial for real experts to raise hell and get their teeth bloody in angrily rejecting whatever bullshit comes out of the mouths of these frauds - and guerilla, grassroots public health, in whatever form that may take, will become crucial to safeguarding the health and wellbeing of Americans over the next four years - especially that of our children. What we simply cannot do is embrace outright fiction in order to legitimize and empower bad actors that have long proven themselves utterly incapable of handling the real-world responsibilities of managing public health in America.

Every single liberal academic & pundit you see going to bat to endorse Trump's hand-picked social media sycophants - bloodthirsty zealots waging a crusade against public health and regulatory authority on behalf of their billionaire backers - is committing a grave act of treason against their fellow American, on behalf of a nefarious villain that dates back to the origins of human civilization. Countless thousands of years ago, ancient mythology was a tool to pass down essential knowledge from one generation to the next via oral tradition, and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse were no different. These are forces that have shattered human societies throughout our long and bloody history - War, Death, Famine, and yes, Pestilence - infectious diseases. This war that medicine has waged against disease has a long tradition; you can read up on the mother of modern medicine, Florence Nightengale, (PBS) on the importance of clean air in preventing the spread of disease, or Death in Hamburg (Internet Archive) on the class politics of pandemics - or read up on saboteurs in 1830 claiming that smallpox is a "New Year's Gift to the world." (Twitter)

As long as we have civilized society, we will always have this fight against infectious diseases, and those who insist we nakedly embrace them will never have your best interests in mind. This is a basic fact that any credentialed sociologist getting paid to write about public health should know quite well by now.

There is no good reason for any liberal to waste a drop of ink legitimizing these grandstanding carny hacks. Going forward, one has to wonder how liberal journalists & academics will help forward Trump’s crusade against public health.

We have a long four years ahead of us, and mainstream institutions like the New York Times will try again and again to rewrite history. The Pandemic Accountability Index refuses to let this pass, and only with your support is our archival work and reporting possible. If you haven’t already, please consider taking out a paid subscription or making a one-time donation.

[eugenedebs1920]

It’s just crazy. Crazy how one guy can cause so much chaos and disruption, such hostility and hatred, break the law habitually and never face accountability.

“I just need you to find, 11,780 votes. That’s one more than we have” were the words spoken by Donald Trump to the Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. This was a pressure campaign launched by Donald Trump to bully Secretary Raffensperger into violating the Constitution, and going against the will of the people of Georgia, and the United States.

Secretary Raffensperger, in what is sadly a rarity in Republican leadership, and Republicans as a whole, stood in fealty to the United States Constitution, and did not bend to the whim of the Tangerine Tyrant.

For his allegiance to the rule of law, the Constitution, and to the United States of America, he received countless death threats from so called patriots. These cosplay patriots threaten his family, his life, and all that he held dear.

It’s sad to say that a man, doing his job as he should. deserves a deep gratitude from this nation, but he does. He could have done what so many Republicans have, and bent the knee to Dementia Don. 

Fani Willis was born in Inglewood California. Her father was founded a chapter of the Black Panthers for that section of California. He grew weary of the infighting and lack of substantive positive impact the Black Panthers were making and moved his family to Washington DC where he would practice law as a defense attorney.

Needless to say Ms. Willis grew up with a vast understanding and respect for the rule of law and a drive for justice.

She would attend Howard University studying political science and would graduate cum laude. In 1993. After graduating from Howard she attended Emory University College of Law and receive her Juris Doctorate degree.

Subsequently she would spend 16 years in Fulton County’s district attorney’s office before being elected as District Attorney. Her previous experience had led her to pursue Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) beyond just organized crime and directed at any muti faceted criminal activity.

Upon the lawlessness Trump perpetrated in trying to subvert democracy, Ms. Willis was appalled. Her admiration to the rule of law, and the binding order laid out in the United States Constitution brought her to go after this egregious act of sedition. 

The Raffensperger call was not the only act of treason Trump and others engaged in. These exploits were not only implemented in Georgia. A slate of fake electors was devised to circumvent the actual electoral count. These fake electors were to swap the official results with ones falsely claiming Trump had won that state. This occurred in Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico and of course, Georgia.

The conspiracy was extensive. Not only the fake electors scheme had transgressed, but a beakin and breach of voting equipment happened as well.

There was over 30 people named as, culprits, co-conspirators or conspirators. Including the disgraced former president, 19 were indicted.

Donald Trump was charged with under the RICO Act, 4 counts of false statements, 2 being false documentation, 2 counts of forgery, 1 count of impersonating a public officer, with 5 other charges dropped.

Rudy Guliani was co-conspirator #1 and charged under the count RICO, 3 counts false statements, 2 counts false documents, 2 counts forgery, 1 count of impersonating a public officer.

Ray smith III, a lawyer for Trump was charged with RICO count, 3 counts of false statements, with 2 counts false documentation, 1 count impersonating a public officer, 2 counts forgery

Cathy Latham, one of the fake electors and Leader of the Republican Party in Coffee County, was charged with RICO, 1 false documents, I impersonating a public officer, and 1 count forgery.

Robert Cheeley, another lawyer was charged with RICO, 1 count false statements, 2 counts false documentation, 1 count impersonating a public officer, 2 counts forged, and 1 count perjury.

John Eastman, one of the leaders in the whole plot, a lawyer, was charged under the RICO Act, 1 count false statements, 2 counts false documents, 1 count impersonating a public officer, and 2 counts forgery.

David Shafer, one of the fake electors and Republican state chairman, was charged under the RICO Act, 1 count false documents, 1 count false statements to the district attorney, 1 count impersonating a public officer, and 2 counts of forgery.

Kenneth Chesebro, another architect in the national scheme, and lawyer was charged under the RICO Act, 2 counts false documentation, 1 count impersonating a public officer, and 2 of counts forgery.

Mike Roman, a devious campaign staffer and odd private investigator, was charged under the RICO Act, 2 counts false documents, 1 count impersonating a public officer, andn2 counts of forgery.

Shawn Still, another fake elector, and Republican state senator, was charged under the RICO Act, 2 counts false documents, 1 count impersonating a public officer, and 2 counts forgery.

Jenna Elis, a big player nationally with the plot to circumvent democracy, was charged under the RICO Act. Same as White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. Jeffery Clark was also charged under the RICO Act, with 1 count false statements.

Then there was the Coffee County election equipment breach (which by the way they have had access to since the 2020 election to find any flaws. Just saying.) The indictments were charged to.

Cathy Latham, the Republican lead of Coffee County, under RICO, 2 counts election fraud, 3 counts computer crimes, 1 count defrauding the state of Georgia.

Scott Hall, a bail bondsman, charged under RICO, he was subsequently charged with 2 counts election fraud, 3 counts of computer crimes, and 1 count defrauding the state of Georgia.

Misty Hampton, the Coffee County elections supervisors charged under RICO act, 2 counts of election fraud, 3 counts of computer crimes, 1 count of defrauding the state of Georgia.

Sidney Powell, a massive instigator, main perpetrator and known kook, was charged under RICO, 2 counts of election fraud, 3 counts of computer crimes, and 1 count defrauding the state of Georgia.

