#the democrats has had all the chances to protect people

[theladyvalkyrieskyeart]

*TAPS AGGRESSIVELY* this is why guys.

I mean..... "vote blue no matter who" and this is the best they got.

This is an excellent response

[wilwheaton]

The conservative justices had an opportunity to rally to the defense of democracy, to gird the system against further attack, to righteously defend the rule of law, and to protect its own prerogatives and powers against a wannabe tyrant who is counting on them to be his supplicants. They could have drawn a sharp line. They could have summoned indignation and outrage. They could have overlooked their partisan priors in favor of principle – or more cravenly in favor of self-preservation. With the possible and limited exception of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, they did none of that. They failed in the worst possible way at the most crucial time.

Rogue SCOTUS Abandons Democracy In Her Hour Of Greatest Need

Say this with me: This SCOTUS majority is not an impartial arbiter of law. This SCOTUS majority has no respect for precedent, the will of the people, or its fundamental role in government.

This SCOTUS majority is doing through force what the other members of their movement could not achieve through elections: change laws to take equality and freedoms away from as many people as possible, to completely remake America into something we don’t recognize.

Donald Trump and his cult are the greatest threat America has ever faced in its history, with this corrupt, venal, activist group of unelected liars (and at least two rapists) enabling him.

Democrats absolutely have to expand the court and begin an impeachment inquiry into Thomas and Kavanaugh the instant they have congressional majorities. 

I don’t think it’s too late, but it’s about five seconds away from being too late. If Congress doesn’t act hard and fast, these seven people will turn America over to corporations and megachurches.

We have to stop this, and the only way we have any chance at all is to turn out in massive numbers this November to overwhelmingly defeat the people who will put Project 2025 into action.

[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.

[mariacallous]

Evidence is mounting that Europe’s far right will score better than ever before in the upcoming European Parliament elections on June 6 to June 9—and that the continent’s young voters will fuel its ascent. The young adults now gravitating to far right aren’t Nazis or xenophobic racists, but they may have a hand in an outcome that will, at the very least, shift the European Union’s priorities and accents to the right. A particularly solid right-wing finish—and cooperation across the hard-right spectrum—could rattle EU unity and throw a wrench into the bloc’s workings at a time when it is confronting acute crises on several fronts, not least the war in Ukraine.

Since new laws mean that even people under 18 will be eligible to vote in some countries—16-year-olds in Austria, Germany, Malta, and Belgium, and 17-year-olds in Greece—there had been hope that these new voters would put a brake on the populist surge engulfing Europe. The idea behind giving 16- and 17-year-olds the vote was partly based on their long-term investment in politics. The policies designed today will affect them for many decades, in contrast to their grandparents.

And in the 2019 European Parliament election, young voters showed great promise by turning out in record numbers, a hopeful sign that reflected their enthusiasm for the common European project. With the climate movement rocking the streets, their votes went disproportionately to green parties that championed strong climate protection and deeper EU integration—two sets of long-term interests. This landed green representatives from Portugal to Latvia in the Brussels parliament and prompted the EU administration to approve the European Green Deal in 2020.

But the democratic exuberance of voters in their late teens, 20s, and early 30s could boost a very different trend this June, as growing numbers of younger voters are siding with far-right populist parties—the very ones that want to scupper the Green Deal and rein in the EU. In recent national votes conducted in Portugal, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Finland, and France, young people voted in unprecedented numbers for extreme nationalist and euroskeptic parties. (Though some observers have argued that reporting about these trends is incomplete or oversimplified.) And surveys in Germany show the youth vote becoming ever more sympathetic to the Alternative for Germany (AfD), a far-right party that has undergone a radicalization that makes it among Europe’s fiercest, hard-right electoral parties.

“There’s no doubt that these parties have been making inroads to younger voters,” said Catherine de Vries, a Dutch political scientist. “The parties don’t look so extreme anymore, as they’ve been around for a while now. And young people think that the mainstream parties have had their chance. The system still doesn’t work for them, so let the other guys have a try.”

A German study published this year by a team led by youth researcher Simon Schnetzer showed that a full 22 percent of the young people (in this case, ages 14 through 29) surveyed would vote for the AfD if German elections were held today—twice as many as just two years ago. The tally for the Green Party fell by a third during that time frame. A full quarter of those asked said they weren’t sure who’d they vote for—another all-time high result.

The grounds for the pronounced shift are vague: Researchers tend to cite a general unhappiness with the post-pandemic economic and political conditions. “It seems as if the coronavirus pandemic left [young people] irritated about our ability to cope with the future, which is reflected in deep insecurity,” wrote the study’s authors. The issues described by participants that most impact this insecurity included their personal finances, professional opportunities, the health sector, and social recognition. They expressed less concern about the climate crisis and more about inflation, the economy, and old-age poverty.

“We can speak of a clear shift to the right in the young population,” said Klaus Hurrelmann, one of the study’s authors and a professor at the Hertie School in Berlin. The AfD’s foremost campaign priority of stopping immigration and refugee relief plainly struck a chord: Compared to a separate study conducted five years ago, about half as many (26 percent) of the young participants (26 percent) in the 2024 study said they were not in favor of taking in refugees. But just as important as the content of immigration policies, the authors underlined, was the idea that young people feel unheard or involved in the political process.

The change in sympathy in many young Germans reflects survey results, elections, and the statements of other young people across Europe. In the Netherlands’ elections last year, the most popular party among people under 35 (at 17 percent) was the Party for Freedom, led by Geert Wilders, a far-right populist with a long record of EU-trashing.

The explanation provided by many Dutch experts: It’s all about bestaanszekerheid, a Dutch word translated as “livelihood security.” This refers to having a decent and regular income, a comfortable home, access to education and health care, and a buffer against unexpected problems, de Vries told the Guardian. Young peoples’ leading concerns in the Netherlands are housing, overcrowded classes, and struggling hospitals, she said, which Wilders addressed in his campaign.