This case was pretty cut and dry. These morons video taped some of their crimes, some were on national tv, some were recorded, and some confessed to their crimes.

Of those who confessed and plead guilty were.

Scott Hall, the bail bondsman, plead guilty to, conspiracy to commit intentional interference with the performance of election duties. This was 5 misdemeanor charges landing him 5 years probation, a $5,000 fine, 200 hours of community service, a public apology to the state of Georgia, and to testify truthfully in future trials.

Sidney Powell also plead to conspiracy to commit intentional interference with the performance of election duties, charges with 6 misdemeanors and sentenced to 6 years probation, a $6,000 fine, a $2,700 restitution, a public apology to the state of Georgia and to testify truthfully in future trials.

Kenneth Chesebro plead guilty to conspiracy to file false documents, a felony, a deli charge. He was ordered to serve 5 years probation, a $5,000 restitution, 100 hours of community service. A public apology to the state of Georgia, and to testify truthfully in future trials.

Jenna Elis plead guilty to aiding and abetting false statements and writings, a felony, and was ordered to 5 years probation, a $5,000 restitution payment, 100 hours of community service, a public apology to the state of Georgia, and to truthfully testify in future trials.

Like I said previously. The case was pretty much open and shut. The evidence was overwhelming, some recorded, and all the acts were easily followed. It seemed justice would be served to the United States.

Then came the sleazy actions from Mike Roman. He had served as an adviser and campaign staffer on many Republican tickets. He had also worked for the Koch brothers as an intelligence gatherer. He would get dirt on liberals opponents and conservative policies.

Through his dirtbag tactics he found out that early on in the RICO case Fanni Willis, and a fellow attorney Nathan Wade, working on the case had engaged in romantic relations.

These were 2 consenting adults, who happened to cop feelings for each other while working together. These things happen. You work with someone, day after day, they start looking good if the conditions are right.

This was brought to the attention of the court, and frankly the world. Trump and some co-conspirators claimed it was a conflict of interest. Also claiming that Wade received improper payments due to it.

The cases against Trump for the theft, illegal retention, and refusal to return classified information, as well as the election interference, January 6th 2021 insurrection case cost upwards of $50 million dollars to date. In contrast, Fanni Willis and the Fulton County DA’s case, as of mid summer was under $5 million. There are accusations that Wade was paid more than some people in the district attorney’s office. This is true as he was a special prosecutor and not paid by Fulton County directly.

Either way, two consenting adults, on the same side of the isle, having an office romance is absolutely not a conflict of interest.

Just as that slimy pig that Trump is, he found a way to delay the case indefinitely until the investigator was investigated. He has done this before. Lord f*ckin knows he’s going to do it again.

Fani Willis went from prosecuting one of the largest acts of sedition ever perpetrated upon our nation, against 30 conspirators, with mountains of evidence. To being asked how many times she had sex with Nathan Wade, in a disgusting contortion of the law.

The fact that Judge McAfee even entertained the dismissal of the case is unprecedented.

A bunch of well off, white men found out that a powerful, smart black woman was sleeping with her coworker and raised a ruckus about it. Trump being found guilty of sexual assault himself, and accused by over 20 other women of the same. The irony hurts it’s so grave.

In the stolen classified documents case out of Florida, the judge, Aileen Cannon, had been put on the bench by Trump. She dismissed the case. The Supreme Court, where Trump installed 3 of the justices, ruled for Trump in Anderson v Trump, where the Colorado Supreme Court had declared Trump was ineligible to run for office under the 14th amendment, section 3, which clearly states that anyone who has participated in “insurrection or rebellion against the United States” is barred from holding ANY federal office again. That same Supreme Court would drag its feet for 6 month, after deciding the Anderson case in under 6 weeks, in Trump v the United States, and rule that the president has absolute immunity for crimes committed while in office. With blatant disregard for what the entire premise of our nation beholds.

Now Fanni Willis is being ordered to turn over documents due to a lawsuit filed by an ultra conservative group. Again, making her out to be the person guilty of a crime.

The only crime Fanni Willis is guilty of is being a black lady, trying to take down a criminal organization. That and sleeping with a handsome, tall, mature black man.

Trump skirting accountability, as he always does, just further emboldens him to commit more crimes against our country. Now with absolute immunity to do so.

In the words of Bob Dylan, “it makes you feel ashamed to live in a land where justice is game.”

[that-was-a-bit-stupid-of-you]

I don't understand, what's going on with Taylor and Matt trash being a couple? Could you explain to me?

nothing is really going on at the moment tbh, cuz they broke up a pretty long while ago, but the issue is the album (if that's what you're referring to) and taylor swift herself.

[will add sources and more stuff when I find the links and if I realise I missed something out, cuz this is a general thing based off of memory]

Context: dating history

Basically she and matty had been friends for a few years (there are rumors of them hooking up ig in 1989 era maybe, but I don't really care enough to believe shit like that). Apparently he had also been pining for her (according to stuff he said in interviews and tweets) for years, but again, you can still chalk it up to rumors if you wanna.

The thing is that post her breakup with joe alwyn, she started dating him (in like april I think) [there had been dating rumors of them since 2014 tho, and again in March 2023] and the fandom kinda got divided.

Here is the link to their entire timeline

Context: what matty healy did

Matty healy (you prolly know this) is basically racist, sexist, antisemitic, homophobic and God knows what else I have missed out or not been aware of. He did shit like doing the nazi gesture on stage, mocking asian accents, tastelessly making fun of ice spice on her race and bodyshaming her, laughing and basically confirming that he watches violent rape porn of black women on a site that is known to be highly problematic and force their actors (gender neutral) to do things they dont consent to (there was also an actress who was assaulted or something but im not informed on it). Even when he was called out on stuff like this, he accused people (who were poc, btw) of overreacting.

Context: taylor and activism

Taylor had also, in the past (lover era, and miss Americana the doc) had talked about how she had been too quiet about political issues and politics itself for too long, that she understands her influence and power in society, and that she "needs to be on the right side of history" and even specifics such as that she thinks it's spineless to go on stage and say "happy pride month" and not acknowledge the political oppression that queers in USA were facing (something about a bill or the republican party idk man I'm not american, i dont remember but i did research when i watched the doc tho). She has claimed she was gonna be clear about where she stands (many republicans had considered her to be one, and many thought she's conservative or something, but she was always quiet about it, until the lover era). However, she just stopped that activism after the lover era, and went back to being quiet on where she stands (I've seen many swifties refer to the lover era as the activism era) and hasn't spoken about anything substantial really. She did some things like post a black square with 13 hearts during blm, and stuff that every celeb who wasn't openly a pos did, but that's kinda it. Even as a self proclaimed feminist, she didn't speak up on issues such as roe v wade, or about an issue regarding drag queens despite having them in yntcd, or talking about trans/queer rights until she was in a blue state (im not an American, I just like to keep up a little with stuff in usa cuz it's always up in my face sadly, and thus i cant be specific, but anyways, correct me if I'm wrong, or if I missed something).