In Portugal’s March legislative elections, the far-right Chega party, which prioritized courting young people, raked in more of their votes than any other party. The meaning of chega, which can be translated as “that’s enough,” accurately describes many young voters’ motive for supporting it. Their gripes: “a very low average wage and an economy that cannot absorb educated young people,” according to political scientist António Costa Pinto in an interview with Euronews

“In the past, right-wing sympathizers accused immigrants of taking their jobs,” said Eberhard Seidel, the managing director of a Berlin-based nongovernmental organization called Schools Without Racism. “Now there are enough jobs but not enough housing for people who work. They still have to live with their parents.”

Observers say that the far right has excelled at grabbing the youth’s attention, not least with the social media platform TikTok. The recent German study found that 57 percent of young people imbibe their news and politics through social media. More than 90 percent use messaging service WhatsApp, followed by Instagram (80 percent) and YouTube (77 percent). TikTok stands at 51 percent; more than half of all 14- to 29-year-olds now use the app regularly, compared to 44 percent last year. The epiphany prompted an immediate response from German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach, who on declared in his first video on the platform, posted on March 19: “Revolution on TikTok: It starts today.”

Other opinion surveys show that young voters are diverse, divided, and undecided. A YouGov poll conducted in August 2023 showed that young Europeans are overwhelmingly concerned about the climate crisis and its likely effects, and more willing than older people to change behavior to mitigate those effects. Another poll, conducted in Germany, showed human rights violations at the top of younger people’s lists, followed by climate change, sexual harassment, and child abuse.

Younger voters still aren’t the drivers of xenophobia in the way that their parents’ generation was, Seidel said. A vote for the AfD doesn’t necessarily mean that they favor expelling immigrants from Germany or exiting the EU. “They take the basics of democracy and the social system for granted,” he said. “And they’re not fully aware of the implications of a rightward lurch in their political systems.”

Neither were Brexit’s voters, Seidel noted. And they found out the hard way.

[posttexasstressdisorder]

GOP has gone rancid—and it isn't fair decent people have to keep cleaning up after them

D. Earl Stephens

April 23, 2024 5:27AM ET

People await the arrival of former U.S. President Donald Trump at a rally for Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) at the Miami-Dade Country Fair and Exposition on November 6, 2022 in Miami, Florida. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.

I’ve heard more than enough from people identifying as Republicans to last for whatever is left of my life.

By words and actions, Republicans have proven they are not serious people, and most definitely do not love or care for our country. We have learned without any doubt during the past decade that there is no line they won’t cross, rule they won’t break, or lie they won’t tell to further their dirty causes, which have absolutely nothing to do with making America great.

They are incapable of good governance, and have settled into mob rule. The Republican-led House of Representatives is a complete and nasty joke, where members literally elbow and hiss at each other, and that is both true and terribly, terribly sad.

With help from our inept Justice Department and a bought-off Conservative Supreme Court, Republicans are making a mockery of the notion that our nation is protected by the rule of law. They know better than anybody, that this simply is not true.

They have exploited a system they have learned to eagerly spit on by refusing to allow nominations for Supreme Court Justices in some cases, while rocketing other Conservative nominees through the Senate in record time.

READ: Breaking our democracy is all part of the GOP plan

They call violent terrorists who attack our country hostages, and expect the press to keep swallowing it whole, because that’s what they do.

Cheating and underhandedness is in their DNA.

They are long past the point of no return, and will either pay for their felonious behavior, or will somehow be rewarded for it at the polls this November, in which case we are done with our Democratic experiment after 248 years.

It is now up to Democrats to once again save this nation from the sick arsonists eagerly trying to burn it to the ground, and that is helluva lot to ask, and isn’t remotely fair.

Here’s a damn truth we don’t hear near enough about: If the Democratic candidate for president was facing 91 felony counts, had been convicted of fraud, was a serial abuser of women, told a documented 30,573 lies in four years, spread a big, toxic lie about an election he lost, and praised dictators, the party and the people who support it, would drop him/her like a rock.

He or she wouldn’t stand a chance. They’d be banished to the nearest dumpster. No decent person would want to be associated with such obvious scum.

The people who vote on the Left and the Right in this country are not remotely the same, and I am way past sick and tired of hearing that they are.

Something as despicable and odious as Donald J. Trump could NEVER happen in the Democratic Party. We simply would not allow it.

That right there is an ironclad fact.

Democrats and left-leaning people are not perfect, because no person is, but we still believe in truth, decency and manners. ALL children are important in our world, which is why we believe feeding them and getting them the healthcare and the childcare they need is vital, and far more important than paying the taxes of filthy-rich, bloated billionaires. We still believe that how the United States projects itself to rest of the world and our children means something.

We love our country, warts and all.

We still believe that when we’ve made mistakes, or said stupid, hurtful things we should apologize for them, not recklessly double down like ill-bred maniacs.

We have not, and will not, surrender to the lowest form of life like Trump. It is simply not in us.

As of this writing, I am officially DONE listening to the unmitigated gall that “both sides do it” or “both parties are the same” because that’s a complete load of bullshit. It is brutally insulting to the tens of millions of people in this country who play by the rules, believe all people are created equal, and still know a damn lie, or attack on our country when they hear it and see it.

The people who populate the Left and Right in our country are wired differently, and it’s time this was said out loud, and repeatedly. It is also long past time our media reported this. Especially because they know it to be true.

In the newsrooms where I used to work, if something so obviously bad and as evil as Trump and his enablers had burst on the scene, we would have been sounding alarms and reporting on it 24/7. The man means us and our country harm. We know this because he is SHOWING US AND TELLING US THIS.

There is seldom a day that goes by without him saying or doing something revolting and egregious. The media doesn’t even bother asking his Republican followers in Congress to account for his larceny anymore. They just accept it as somehow normal when it most certainly is not and never can be.