So even after saying she'll be vocal, she was just... not. And that's basically her on politics or giving a shit about minority communities.

Context: Fandom's reaction

Swifties were extremely disappointed that taylor CHOSE to associate with a man like this, and there were fans calling her out, and she received backlash, too.

Most of these swifties were poc (myself included) and they felt hurt that an artist that they not just supported and developed such a deep connection with, but also financially supported for years, would have such disregard for them. Not just was she dating him, but she kept saying things such as "I have never been happier in all aspects of my life" or saying "I love you" or "uk who you are" in romantic songs on the tour, which was just adding insult to injury. She also did a collab with ice spice (which was completely out of nowhere, and the collab itself seemed badly made and rushed), which fans and others speculated to be a pr cover up for the fact that matty healy had mocked her (many ppl also believed that it was too quick for it to be a pr cover tho).

Now, in the fandom, when poc swifties were calling her out on dating mh, (mostly) white swifties started harassing poc swifties for doing so, or saying that they are hindering with her happiness or some bs about it being "just a fling" (again, myself included). They said it's the same as seeing a friend get out of a long-term relationship and make bad dating choices, and poc swifties should let it go (as if taylor is our close personal friend). In a mostly white fandom, poc swifties felt alienated and sidelined.

Ofc, taylor never addressed any of this backlash, and after she broke up with him, there were articles saying that sources say (which mostly means her pr team atp) that her breakup had nothing to do with his controversies or behavior.

The album release (lyrics, references and reaction)

Now, with the release of ttpd, contrary to what most of the fandom believed, most of the songs on both the albums are believed to be (and heavily hinted on) about matty healy. These include 4 songs- "ttpd", "but daddy I love him", "I can fix him (no really I can)", and "guilty as sin?"

Ttpd, the title track, talks about mh being "a tattooed golden retriever" (wtf) and about him love-bombing her, and her pining after him, thinking about marriage and shit. But daddy I love him and I can fix him, are basically that no one supported her dating decision and she's claiming that she loves him oh so goddamn much, but more importantly, her talking about her fans' reactions. Specifically, describing her poc fans to be "vipers" and "judgemental creeps" who hate her and them being hurt as "bitching and moaning", and basically took the side of the (white) fans who defended her, indirectly. She described his racist bs as "crazy" and said shit like she could "handle a dangerous man." She also has another song, "Guilty as sin?" and while I genuinely don't give a fuck about what she chooses to do in her private life, unless it is problematic, it is about her fantasizing about being with that racist man while being in a long term relationship with joe alwyn. She sings about how she wants him and wants to be with him... in multiple ways, iykyk. Again, out of context, I love this song so much, but that doesn't erase the context, right?

She also has a song "I hate it here" where she says the following lines:

"My friends used to play a game where

We would pick a decade

We wished we could live in instead of this

I'd say the 1830s but without all the racists and getting married off for the highest bid"

And while there are many reasons why this line by itself is racist (romantisization of a time that was extremely shitty to many communities, most of which she is not a part of, showing herself to be "oh look I'm so woke I still remember the bad things even when I romanticize bad eras in history" which is something you expect from an ignorant white high schooler maybe, not a 34 y/o billionaire who claims to be well-read, etc.) but taylor swift herself saying these is adding insult to injury cuz she has shown time and time again she has no problem with racism (she kept quiet when antonia gentry, a black actress, received hate and racist threats by swifties because of a line BY NETFLIX that taylor didn't like, and she shouldn't ofc, but it wasn't the actress' fault), or associating herself with them (matty healy, for example). It is hypocritical to write something like that after writing an album about pining after a man and his "dangerousness," which is just bigotry. Way to romanticise racism, sexism, and antisemitism, taylor.

Even now, after listening to the album, she clearly doesn't like mh anymore, NOT because of his actions, but because he broke her heart, showing that she still enables and is okay with everything he did.

And that's kind of it (ig) about her and matty healy. I'm not really sure exactly which part you wanted to know, so this is just a gist of it all. Hope it helps :)

[ceilidhtransing]

I see people saying “a vote for a third party isn't a vote for Trump, no matter how much you try to tell me it is” and while this statement makes sense from one perspective, it also sadly just misunderstands the material reality of politics.

If we're talking about voting purely as something that affects the moral tally of your individual heart, then yes, a vote for the Greens or whatever isn't morally equivalent to a vote for Trump. If the way you think about this is in terms of getting to the pearly gates and being asked “and did you always vote for the purest and most morally clean person?” then yes, a Green vote is not the same as having to say “actually I voted for Trump”.

But down here in the real world where voting isn't about maintaining your own personal sense of having a Morally Untarnished Heart but about, you know, real material consequences, a vote for a third party is functionally, if not morally, equivalent to a vote for Trump. You might not be voting for Trump but you are voting in a way that only makes it harder for the only candidate that has an actual chance in hell of beating Trump to win. There is no world in which that does not simply help Trump. You are splitting the anti-Trump vote and making it easier for him to win because that is how this voting system unfortunately works. Frankly, you may as well be voting for Trump.

“But my vote isn't an endorsement of Trump! It's an endorsement of the exact opposite values of Trump!” Yes, but again, this terrible first-past-the-post voting system does not produce “the average of all the values that people voted for”. Any votes that don't go towards the winner are wasted votes. And the winner, especially if that winner is Trump, will not care that you voted Green. They will govern just the same, and your voice will carry no weight at all electorally.

“Stop blaming people who vote third party for all the terrible things Republicans decide to do! Those things aren't my fault; I didn't vote for them.” There is a certain value to the argument “it's not my fault for voting third party; it's the Democrats' fault for not putting up a candidate I could vote for”. But this slightly falls apart when it comes to the people who have already decided they will always vote third party, regardless of how perfect a candidate the Democrats run, so this whole “it's the Democrats' job to convince me” is purely theoretical. And I too hate the way our society often defaults to blaming leftists for whatever the right does, as if leftists are the only ones with political agency and the right can never be held accountable for anything. But when leftists had an opportunity to prevent the right from doing something evil and they chose their own moral purity over an imperfect choice that would nevertheless have prevented some harm, then no, I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to place some of the blame on those people.

US presidential elections hang on relatively tiny numbers of people in only a few crucial swing states. And because 132,476 people in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin decided to vote Green rather than Democrat in 2016, abortion is illegal in 13 states. That's less than 0.04% of the US population. Even margins that small matter. And no, those people didn't vote “against abortion”, but their failure to tactically unite behind the candidate who would have protected reproductive rights and who had a chance of actually winning directly led to the victory of the anti-abortion candidate. I'm sure all the people who now can't access abortion (ironically, none of whom lives in MI, PA or WI) are really glad that those people voted with their hearts rather than strategically. Votes have consequences, and things do change (for the worse, as well as for the better), much as some people like to harp on about how “nothing ever changes” and “your vote doesn't matter”.

“But why are you blaming those people? What about the people who actually voted Republican? Or the people who didn't vote at all?” Well, first off, this post is about third-party voting, not Republican voters or non-voters. But I do feel there is more ground to be gained by talking about the consequences of third-party voting than by discussing the others. Many Republican voters are essentially unreachable; they're not remotely progressive, so trying to convince them that they should be voting Democrat is mostly like talking to a brick wall. And non-voters are the people who didn't show up anyway; arguably they should have shown up, but they didn't. But third-party voters got involved, made sure they were registered to vote, got all the way to the voting booth, and then decided to vote not in the way that would defend at least some progressive values, but in the way that would only make it harder to beat the ultra-regressive candidate. There's an understanding that a lot of third-party voters are on the right side, they're just not making the right strategic decision, which is why so much more progressive energy gets put towards trying to convince e.g. Green voters than towards trying to convince people who aren't even remotely on our side to begin with.

“But both major candidates are agents of capital who will ultimately work for the continuation of the American empire. I'm voting for the benefit of the world, not just for the benefit of a few people in the US.” I'm not going to argue with you over that first sentence, because yes, you are correct. Both Democrats and Republicans ultimately support capitalism and both Democratic and Republican presidents have been responsible for some absolutely heinous crimes of US foreign and military policy. But as a non-American, the idea that voting in a way that makes it easier for Trump to win rather than uniting behind the person who might actually beat him - who is still flawed, but orders of magnitude better than him - is in some way liberatory to the rest of the world is just... what??? Do you not hear the people who are screaming “please stop the guy who's basically in favour of Putin annihilating Ukraine and endangering the rest of Central and Eastern Europe��? The people who are screaming “please stop the guy who seems like he just can't wait to drop nukes somewhere”? The people who are screaming “please stop the guy whose victory will only embolden the far right in our own countries and make it harder for us to beat them here”? Non-Americans are, by and large, not saying “ah yes, we are grateful that you chose moral purity rather than supporting one of the two capitalist candidates who will continue US imperialism”; we are screaming “PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DON'T LET TRUMP GET ELECTED; THIS WILL MAKE EVERYTHING WORSE FOR ALL OF US”. Your Green vote does not help the world right now. Please get behind the person who isn't a massive, immediate, almost unprecedented threat to everything we hold dear, and then we can fight for a better world together.

[their-name-is-fake]

I’ve seen an interesting argument pop up that Stien voters cost Harris the election. This isn’t true

Sadly, even if the stein voters had voted for Kamala she would have lost these swing states because the margins were too big. Whether you like it or not she lost due to a mix of a bad campaign, red pill ideology on the rise, racism’s and Trump being able (and willing) to leverage Kamala’s short comings in a way actually beneficial to him.

This isn’t a Green Party problem, this is a US problem, and y’all have to start acting like if you want to have a chance of winning in4 years and it starts by actually listening to what is coming out of peoples mouths and mobilizing NOW. Not just every 2 years but literally right now. Put pressure on dems to vote progressive, to actually codeify things when they have power, to deal with the racism and sexism that is on the rise and the causes behind it instead of just writing these people off.

Listen to minorities even ones who don’t agree with you and figure out where the dems are losing them, work to abolish the electoral college and NO MATTER WHAT don’t clock out just cuz ur candidate won. That’s how you lose the ones on the fence

But for now, kick your wounds, cry your tears, then reach out to people who mobilize and I don’t mean this in a ‘on I reblogged something that’s enough’ I’m so serious.

If you take ANYTHING from me, someone who has been watching these patterns play out all over the world for a while, it is that if you don’t put the pressure on their necks constantly they will not actually do anything. Because, and I know this won’t be nice to hear, but dems and republicans are the same in that they care about their OWN power and their OWN comfort. Not yours. So, if we can get them to understand their comfort will not come without ours, they will get off their asses and do something

Also free Palestine! Free Congo! Free Sudan! And free Tigray! Because America, at the end of the day, is a villain in so many peoples histories and present days.

And yall better be ready to march for as long as it takes until democracy isn’t threatened every couple of years (because that’s not normal)

[mariacallous]

The list of Wisconsin Republicans endorsing the Democratic presidential ticket in November has added three high-profile names: Longtime conservative commentator Charlie Sykes, former lawmaker and judge David Deininger and onetime state Senate Majority Leader Dale Schultz.

The three went public just before the weekend in a Zoom call with reporters to declare their support for Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president, and their opposition to the Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump.

“It is a uniquely dangerous moment, and it’s a moment for us to set aside our differences,” said Sykes, explaining why supporting Harris was “not a difficult choice for me” even though he said he’s likely to disagree with many of the policies on her agenda.

“That’s not the point,” he said of those policy differences. “The point is this choice that America has to make — what kind of country we want to be.”

In backing Harris, the three added to the Democratic campaign’s concerted appeal across party and ideological lines to people who view Trump as a distinct, existential threat. All three declared that under Trump the Republican party has evolved far from the party with which they historically have aligned themselves.

“Unless or until the Trump era ends, that party will not regain its footing, and I think defeating him this year is a way to make sure the Republican Party can rebuild and get back to what has always been the party of Lincoln,” Deininger said.

Sykes has opposed Trump since before he first won the Republican nomination for president in 2016. He’s one of the founders of The Bulwark, a digital publication established in 2019 by anti-Trump conservatives.

Schultz left the state Senate midway through Scott Walker’s tenure as Wisconsin governor after voting against two of Walker’s signature pieces of legislation — a bill that stripped public employees of most of their union rights and another loosening mining regulations.

Deininger was among the former judges who served on the Government Accountability Board — a nonpartisan agency that for a few years served as Wisconsin’s elections and ethics watchdog.

After the board investigated Walker’s campaign for coordinating spending with outside groups in the 2012 recall election — at the time a violation of Wisconsin law — Republicans in the Legislature abolished the independent board in 2015 and changed the state’s campaign finance laws to permit coordination.

“When I was on the Government Accountability Board, our primary function was to protect and preserve the integrity of Wisconsin government and our elections,” Deininger said. “That’s the kind of leadership we need at the federal level, and sadly, it’s the opposite of what we saw from Donald Trump.”

Deininger didn’t equivocate in his criticism of the former president.

“Trump has lied repeatedly to the American public about just about everything, but probably the worst of all is his lies about the outcome and integrity of our elections,” he said, recalling that on Jan. 6, 2021, “Trump encouraged a violent mob to attack the Capitol to overturn the 2020 election.”

“The reality is a second Trump term would be far worse and far more dangerous,” he added.

A U.S. Navy veteran, Deininger also asserted that the president has unique responsibility for overseeing national security — and that he was “dismayed at some of the public comments, publicly reported comments, that former President Trump has made about veterans and military service.”

Schultz emphasized his belief in a bipartisan approach to governing and his faith that Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, would govern in a bipartisan manner. In contrast, he pointed to the destruction brought by Hurricane Helene to the American Southeast and lies spread by the GOP standard bearers in the storm’s aftermath.

Schultz also drew a contrast between Trump’s evocation of “a dystopian future” and “a candidate seeking the highest office in the land talking about the need to come together, joyfully, working on the problems that all of us face” — Harris.

“I myself want to cast my lot with those folks who are [optimistic about] our future, not who are hung up on some sort of Mad Max scene that they see as a future for our country,” Schultz said.