There are two sides to the story that should be told in America right now. One is called, good, the other is called, evil.

The only reason our national press does not report on this legitimately and accurately is simply because they are pathetic cowards, plain and simple. They know they are failing, but are carrying on despicably, anyway.

I’ll always have ammo to burn addressing their egregious behavior these days, but for now, I want to continue unwinding this thread of how the Left and Right are completely different and how unfair it is that we have to deal with the never-ending recklessness on the Right.

Back in 2015, when Trump laughably announced he’d be seeking the Republican nomination for president, many prominent Republicans rightfully scoffed at the possibility. You’ll get no better example than Lindsey Graham’s evergreen tweet: “If we nominate Trump we will get destroyed.......and we will deserve it.” Graham went on to call Trump, “a jackass.”

The Bushes, Rubios, and other red-blooded Republicans all saw Trump for what he was: completely disgusting and ridiculous. That was before the big-mouth, lifetime loser started blasting them off the debate stage by imitating a slobbering, belligerent drunk at the end of the bar.

Instead of bouncing him from the party, they allowed him to play to the delight of the silent minority in America, who had watched him bravely fire people on his TV show, and lick his toilet seat by degrading President Obama with his putrid, racist, noxious birther blather.

These were the fine people whose tongues bled from self-censoring the bile that flowed from their broken brains, into their big, fat mouths, and had taken centuries to finally go out of taste in this country. It killed them that there were actually awful, hurtful things they could not say out loud anymore.

Now they were free to be themselves again, and let the sludge flow freely from their chapped lips.

Their freedoms had nothing to do with breaking free from any chains, or breaking glass ceilings. No, their freedoms meant having the permission from the very top to be just as disgusting and appalling as they wanted to be. It meant belittling the disabled, and dragging women into the gutter. It meant coddling Nazis and calling cities that terrified them with their sophistication, “s--t holes.”

Before we knew it Nazis and white suprematists were coming out of their caves everywhere and lighting their tiki torches. They were finally on the march to the point of no return, where their disgusting leader was waiting to tell them that he loved them.

Once you have coddled a racist, a traitor, a two-timer, a friend of our enemies, an environmental terrorist, a serial liar, and a sociopath, you are completely lost and broken. Done.

Now the mob rules the Republican Party, which makes it fitting they are represented by this two-bit thug, who is currently sitting in a court room for hiding campaign money he paid to an adult movie star he slept with named Stormy, while his wife was at home caring for a newborn.

Yeah, that’s good and wholesome and normal right there.

A few have broken free of the madman’s grip in the Republican Party, while others have tried, and have crumpled into a heap and back into the mud and slime.

In February, Trump’s very own attorney general, the morally corrupt, Bill Barr, stumbled into bravery and truth when he said that voting for Trump would be “playing Russian roulette with the country.”

By this past Wednesday he had once again devolved and said, but “I’ll support the Republican ticket” if Trump leads it.

Also in February, New Hampshire Republican Governor Chris Sununu said of Trump: “A--holes come and go. But America is here to stay.”

On Sunday, he admitted he had changed his tune and said: “Look, nobody should be shocked that the Republican governor is supporting the Republican president.”

That’s exactly right, governor: A--holes come and go, and apparently you will do everything you can to hang around for a while. You are a revolting person, sport.

Nobody should be surprised by these things anymore, because the Republican Party is irredeemable and incapable of surprises. They can ALWAYS go lower, and prove it literally every day.

This is what happens when you are morally busted and are not bound by any rules or self-control that guides the rest of us.

This is what happens when you surrender to depravity.

This is what happens when you rubber stamp abuse of women, lies, insurrection and support for dictators as anything in the vicinity of normal.

So what happens when standing by the truth and playing by the rules gets you nowhere as a political party and as a country? What happens when millions discover there is no justice and a depraved mad man once again has the keys to the kingdom?

Thanks to the Barrs and the Sununus, and the tens of millions of below-average, broken-down Republicans littering our country, we are terrifyingly close to finding out.

It is up to the Left to take out the garbage once again in America, because the Right has lost its damn mind, as well as its sense of taste and smell.

At what point can all this FINALLY be delivered as fact and shouted on Page 1?

At what point can we quit pretending that both sides are even remotely the same?

NOW READ: What most assuredly happens when Trump sits down with the New York Times

D. Earl Stephens is the author of “Toxic Tales: A Caustic Collection of Donald J. Trump’s Very Important Letters” and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. Follow @EarlofEnough and on his website.

[the-real-sasuke-uchiha]

Thoughts on Hashirama's past with trauma? Frankly I think it's an excuse that he didn't stand up against Tobirama because their father abused him. He was the Hokage.. Also I'm not sure who to ask this but you seem knowledgeable Sas so can you refresh my memory about what happened with Madara, Hashi, and Tobirama? It's been a while since I read the manga/watched the anime. If you have time/effort. Just a quick explanation is all I'm looking for. :)

Anyone who disagrees please don't get angry and attack, and take it up with me if you do.

Hi there! How are you?

Don't worry at all, people can keep scrolling or block a tag if they are unable to deal with a character being criticised. This will be anti Hashirama and anti Tobirama, of course. Those who know me even a tiny bit know that they are constantly receiving hate in this blog, so, no surprise.

If you don't mind, I will start by the end. Hashirama had proposed the hokage position to Madara, but Tobirama was against that and requested a democratic election. Immediately after, Tobirama also fed his racist bullshit to Hashirama, and Hashirama barely answered with one of his typical small scoldings. This was overheard by Madara, who obviously was not happy. Hashirama gets elected, and Madara realises that the Senju are hoarding the power in the village. This, together with the fact that Tobirama could not let go of his prejudice and hatred towards the Uchiha, makes him correctly foresee that the Uchiha face a fate of exclusion and doom in the village they co-founded. He tries to warn his clan, but nobody trusts him, so he leaves mortified because he was unable to protect his family once again. And later attacked the village and Hashirama killed him. More or less that, in summary.