While echoing some of the same criticisms of Trump, Sykes focused on the party that once served as the political homeland for all three Wisconsin Republicans on the press call.

“I have been surprised and disillusioned by watching how many conservatives have gone along with Donald Trump — his lies, his insults, his kowtowing to dictators, his willingness to violate the law,” Sykes said. “One after another, Republicans have decided that winning or staying in power is more important than standing up for these values that used to be, I think, fundamental.”

He also noted the number of staff and appointees  from Trump’s four years in the White House “who are now saying that he is not fit to be returned to office,” including his former vice president, his former defense secretary and his former national security advisor. “There’s no historical parallel for this,” Sykes said.

Trump’s vice president, Mike Pence, and former U.S. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, the Janesville Republican who served in Congress for two decades, have both publicly stated Trump should not be reelected but have declined to endorse  Harris.

Sykes professed his respect for them, but also said leaving the presidential line on the ballot empty or writing in a name — George Washington, Edmund Burke or Ronald Reagan — wasn’t a sufficient response, since it won’t prevent Trump from being reelected.

“The only two candidates who have a chance to win this election are Kamala Harris and Donald Trump,” Sykes said. “And by voting for Kamala Harris, I think that we draw the line and say that Donald Trump should never be allowed anywhere near power again.”

[after-the-end-times]

THE HOPE OF IT ALL

G 💙 750 words 💙 '92 US Election 💙 on AO3

💙❤️💙❤️💙❤️💙❤️💙❤️💙❤️💙

As the 1992 election results started to roll in, The Party were glued to the tv in Steve and Eddie's apartment.

It had been a long time since they'd had a Democrat come this close to winning the Presidency. They all lived for too long under Reagan and then George H W Bush and now they were all watching to see if Bill Clinton could keep Bush from getting a second term.

"Do we really think he's gonna-"

"Shhhh!," Dustin cuts Robin off, "What did I say about jinxing this! No. Predicting!"

Robin mimed zipping her lips closed while she pulled her foot onto the couch. She gave a quick kick that sent him flailing onto the floor.

"Hey! I'm trying to win you an election here and that's how you act! Hmph! And not even a thank you for my effort!"

Robin pointed at her zipped together lips and shrugged faux sadly.

"Ok!," Steve stood up, stopping the inevitable slap fight, "I'm making more popcorn. Who needs another pop?"

Everyone raised their hands as Steve stepped gingerly through and around everyone sprawled on the living room floor. Eddie met his eyes and got up to follow him into the kitchen.

While they hoped it'd be a shut out (Clinton's popularity amongst both Dems and some Republicans was pretty high) they wouldn't know for sure until all the polls closed and the numbers came in.

And until then, they tried not to let the worry gnaw through their stomachs.

They were silent as Steve unwrapped bags of popcorn to put in the microwave and Eddie grabbed cans from the fridge.

Eddie lined the pops up on the bar top between the kitchen and living room and spoke through the opening, "Hey Will, can you hand these out?"

He waited to see Will and El standing to grab them before he turned back to Steve. He stepped up to Steve's back and wrapped his arms around him.

"Don't tell Dustin I said so," he said lowly against Steve's shoulder, "but Clinton's gonna win."

He drags his mouth along Steve's shoulder and mutters into hair, "He's gotta win. We can't do four more years of Bush. Four more years of him not caring about people, our friends, dying."

Steve emptied the last popcorn bag into a bowl and turned in Eddie's arms and hugged him close.

"We're not jinxing," he whispered back, "we're hoping. How can we get change without hope?"

They held each other a few more minutes until Robin came in. She passed the bowls of popcorn across the counter to Lucas and turned back to Steve and Eddie.

She wrapped her arms around herself and stared at the ceiling above their heads, "We're gonna get this. It's gonna happen. And things are gonna get better. They have to. I just can't get this churning dread out of my stomach. Cause what if-"

Before she could put that thought out there, they pulled her into their hug and held her tight. She knew that no matter what happened, they'd have each other, but it was still terrifying. That what-if.

With one last deep breath and hard look between the three, they smoothed their expressions to hide their anxiety and rejoined the kids.

Except. It was finally 8:30 and hope was on the rise. As were the shouts and, yes, predictions getting yelled around the living room.

Because the midwest was going blue. State by state: Michigan, Ohio, and then their new home, Illinois. Blue!

Even southern states were going blue, which none of them could believe. First Georgia and then Tennessee!

Some states were still going to Bush, of course. Big ones like Florida and Texas.

Steve handed $5 over to Eddie when their home state of Indiana stayed red.

But then at 9.30, the tentative hope everyone held tightly to their chests exploded into cheers and whoops when California and Pennsylvania went to Clinton.

"WE WON!", the kids screamed while they jumped up and down.

Steve and Eddie kissed hard and pulled each other into a tight hug.

Robin jumped on top of them from the couch, "I told you! I told you we'd win! Ha!"

The phone on the wall immediately started ringing. Steve pulled away and pushed his way through the wall of bodies to reach it.

Through the space between the kids' heads, Eddie saw Steve answer the phone grinning so hard his eyes did that scrunchy thing he loved so much.

In the instant, he was filled with so much love.

For Steve.

For his friends, here and gone.

For Wayne, who he needed to call if that wasn't him on the phone already.

And even, honestly, surprisingly for all his fellow citizens who came together to bring them this hope and possibility of a better future.

~fin~

[konzenkoryuu]

Just heard that Biden stepped down. No idea who the next candidate is. But even before knowing, I’m still planning to vote blue. Why? Because this election is, sadly, Republican vs Democrat. And the Republicans have shown they want to take away my life and safety. The safety of millions of women and lgbt+ people. I will never vote for a party that wants to take away my rights.

[asklittlepip]

I'm scared, Pip. What if this is the end of the kind of life we know? What if damage is done that we can't recover from? What if this time really is different?

There are so many ways that things can go wrong and only a very few ways they can go right. From getting even more of a stranglehold upon the Supreme Court (with the solution being to expand the court; if we ever have any other fair elections again..), to even just a fraction of the horrible shit in Project 2025 happening. I swear to whatever gods exist and whichever don't, that anyone who's centrist OR leftist needs to get their fucking marketing right. You can't tell terrible people that a terrible person is going to do terrible things that they agree with. You need to hammer on the shit that everyone agrees is terrible; like drilling for oil in natural parks, destroying Social Security, that sorta thing. They try and bring up healthcare and human dignity, but since these assholes don't consider that "earned", they don't care, even if they're voting against themselves. Remember these are the people who've literally drowned in their own blood denying COVID as it kills them. Logic doesn't mean shit to an idiot.

The Simpsons said it best years ago; Republicans are just straight up evil, but Democrats don't know what they're freakin' doing. And, sadly, I think we learned another lesson about America. We already knew that a third party win under the current system is impossible; Teddy Roosevelt couldn't win when he tried; but now we also know that a woman winning versus a man is also seemingly impossible. Too many voters literally chose the pedophile rapist fraudster over the criminal prosecutor. Fucked up but true.