Now, about Hashirama, I can totally understand that he was traumatized by his abusive father, by his siblings being killed, by a childhood of war and suffering, and by all you want. But I can't by any means justify his terrible job as a hokage with any of that. He had the responsibility to lead the village fairly and, if he was unable to do that, he should have passed the position to someone else. You can't take such a job willingly and then justify your very concious and obvious negligence on trauma or faked incompetence.

Tobirama likely had many reasons to hate the Uchiha, as the Uchiha had many reasons to hate the Senju. Nobody is asking Hashirama to get rid of his brother, but he should have found someone impartial as an advisor. He knew perfectly that his brother was racist, and still, he not only listened to him and let him influence state matters, he also appointed him as a successor. He let Tobirama desecrate Madara's body for his experiments, and he knowingly let him kill and experiment with people to develop the Edo Tensei. One can understand that he loved his brother unconditionally, as he was the only family he had left. But he had a duty as a leader to put limits to his brother's crimes and rampant bigotry. Or, if he was unable to stop him, at least keep him far from any position of power.

You know, if the Uchiha were to do something remotely similar to what Hashirama did, everyone would be questioning their loyalty, saying that they put their clan before the village, curse of hatred and whatever bullshit.

Another thing I can't stand of Hashirama is that he plays innocent and dumb. And I just can't believe this comedy. Because in his political actions he was never dumb. He was entertaining Madara with empty promises and nice words but, first chance he has, he leaves him out of the leadership of the village they both founded. Why didn't he, don't know, appoint Madara or any other Uchiha as his advisor instead of his biased brother? Collecting tailed beasts is also not the behaviour of a fool, he very much intended to hoard power to stablish Konoha's supremacy (and his own). He distributed the tailed beasts but was clever enough to keep the most powerful one to himself. And for a man who reached to power with the excuse of democracy, see how quick he forgot about it nominating someone from his family without taking anyone's opinion into consideration. Should I believe he established an oligarchy by accident because he was naïve, and that he didn't know what would happen once his racist brother got to power?

Anyway, sorry, this was probably too long. But I start hating on Hashirama and I get carried away...

Take care!

[uboat53]

Genuine question: What would be a bridge too far? Is there anything Democratic politicians could do that would make you break with them?

Hey, great question! I'm happy to answer this one. In fact, it's a question I'd encourage anyone to ask about groups they support!

To me there's actually two fairly clear cases where I would break with the Democratic Party.

First, if Democrats ever become a party that actively attacks the rights of minorities and vulnerable people, I'll abandon them in a heartbeat. Depending on the specific politician, Democrats can be steadfast in their support or lackluster and anywhere in between, but at the moment I'm not aware of any Democrat who is actively trying to roll back the rights of racial minorities, women, LGBTQ folks, or any other marginalized or vulnerable people.

Note that not attacking them is very different from not accepting losses. Unfortunately, Republicans are still way more popular than they should be given their outright racist and sexist agenda which means that they have the power to force changes to the law that attack disadvantaged people and Democrats will not always have the power to stop them. Even worse, sometimes they will be forced to choose which of two (or more) different disadvantaged groups they can protect or whether to accept a lower level of attack in order to prevent even worse from occurring.

Triage sucks and it can be tempting to blame Democrats for those tough decisions. This, however, misses the point that, if Democrats had enough power, none of those attacks would occur in the first place. The fact that Democrats are in the position of having to make these decisions at all is entirely the fault of the Republicans who are launching the attacks in the first place.

If that changes, if vulnerable people are deliberately targeted by Democrats, then I'm out.

Secondly, if a viable third party arises that better promotes the rights of poor, minority, vulnerable, and other disadvantaged people, I'll happily switch over and vote for them instead. That said, there's a key word in there that probably deserve a bit more detail.

"Viable" is always a key word, isn't it? It gets thrown about a lot, but it's worth looking at it in some detail. "Viable" to me means that this party has a chance of winning. If a third party exists but all it's doing is making it so that liberal voters such as myself are split between two candidates, letting the conservative candidate win, that's not something I can get behind because, ultimately, that only hurts the causes I care about. And yeah, that is a tall order.

Unfortunately, we have a first-past-the-post electoral system. In this system it doesn't matter how many votes an idea gets, it only matters which candidate gets more votes than all the others, even if that number is a small number of the total. The reason we have a two-party system is because this electoral system necessitates it. I'd rather have the most milquetoast, weak-kneed liberal candidate win than see the left split its votes between them and a powerful liberal candidate only get a conservative elected. Ultimately, the person in office will get to make decisions that affect all of our lives and I want to make sure that the person in that office leans as far toward my position as possible, even if that means giving up on someone who would technically be better from my point of view.

And, yes, that does mean that I'm prioritizing the short term over the long term. Perhaps voting for a small third party might help them grow to the point where a party that does 90% of what I want might start winning elections in a few decades, but doing that also makes it more likely that a party that does 80% of what I want RIGHT NOW doesn't take power and a party that does 80% of what I absolutely DON'T WANT will. Two decades is a long time, the whole project could fail, and a lot of damage can be done in that time, and I'm old enough to remember that Democrats (including myself!) hemmed and hawed about gay marriage twenty years ago and have now evolved into a party where just about everyone strongly supports it.

(I'd also note that the key moment in that transition was when our current president, then vice-president and today loudly decried by many on the left as a weak-kneed centrist or even an outright traitor to liberal causes, went off-script to do what he thought was right and dragged the whole party with him.)

At this point there has only been one successful third party in the entire history of American politics. Just one, and, let's face it, its success precipitated the Civil War. Pushing the evolution of the major parties has been THE major way that change has happened in American history and, as long as there's one that works for me for the most part it seems reasonable to keep plugging away at it.

That said, I don't see a third party I'd be willing to support at the moment over Democrats even if they had a chance of winning. The Libertarians have basically decided that gun rights and low taxes are more important than abortion and civil rights, the Green Party is basically now the pro-dictator party under Jill Stein, the Constitution Party makes the MAGA movement look liberal, and No Labels seems dedicated to pretending that Democrats promoting the rights of trans people too aggressively is as deadly a sin as Republicans demonizing them.

And that's pretty much it, a new party that more closely represents what I want to see in government AND has a chance of winning an election could get me to abandon Democrats and vote for them, but I'm not seeing that at the moment.

So, for the moment, I'm a solid Democrat. I'm very happy that the party is moving more and more in the direction of increasing the scope of rights we're willing to protect and I'm happy with the direction of economic policy, moving in favor of a greater role for government both in regulating the private sector and in providing certain goods and services. I certainly have some quibbles and I definitely identify more with some factions of the party than others, but I'm reasonably happy with it overall.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Pema Levy at Mother Jones:

America loves a sports metaphor. On the third night of the Democratic National Convention Wednesday, Vice Presidential nominee and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz showed up by his preferred title, coach, to give a pep talk to American voters. “I haven’t given a lot of big speeches like this,” Walz said bashfully. “But I have given a lot of pep talks. So let me finish with this, team. It’s the fourth quarter. We’re down a field goal. But we’re on offense and we’ve got the ball. We’re driving down the field And boy do we have the right team.” The crowd changed “Coach! Coach!”

A month ago, few Americans knew who Walz was. The governor of Minnesota had a low national profile until he began making the rounds on TV, presenting himself to the American people and, in so-doing, auditioning for the suddenly- open position of Democratic vice presidential nominee. Walz changed the race when he called the Donald Trump, JD Vance, and the MAGA movement “weird.” It was a disarming attack, stripping Trump of his power and turning the dour former president it with something like a joke. In selecting Walz, Harris chose a savvy communicator. But she also chose a foil to the weirdness on the other side of the ticket. In Walz, Harris found the opposite of Donald Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio. Both men are veterans. Neither spent their formative years in a coastal city. But the policies they stand for and the temperament they display are starkly different. [...]

Walz’s speech highlighted his record in Minnesota, parts of which Harris would seek to replicate as president. “We protected reproductive freedom,” he said. “Even if we wouldn’t make those same choices for ourselves, we’ve got a golden rule: Mind your own damn business.” Walz also shared his own connection to the current battle over reproductive choice. He and his wife, Gwen Walz, used IVF to start their family. “If you’ve never experienced the hell that is infertility, I guarantee you know someone who has,” Walz said. “I’m letting you in on how we started a family because this is a big part about what this election is about.” Walz’s job Wednesday was to introduce himself to American voters, to convey the goals of a Harris administration, and to knock down the opposition. In his final pep talk of the night, the former coach did just that. “We’ve gonna leave it all on the field,” he said in his finale. “That’s how we’ll build a country where workers come first, health care and housing are human rights, and the government stays the hell out of your bedroom.”

Wrapping up Night 3 of the DNC was Minnesota Governor and Kamala Harris VP pick Tim Walz. His speech reminded me why I was happy she picked him as his running mate.

Walz’s speech hit home some important themes, such as the “government stays the hell out of your bedroom”, free school lunches > book bans, and “minding your own damn business”.

He dropped in some coaching metaphors, such as the reference that the Democrats were down a field goal with a chance to tie the game or take the lead.

America, we need to elect this fine man as our Vice President along with Kamala Harris!

See Also:

The Guardian: Tim Walz accepts VP nomination and pitches voters: ‘We have the right team’

HuffPost: Coach's Clinic: Tim Walz Delivers Emotional, Energetic DNC Speech

Daily Kos: Tim Walz positively nails his big DNC moment

[ultimatebottom69]

Trump won

now. I see some kind of campaign to recount the votes and frankly yeah go sign that shit but hum.

This is about me for a second. Yes the filthy European. Well. As I said last night before passing out drunk. Palestine is fucked. Keep giving donations and all but you must know too right.

Abortions rights ? Well i hope you didn't like women.

Trans rights ? Doll there was already barely any. He gonna snuff that shit out.

The economy ? Oh baby 2016 eletric bungaloo remix. But you all knew that.

Suicide hotlines ? Over crowded as all learn the info as usual.

Immigrants rights ? Basically snuffed.

Police brutality ? Oh you thought George Floyd would be the worse they ever done it ? Think again.

My respect for this country ? None. I respect only the people I talked to.

My hope for this country ? Doll. The whole world watched with bated breath, we sent our whitest blond woman journalist to do the fucking job and you voted...For Nazi Orange. Again. No words.

You know when I was 12 and Obama was still the president. I remember loving the USA. Grand houses, cool movies, the music culture as I always liked pop, the diverse community how all you were so much more detached and free then me in my little France.

I remember at 13 to learn English because I wanted to go to the USA. I wanted to be able to talk to my idols. In 2017. I got called a racial slur in Orlando. It was also my first time being cat-called while my dad was right there, I mean I always got stares but bro was whistling and shit while my whole family was there. I loved Disneyland, loved the whole thing except for this two very weird encounters. I mean I am very light skinned and didn't know such word existed and my step mom who is a black woman didn't tell me what it meant when I asked her. And it was to me who it was said by the way because it was a little blond girl who said it while staring into my soul.

I learned that day that I was a black woman. That my light colored skin contrary to any had thought had offered me no protection whatsoever.

Which is funny because I am the lightest in my group and I got called a white woman a lot by them only it's our little rascist jokes between us.

But in the USA I get treated like the "Bad Hombre" as Trump called them. I get called a "Niggay" by the white folks.