I was going to put this into it's own post but, basically, what we need to do is mitigate the damage and hope to hell that this idiot doesn't start World War III by sucking off Putin any more or pissing off some other random nation, and pray that his own incompetence will hinder him. Looking at who he wants to hire, that may very well happen. But we can't rely on it, especially since there's also the strong possibility of J.D. Vader over here pulling the 25th Amendment and taking over himself to sweep in fascism "properly". He's a 'true believer', but he's also a shallow, cowardly man so that might not occur, and Donny might just hamburger himself into the grave any moment, too.

My hope isn't extinguished, but I am so very, very disappointed in this country right now. Guy kills 1.3 million people, literally worse than Hitler, and they decide to give 'em another shot, with even more power and basically getting away with almost all his crimes. He's old and unhealthy, but.. evil people also seem to have some power to stay alive for ages. Fuckin' Dark Side, man...

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Noah Berlatsky at Everything Is Horrible:

Outgoing president Joe Biden pardoned his son, Hunter, to protect him from prosecution by a rabid and vengeful incoming President Donald Trump. In response, a lot of pundits, and a lot of Democrats, denounced the action as nepotism, or as a clear abuse of the pardon power. Colorado Governor Jared Polis insisted, “This is a bad precedent that could be abused by later Presidents and will sadly tarnish his reputation.” Senator Peter Welch of Vermont said the pardon was “unwise.” Legal journalist and Brookings fellow Benjamin Wittes argued that the pardon was “self-dealing to a family member” and that it was “wildly broad” since it immunizes Hunter for any crimes he may have committed over the course of a decade. You can argue back and forth here on the merits. But Tim Miller at the Bulwark makes a big picture argument; he worries that support for the Hunter Biden pardon is a sign of disintegrating norms and an erosion of faith in the rule of law among Democrats.

Trump was found liable for sexual assault, convicted of hush money payouts in the 2016 election, and of course led an insurrection in 2020. Nonetheless, he was reelected. Democrats, Miller says, are now following Republicans into nihilism; the Hunter pardon is Biden, and his supporters, insisting the LOL, nothing matters. Miller then makes an appeal to decency and liberal values. We have to follow the rules and demand better of ourselves than of the opposition, he argues. “There is one thing that does matter in this life. And it’s the only thing you actually control: Acting in accordance with your own integrity. In a way that lets you feel good about yourself.” That’s a stirring argument. But I think it’s one that can cut various ways. Because…does “acting in accordance with your own integrity” really have to mean putting a “kick me, fascists” sign on your face and then letting the fascists kick you? When Trump says he will use the vast powers of the presidency in unprecedented and violent ways to go after his personal enemies, do you just have so sit on your hands and say, “well, gee, that sucks, but at least I’m not dirtying myself by trying to stop him”? Or, maybe, might integrity mean refusing to let Trump roll over you?

Fight, for fuck’s sake

There are certainly some things Democrats shouldn’t do and shouldn’t countenance. Democrats should not, for example, agree to let fascists target trans people in order to get votes (not least because it won’t work). They shouldn’t let party leaders like Bob Menendez indulge in an orgy of corruption with impunity. They shouldn’t support a genocide in Gaza either. (Biden hasn’t done so well with that one.) There are lines you shouldn’t cross.

But when thinking about which norms matter, and what integrity entails, it’s also important to recognize that fascists like Trump count on the fact that liberal institutionalists are often conflict averse, and that they will sometimes even refuse to defend themselves for fear of the opinion of supposedly neutral arbiters like (say) Benjamin Wittes and Tim Miller. The most egregious example here is Merrick Garland’s decision to slow walk or stymie prosecution of Donald Trump for his 2020 coup attempt. Garland didn’t want to prosecute Trump because he feared that such a prosecution would look partisan; he delayed for two years until revelations by the January 6th commission and (I’d argue) revelations about Trump’s misuse of classified material post presidency forced him to belatedly recognize that Trump was not in fact going to disappear or stop criming. By then, it was too late, and Trump (with the help of the supine and criminal Republican party) was able to run out the clock.

Failures like this are enabled by the conventional Beltway/pundit wisdom that says that the real threat to democracy is partisanship—rather than, say, fascism. Garland (and presumably Biden in choosing a centrist equivocator for his AG) believed that you protect the Constitution by refusing to identify fascists as fascists or bad actors as bad actors. The goal is to be even-handed, and refuse to see the boot coming at your genitals. You avoid a constitutional crisis by pretending there is no constitutional crisis; as long as you pretend you can’t see them, then the emperor isn’t wearing jackboots. (Another disgusting variation on this is Congressman Jim Clyburn’s recent suggestion that Biden should pardon Trump.) Again, this approach has worked very badly. It has not protected the integrity of Garland or of Biden. It has made them look like weak fools, and it has made it look like liberal institutions are unable to handle fascism or to protect vulnerable people from fascism.

President Biden’s decision to use his pardon powers to thwart Donald Trump’s vengeance desires are smart and necessary.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

It was a rough day in the Supreme Court for anyone who cares about transgender kids, women, men, or people. In short, the reactionary justices on the Court seem poised to create an exception that will allow discrimination based on sex in cases involving healthcare. The rationale of the justices seemed to be that “healthcare is complicated” and “best left to the discretion of part-time legislators” in GOP-controlled states that have a lock on power through political and racial gerrymandering.

Before reviewing the specifics, let’s talk about the solution—and the missed opportunity. During the first two years of the Biden administration, Democrats could have expanded the Supreme Court to override the death grip of the reactionary majority. Democrats controlled the House, the Senate, and the Presidency from 2021 to 2023. Expanding the Court required only the passage of bill by a majority vote in both chambers of Congress (and creating a carve-out in the filibuster, which requires only a majority vote).

But calls to expand the Court were met with disbelief and horror. Opponents warned that expanding the Court would “undermine its legitimacy.” That quaint notion was demolished by rulings in cases like Dobbs (overruling Roe v Wade), Trump v. US (fabricating presidential immunity out of whole cloth), Bruen (concealed carry of handguns in public is a universal right), Bremerton (okay for football coach to lead public school athletes in prayer at midfield after games), Cargill (a bump-stock rifle that can fire 13 rounds per second is not a “machine gun”), and Snyder (bribes given as “thank you gifts” are not illegal). (List is not complete; feel free to add others in the Comment section.)

During the two-year period when Democrats had a trifecta in Washington, they suffered from a lack of imagination. They could not imagine that the Court would take a wrecking ball to the US Constitution and the rules of judicial interpretation and restraint. Lesson learned.

Democrats will regain a trifecta. When they do, we must not waste a moment worrying about the “legitimacy of the Court.” Like Elvis, it has left the building, and it isn’t coming back. We must never again allow a lack of imagination about the depravity of the Republican Party to detain us.

Sadly, the religious and cultural biases of the reactionary majority were again on display during arguments in US v. Skrmetti. The facts are straightforward: Tennessee has outlawed the use of certain medications for use by transgender youth. The law plainly discriminates on the basis of sex because those same medications can be used by other minors who are not seeking to transition or affirm their gender. See generally Ian Millhiser in Vox, The horrifying implications of today’s Supreme Court argument on trans rights, in US v. Skrmetti.

Under existing precedent, laws that discriminate based on gender are subjected to a higher degree of judicial scrutiny to determine if they violate the Equal Protection Clause. Under settled law, the Tennessee ban should be subjected to heightened scrutiny. But the reactionary justices seem intent on allowing the Tennessee ban to escape heightened scrutiny (and thereby remain on the books). Accordingly, four justices seemed willing to create an exception to the heightened standard for cases arising in the “medical context.”

What could go wrong? I mean, it’s not like the reactionary justices are relying on the views of witch-burning judge from 17th-century England (as they did in Dobbs). In fact, the reactionary justices seemed inclined to follow selected European laws dealing with transgender youth rather than the US Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court.

As explained by Ian Millhiser, Justice Roberts led the charge in suggesting that there should be a “carve out” to the heightened scrutiny standard of review for sex discrimination in the medical context:

If the Court adopts Roberts’s approach, which seems likely, that’s not just a devastating blow to transgender youth and their families. It’s also a sea change in the Court’s approach to sex discrimination of all kinds. Again, [previous cases] held that “all” laws that draw lines based on sex must survive heightened scrutiny, even though some laws ultimately clear this hurdle. “All” means all. But now many of the justices seem eager to hold that only some laws that classify people based on sex are presumptively unconstitutional.

The Republican attempt to legalize discrimination against trans people begins with its assault on the equal protection of trans youth. Again, as Millhiser notes,

It’s hard to divorce this case from its political context. During his recently victorious presidential campaign, President-elect Donald Trump went all in on anti-trans rhetoric — spending literally hundreds of millions of dollars on ads that, in the Washington Post’s words, “paint trans people as a menace to society.”

Republicans are discriminating against transgender youth because they can and because it is a wedge issue that will lead to additional areas of sex discrimination. Such discrimination is one of the last bastions of “acceptable” discrimination in America. The reactionary justices are poised to “aid and abet” in that discrimination by refusing to subject it to the heightened scrutiny that is applied to all other forms of sex discrimination.

As with reproductive liberty, the reactionary justices will wrap their complicity in the claim that they are “sending the issue back to the peoples’ representative.” But other constitutional rights do not blink in and out of existence depending on a person’s residence. That is precisely why we have a federal constitution—to ensure that there is a supreme law of the land not subject to the vagaries of state legislators who choose their voters (through gerrymandering) rather than being chosen by voters.

It was a tough day. We must never again suffer from a lack of imagination. And that lesson should be applied to every situation where Democrats have an advantage—no matter how transitory or narrow.

Recognizing the Democratic achievement in the House

The Supreme Court has blessed the use of political gerrymandering to make it nearly impossible to dislodge incumbents. Republicans have pushed gerrymandering to the extreme, thereby bestowing on themselves a “built in” unfair advantage in the House arising from red-state gerrymandered districts. See David Daley in Salon, How Republicans held the House: It's the gerrymander, stupid.

Per Daley,

Republicans’ margin of victory [in the US House] was just three seats, and their working majority as the next term begins will be almost nonexistent.

As it happens, three seats is exactly the number that Republicans engineered in their favor this cycle in North Carolina, as the result of an extreme gerrymander gifted to them by that state’s Republican-controlled Supreme Court.

The fact that Democrats clawed their way to 215 seats is an achievement to be celebrated—not the badge of shame portrayed by many commentators. Readers forward articles to me daily that explain “what Democrats did wrong” or “why Democrats lost.” Nearly 100% of those articles adopt the “just so” story that Democrats lost because they stopped listening to the working class (a falsehood so egregious I will not repeat the obvious response, but instead direct critics to any and every campaign speech delivered by Kamala Harris).

One grassroots organization sent a newsletter that said that Democrats “must have made mistakes” because “we lost.” As framed, that syllogism is false. Democrats could have (and did) run a sound campaign but lost, nonetheless. See, e.g., gerrymandering in the House, described above.

I am not saying that Democrats are perfect or can’t improve or are blameless in the 2024 losses. But the handwringing and gnashing of teeth by Democratic political commentators are out of control. Predictably, every “what went wrong” article miraculously validates the author’s worldview and prior (successful) campaign experience (usually on the Obama campaign).

With apologies for that detour, let’s get back to my thesis: Democrats have every reason to be proud of their accomplishment in increasing their representation in the House in the 119th Congress, which starts on January 6, 2025. The Democratic success in the 2024 election has saddled Speaker Mike Johnson with the smallest House majority in history.

Let me repeat: “The smallest House majority in history.”

See NYTimes, Mike Johnson’s Newest Headache: The Smallest House Majority in History. (This article is accessible to all.)

Despite being in the minority in the House, Democrats are in a strong position. I recommend reading the NYTimes article above to understand the details of the Republican majority’s predicament, but here is one example:

The relief from the budget ceiling negotiated by President Biden expires in January 2025. Republicans want to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts as their first order of business in January 2025—a move that will raise the debt unless Republicans create new sources of revenue (i.e., “raise taxes”) or slash spending. Cutting spending is easy to talk about but hard to do when your ox is being gored by cuts to services or projects important to your constituents.

It seems unlikely that Republicans will be able to pass any spending bills without Democratic support. That outcome is a direct result of the countless hours and tireless work of Democratic grassroots volunteers.

No one will thank you or even think of you when the bigwigs are negotiating in the halls of the Capitol or sitting uncomfortably on the awkward couches in the Oval Office. Still, you are the reason Democrats will have a seat at the table. Every vote cast, every ballot cured, every door knocked, every postcard sent, and every phone call made is directly responsible for Democratic power in the 119th Congress.

So, rather than blaming “Democrats” for their imagined arrogance or manufactured “mistakes,” we should thank them for standing up to Trump and MAGA extremism. We still have a dog in the fight and a seat at the table because of you.

Since precious few other commentators are saying what should be said, I will say it:

Thank you for a job well done.

Democrats who volunteered their time and donated their resources are true heroes of democracy. Your nation will forever be in your debt for a job well done. And your reward is that you get to do it all over again, starting yesterday.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

[ghostowlattic]

"No Food has entered"

Oh my, why would food do such a thing? How could food do it anyhow? Strange.

It would seem kind of important, unless this is pure propaganda, to add that our country's current admin. and Israel are the ones blocking food and aid. to purposely starve 400,000 + people. And to mention also that Biden/Harris/Blinken personally signed off on attacking aid trucks and ambulances.

Aid trucks and ambulances.

It's absurdist, agonizing really, reading western headlines as they constantly try to twist reality daily. When you watch the events yourself or see them live streamed online, only to see headlines moments later which purposely misinform, it becomes even more clear how much the western media keeps people in a manipulated bubble. Which was clear anyhow but it sure does become more apparent when you really see it in action working overtime.

I'm sad and somewhat surprised to watch the 'left', Dems mostly, of the USA be so quiet. People who seemed good at picking apart those police shooting articles saying, 'a police officer was holding a gun today when 3 of the bullets inside it killed a teen'. You know, where it's obvious they write anything to distort responsibility or even blame the victim? Now headline after headline is the same about our actions in the world and there is so much---silence!? Is the manipulation just working really well, or people are ignoring it for the election? Why does the Democrat's morality always seems to stop at the border? I certainly can't expect much humanity from Republicans.