And funnily enough this experiences although very defining did not stop me from making it big in the USA I thought I just had to not go to orlando and i'l be fine...

And then George Floyd happened. I then watched real life documentaries about victims of police brutality. BLM happened.

I saw people that looked like my grandma and uncle getting shot at as if they were just fucking cattle.

When Biden got elected I thought "Maybe if the democrats win again...I can forgive them., I can go there and see their world and drive for an awful 8 hours when I barely wanna drive for 30 minutes hahaha."

And...Well...Trump won. He did. By a large margin I am CERTAIN there were tampering in the election as usual.

But...The fact is. He fucking won. Despite the whole world watching. All of us were quietly hoping for you all to show us. Progress what the USA stands for.

Diversity

Freedom

Dreams

And you vote for the man. Who extinguished the most dreams I have ever seen. You vote for the man who made me re-think every respect I ever had.

You had the chance to make a woman president. After the first black man president in the western world you could have had the first woman president.

You could have gained all the respect you had ever lost back. To the people who voted at all, bravo for trying. To the people who didn't vote PER CHOICE...I have nothing to tell you except you could have done something.

I won't even dwell on the dumb fucks who voted third party. Just vote for Trump at that point it's the same the whole world has been telling you this for 8 years now.

But back to this. The American dream is dead. I dream of nothing more but for the USA to stop being everyone's burden. I don't want to go to your country. I don't want to know anything right now.

Are we a joke to you ? Because USA you are the ehole circus right now.

I am gonna go focus on something else since clearly the hatred was stronger then the Hope. This isn't even a joke the USA has a true problem and if I need to spell it out well too bad.

I hope Drag queens will keep existing and that is that.

Have a pleaseant day tbh. I have no words. I won't try to tell you that there is hope or whatever. There is none. Your fate has been sealed. In fact many fates right now have been sealed. I can see in real tiime how many lives are about get snuffed because Harris didn't win. I am not here to tell you to have hope. I can however tell you Good luck and get the fuck out.

You have like 3-5 months before it really starts to be a shitshow so if you wanna move out or had plans. Move to Europe as a whole.

I am not even angry. I am throughly disapointed. In about 8 month France will feel the wave. Gaza ? Pfft. I'm going to keep donating and reblogging.

To the mutuals who voted. Thank you for trying. I hope you stay safe and are white looking enough for the upcoming times.

[ginnyrules27]

I'm hearing all this hand-wringing about Joe Biden and 'oh, what are we going to do? Should we nominate a new candidate?'

So I figured I should drop some history here.

When LBJ was convinced not to run for re-election, who did we have next? Nixon.

Jimmy Carter was almost replaced as the nominee due to a brokered convention. There's a good chance he could have been re-elected and we wouldn't have had Reagan had the Democratic party been united.

In 2016, Bernie Sanders failed to bring his people to the table and unite the party under Hilary (the same job she had to do in '08 even though she actually had her Michigan and Florida delegates taken from her but that's a story for a different time) and who did we end up with? Trump.

History has shown that a split party means victory for the other side. And with democracy hanging in the balance, this is not a time for the Dems to be handwringing.

Joe Biden is our incumbent. He is the winner of the Democratic primaries (and don't come on here claiming there weren't primaries, cause I voted in my state's primary and I voted for Biden). He is the one we need to rally behind.

If you really hate the idea of voting for Biden, then on Election Day ask yourself this. Do you want more 40-50-year-old Federalist Society SCOTUS justices serving a lifetime spot or do you want justices who'll actually protect our country and all of its citizens, not just the straight, white, able-bodied Christian men?

[jewishbarbies]

https://www.tumblr.com/jewishbarbies/768080310343778304/gotta-admit-bernie-sanders-is-getting-ridiculously?source=share

Bernie been pissing me off too but I ain’t wanna say it coz people get real protective of that old ass man nowadays, as if he’s their lord and saviour. Did the Dems do him wrong in 2016/20? Yeah, sure whatever. But Bernie has NEVER BEEN POPULAR BECAUSE HE IS RADICAL. The demographics that vote the most are old people and middle aged people and Bernie ain’t never been popular to those demographics. Maybe now, in the age of radicalism, but not in ‘16 and definitely not in ‘20. He keep acting like he would be the saving grace of America, but he forgets that he failed to capture the support from southerners, especially southern black folk. And it ain’t coz he Jewish, it’s because he has no fucking charisma at all and came off as a stuck up northerner and talking down on people. They’re gonna tell you it’s because black voters are more conservative, but it’s more complicated than that. The Clintons put in the work over the last thirty years and were actual active members of the Democratic Party. Bernie was not an active Democrat for most of his career and served a constituency of mostly white people in Vermont. Add on top of that the endorsements of Clinton by local black leaders, and Bernie Sanders never stood a chance. Also, black voters aren’t afraid of social spending, but Bernie’s specific type of social spending is more appealing to middle income to affluent college students. He had the wrong message and the wrong institutional bonafides. But people gon say it’s coz “black democrats are more conservative than white democrats” THAT AINT THE TRUTH AND YOU KNOW IT. BERNIE JUST FAILED.

But in terms of him talking shit bout the Dems and Kamala nowadays, he been pissing me off because he truly doesn’t get the real problem here. He doesn’t get that he himself aided towards the Dems losing the election.

One thing I will say is that the republicans won because they vote red no matter WHAT. No matter how outlandish their politics are, they vote as a united front, which dem voters didn’t. And radicalism aided towards that. One issue voters aided towards that. All of that shit is shit that Bernie himself largely contributed towards. And now he wanna act all high and mighty, get your old ass outta politics and go play golf. And take McConnell with you.

He keeps pushing radicalism and he doesn’t seem to get that radicalism on either side is what’s destroying this fucking country. Radical right wingers are everybody, but so is radical leftism. Does he not see how radical leftism is harming black and Jewish folk? The two demographics that vote Dem overwhelmingly because we know what’s at stake if we don’t? Maybe he sees it and doesn’t care, idk. “They’re not radical enough” WE DONT NEED RADICALISM.

The way he be talking about Kamala and the Dems on the podcasts and shit, it’s like he wanted them to lose to “prove a point”. And that shit pisses me off. Because at the end of the day, Bernie’s an old, rich, white (or white passing Jewish) guy. Project 2025 and all ain’t gonna affect him like the way it’ll affect us. He’s old as shit. He won’t be here much longer. And he rich too. He ain’t gonna suffer from the tariffs and shit like we will. So for him to act like this knowing how much pull he got… idk man. Shit pisses me off.

Sorry for the rant. I’ve just been thinking this for weeks. Bernie been unpopular with voters for a long time and his bitter ass won’t get over losing.

well said.

Bernie did a lot for activism in his life but he’s doing actual harm to the people he claims to be an activist for now. he should just go back to local politics or get out of the game altogether imo.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Sign of the Day... on the Pennsylvania Turnpike near Morgantown...

[Mary Elaine LeBey]

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

July 29, 2024

Heather Cox Richardson

Jul 30, 2024

One of the advantages of refusing the Democratic nomination for president is that his decision to do that has left President Joe Biden in the position of being above the political fray and being able to act for the good of the whole country. 

Today, Biden noted that the American people have lost faith in the Supreme Court. When he was in office, Trump stacked the court with three extremists who have worked with extremist justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas to overturn longstanding legal precedents that protect civil rights and move the country toward a theocracy overseen by a dictator. A statement from the White House today recounted how the Supreme Court has “gutted civil rights protections, taken away a woman’s right to choose, and now granted Presidents broad immunity from prosecution for crimes they commit in office.” It also noted that “recent ethics scandals involving some Justices have caused the public to question the fairness and independence that are essential for the Court to faithfully carry out its mission to deliver justice for all Americans.”

Today, Biden called for three major changes to restore trust and accountability.

He called for a constitutional amendment to make clear that no president is above the law or immune from prosecution for crimes committed while in office. This is a direct response to the Supreme Court’s decision of July 1, 2024, in Donald J. Trump v. United States that a president cannot be prosecuted for crimes committed in actions that fall under a president’s “official duties.”

The White House wrote that “President Biden shares the Founders’ belief that the President’s power is limited—not absolute—and must ultimately reside with the people.” The “No One Is Above the Law Amendment will state that the Constitution does not confer any immunity from federal criminal indictment, trial, conviction, or sentencing by virtue of previously serving as President.”

Biden also called for eighteen-year term limits for Supreme Court justices. Noting that Congress approved term limits for the presidency, Biden pointed out that “[t]he United States is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats to its high court Justices.” “Term limits would help ensure that the Court’s membership changes with some regularity; make timing for Court nominations more predictable and less arbitrary; and reduce the chance that any single Presidency imposes undue influence for generations to come,” the White House wrote. 

The administration is reacting, in part, to the fact that Trump, with the help of then–Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), denied Democratic president Barack Obama the right to appoint a Supreme Court justice, holding it for Trump, and then, after Trump had appointed a second justice, rushed through a third Trump appointee at the very end of his term, enabling him to appoint three hard-right justices who will be able to skew the court’s decisions for decades. 

With those justices on the court, it has handed down a series of nakedly partisan decisions that represent the goals of the extremist Republican Party rather than the majority of Americans. They have overturned a ban on bump stocks for semiautomatic rifles, made partisan and racial gerrymandering easier, undercut business regulation, ceased to recognize the constitutional right to abortion, and, stunningly, ruled that a president has significant immunity from prosecution for committing crimes while in office.  

Biden also called for Congress to “pass binding, enforceable conduct and ethics rules that require Justices to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity, and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Supreme Court Justices should not be exempt from the enforceable code of conduct that applies to every other federal judge.” 

This, too, reflects the problems of the modern court, where several justices, especially Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito, have accepted large gifts from those with business before the court and have refused to recuse themselves from those cases. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) introduced articles of impeachment against Thomas and Alito on July 10, and the measures currently have 19 co-sponsors.

As Ankush Khardori noted in Politico today, before Trump’s three justices took their seats, public approval of the court stood at 58%. After its decision to give presidents immunity, that approval fell to a record low of just 38%. More than 75% of Americans, including a large majority of Republicans, support eighteen-year term limits for justices.  

In an op-ed in the Washington Post today, Biden wrote: “This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. No one.”

He noted that as a senator he served as chair and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, and has “overseen more Supreme Court nominations as senator, vice president and president than anyone living today.” Noting that the current system makes it possible for a single president to radically alter the makeup of the court for generations to come, he warned: “What is happening now is not normal, and it undermines the public’s confidence in the court’s decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms. We now stand in a breach.”

“We can and must prevent the abuse of presidential power. We can and must restore the public’s faith in the Supreme Court. We can and must strengthen the guardrails of democracy.

In America, no one is above the law. In America, the people rule.”

Ian Millhiser of Vox points out that these reforms would currently be almost impossible to pass, but Biden’s embrace of them is a powerful political statement for the Democrats to carry into the 2024 election. Until now, Biden has lagged behind popular opinion on the issue of court reform. Now, though, the sitting president is rejecting the power the extremist modern-day Supreme Court conveyed on presidents and reinforcing the rule of law. 

Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, immediately endorsed Biden’s proposals, meaning that she is willing to be bound by our historic understanding that presidents are not above the law. In contrast, Leonard Leo, who has been central to the stacking of the court and who has called for “flood[ing] the zone with cases that challenge misuse of the Constitution by the administrative state and by Congress,” called the plan “a campaign to destroy a court that they disagree with.” House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called it “dead on arrival in the House.”  