I was always deeply hurt learning about the holocaust. I was a rather weird kid who studied all of those things very early on, including Cambodia, Pol Pot, Vietnam, more recent world history in general than my classes ever approached. Call me crazy but, I thought the lesson was that we could never let that happen again to anyone. To PEOPLE. To ANYONE.

Now it feels like we could be shoving people into gas chambers, we're already starving them and burning them alive, and it's like hey, isn't this great we just can't let this happen to Jewish people again? I'm like what the living fuck, this isn't what I signed up for. No one should be treated this way, nobody.

How can people here defend women's rights -- then be quiet about your nation helping to starve half a million women and children to death? No conflict there?

Is this what Trump did to us, is this our national soul now even for those who oppose him? Saying nothing while burning people alive in hospital beds!?

Trump is obviously a walking piece of living excrement and certainly isn't better in any regard, but anyone able to stay silent or not criticize your own nation and party as 100 thousand people are murdered in your name, as entire populations are being purposely starved, if it's just because they think it might spoil the election and it's 'not the time', how are they possibly a better human than he is?

Harris has now fully committed herself to this horror sadly, she said there was not single mistake made, and that she would have done NOTHING differently this year. Nothing. She added she will put NO RESTRICTIONS on Israel. Affirming she far right of Richard Nixon of all people, who you can see on historic videos warning people why we should never ever write Israel a blank check or they will bomb everyone in the region. It's truly weird to listen to Dick fucking Nixon explain why you need peace and love in the world more than the current Democrat running in 2024, things are probably a bit out of hand.

So what would be much for Americans? Democrats for that matter, it's not like I can expect Republicans to grow a heart if they ever had any, but everyone else? Because it's feeling like there is no limit. Officially it's over 41,000 but we know the number is more likely over 100k.

There are now over one million people displaced in a week. Is that not too much??

Then there is Aaron Bushnell, a 25 yo US serviceman who set himself aflame this year, burned himself alive saying it doesn't even compare to what Palestinians are going through, and notice how few Americans seem to give a shit or notice? Democrats seemed awfully offended by Trumps treatment of the military and yet our own soldiers set themselves on FIRE? Killing themselves in protest and, nothing?

400,000 in Gaza with no food since October 1. Are we going to just sit and wait for them to starve? This isn't a natural disaster. Civilians, women, children killed in mass numbers and this is still the good side of the country? How can anyone discuss something as important as abortion and women's rights while starving and bombing women and children in great numbers and not find that a bit...conflicting?

It was so soulless to see this morning, after watching the IDF burn people alive as it happened this week -- that Sky News had the gal to use those VERY images, those of burning people alive in hospital beds, with a story instead about Iran's missile attack, that killed no one, from a week earlier. Knowing people will likely conclude the terrible things they are seeing were not done by the IDF and the West, but Iran. Over and over straight up propaganda.

History will remember this. And since those involved are having such a 'great' time live streaming their own atrocities on social media, it's making it the most documented genocide in history and will be watched in detail for generations to come. It's insane to watch people openly discuss they want genocide and be very honest about it, to live stream theirselves killing people and to see them play in children's clothes after murdering them and just look at how passive Americans are. As the news is full of strange headlines like the one above..where FOOD magically keeps itself out of places with no reason or logic, starvation, bombings, displaced people, by....this mysterious nobody! Manipulation... the loss of active verbs will astound you.

I mean, I really do not have love for Nazis and bigots, I dislike seeing any sort of hate and fascism in fury. So, how could I not find it equally unnerving to see a huge group of American Israeli supporters this week carrying flags with stars of David, singing the melody of Hey Jude to 'No more Gaza', and laughing and chanting for the death of 2 million human beings? How is this morally different? Are people really so absurd that if the very same forms of hatred return but it's a diff symbol or reversed it's just unnoticed? Defended even? Are people really just led by some weird guilt so the holocaust was a get-one-free holocaust card for one specific group of people, instead of lesson to defend human life and dignity for everyone???

It makes me wonder, what was our entire culture about? Movies, art, lessons, all the supposed morals and novels from war and fiction and our own history? What was all these decades of artists, shows, film makers, going on and on about humanist topics worth? Streaming years worth of documentaries online about humanity, history, society - only to sit as it happens all over again? How can American liberals watch Republicans lie and say crazy things like immigrants will eat your pets, and laugh at it, and say damn we're not that stupid - but then Israel tells the world Palestinians and Syrians and Lebanese and pretty much every Arab in the world sleeps with a missile under their bed and you're like shit well here's billions of dollars and weapons go end them all? How can you not recognize the same techniques or just really so equally racist? What was the point of culture and movies or documentaries, even Star Wars -- any of these moralistic stories, if you all just sit here and let it happen again without saying a word? Does it have to come dressed in the same attire for you to recognize it?

I don't use FB a ton lately but I will post this here. I don't even try to share overly or get too personal online but with this, I feel it's not good for my soul to not say something more. Fuck Trump forever and I hope he loses or better yet dissolves into a pile of goo, but how can anyone else actually sit at ease or stay silent when this this current admin is fully supporting this and signing off to attack aid workers? If fascism is bad...isn't fkn' genocide?? Are you really ok if its not inside America?? Really? Even good ole American dad Tim Walz says he supports this mass death, so there's your cuddly football coach for you.

I cannot in good faith back my government's actions or those supporting this. This is beyond atrocious and I only can wish people can find their true hearts.

I get that human beings just aren't there yet, we are pretty much just mostly hairless apes fresh off the plains. I try not to be very misanthropic because I don't expect too much from people in the first place. I think there is an endless amount of love and beauty in people.

Still I'm disheartened by my own people on the 'good' side mostly. And with, ignorant celebs like Bill Maher are obviously assholes, most know that I guess, but still. Watching him and other libs saying gay people would be thrown off of a roof by Palestinians, just weeks after I literally watched Israelis blindfold Palestinians and throw them off of a building to their deaths, one after the other, feels like the most demonic gaslighting. Is there some throwing people off of buildings morality system I'm unaware of, or is that generally like, a terrible thing to do? And if being homophobic is a reason for genocide, then what of many of my Texan neighbors, Trump supporters, and the entire USA or half the planet? And I know this is crazy but, I wouldn't want to burn them alive or use white phosphorous on them or starve entire Republican cities to death either. Go figure?

I have friends in Israel and all over that I care for much, I want peace and safety for as many in this world as can be. But there is no way I can defend this, or any apartheid system for that matter.

There is nothing anyone can do that justifies this being done to anyone. Not terrorism, nothing. If you think 'terrorism' justifies collective death punishment and starvation maybe it's time to reconsider if you have a soul.

At very least perhaps we can like, not starve half a million people this month and fight for their dignity. Even just more people saying anything at all.

DIGNITY, something all humans deserve.

Wishing everyone truly a beautiful week and life, and hoping for much better for everyone.