For his part, Biden seemed more optimistic than Millhiser that his reforms could pass. When a reporter asked him how he would get court reform passed, he answered: “You’ve asked me that—on everything I’ve ever passed you’ve asked me that. We’re going to figure a way.”

Today, additional assistance provided to International Brotherhood of Teamsters pension plans thanks to the American Rescue Plan saved the pensions of an additional 70,000 New England Teamsters. This brings the total protected to 600,000. No Republicans voted for the American Rescue Plan, and Teamsters president Sean O’Brien stood next to Biden when he put the first protections into place. After O’Brien spoke at the Republican National Convention earlier this month, Vice President at large John Palmer announced he is challenging O’Brien for the leadership.  

Momentum behind Vice President Harris continues to build. Today John Giles, the Republican mayor of Mesa, the third-largest city in Arizona, wrote an op-ed in the Arizona Republic explaining why “as a Republican mayor, I support Kamala Harris over Trump.” He blamed Trump for abandoning cities while Biden and Harris have made historic investments in them and brought thousands of new jobs to Arizona. Giles urged his fellow Republicans to reject MAGA Republicans and turn back to the principles of an older Republican Party. “Our party used to stand for the belief that every Arizonan, no matter their background or circumstances, should have the freedom, opportunity and security to live out their American Dream,” he wrote.

But today’s Republicans are political extremists who are trying to disrupt elections and who killed immigration reform. “Trump poses a serious threat to our nation,” he wrote. “We can’t have a felon representing us on the national stage, let alone one who would threaten to abandon NATO and ruin our standing abroad.”  

“Arizona Republicans like me can emulate Sen. John McCain's motto of 'Country First' and beat back Trump and his threat to democracy,” Giles wrote. “Kamala Harris is the competent, just and fair leader our country deserves.”

In the New York Times, Peter Wehner, who served in the administrations of Republican presidents Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush echoed Giles’s autopsy for his party but, in an important shift, examined its recent changes through a lens of the political theories of autocracy. He concluded: “It’s hard and haunting to know that the political party to which I devoted a significant part of my life has become the greatest political threat to the country I love.”  

More than 40 former officials from the Department of Justice agree. On July 25 they wrote an open letter endorsing Harris and warning that “Trump presents a grave risk to our country, our global alliances and the future of democracy. As president, he “regularly ignored the rule of law.” In contrast, as the elected attorney general of California, Harris “oversaw the largest state justice department in the country. She forged strong relationships with law enforcement to keep people safe, fought for American consumers and fought against those preying on the American people…. The stakes could not be higher.” 

Tonight, White Dudes for Harris held an online fundraiser. Actor Jeff Bridges, who played The Dude in the 1998 film The Big Lebowski, recounted Harris’s popular policies on the call. “I’m white, I’m a dude, and I’m for Harris,” he said. “A woman president, man, how exciting!” Minnesota governor Tim Walz added: “How often in 100 days do you get to change the trajectory of the world? How often in 100 days do you get to do something that’s going to impact generations to come? And how often in the world do you make that b*st*rd wake up afterwards and know that a Black woman kicked his a** and sent him on the road?” 

The Trump-Vance ticket continues to stumble. In the Washington Post today, Jennifer Rubin noted that the Republicans appear to have gone out of their way to pick a presidential ticket that would offend women. Trump is, she pointed out, “an adjudicated rapist” who bragged about sexual assault, demeans and insults women, “mused about punishing women for having an abortion,” and boasts that he was behind the overturning of Roe v. Wade. 

Vance wants to ban abortion in all cases, wants the federal government to stop women from traveling across state lines to obtain abortion care, says childless women don’t have a stake in the country’s future, and has implied that women should stay in abusive marriages. 

The Republicans embrace the ideas of right-wing groups whose members want to roll back women’s rights; their call for a “revival of faith, family, and fertility” is a tenet of fascism. “When Harris declares ‘We’re not going back,’” Rubin notes, “the message has particular resonance among women.”

Finally, the world is watching events in Venezuela, where President Nicolás Maduro has claimed victory despite exit polls that showed him losing to opposition candidate Edmundo González by more than 30 points. CNN’s Jim Sciutto commented: “Don’t underestimate the loss of U.S. soft power in moments like this after a U.S. president—and current candidate for president—attempted to overturn an election here.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[cazort]

Hey, in case people don't know it, abortion rights are on the ballot in Florida. There is a ballot initiative, Issue 4, and voting Yes protects abortion rights in the state constitution.

Please share this even if you don't live in Florida, so it can reach as many Floridians as possible. Don't just share on Tumblr, send it to friends of yours who live in Florida to make sure (1) they know about this, (2) they are registered to vote (Deadline is October 7th, 2024) (3) they are going to vote YES on this.

If you live in Florida, you can volunteer or even take a paid position (they are hiring) to help with on-the-ground organizing. They are going door-to-door to talk to and try to register as many voters as possible.

If you don't live in Florida, you can still donate to this organization, as long as you are a US Citizen.

This initiative is important for multiple reasons. It is highly likely to succeed; abortion-related initiatives have consistently come in in favor of abortion rights, often with surprisingly large margins, in "deep red" states such as Kansas (+18.32%) and Kentucky (+4.7%). Florida has slightly more "purple" politics than either of these states so the margin would probably be even bigger. And I think it goes without saying that we all agree that protecting abortion rights is important.

A second reason is that abortion ballot initiatives tend to result in huge increases in voter turnout, primarily from more women coming out to vote. These new voters (a) tend to keep voting once they vote for the first time (b) are more likely to vote democratic. Florida has tended to vote Republican in recent elections but it is still a "purple" state; Obama won in Florida in both 2008 and 2012, and in 2012 Florida elected a Democratic senator by a huge (+13%) margin. Not coincidentally, that election had high turnout (63.5%) whereas turnout was much lower (52.0%) in the 2018 election that elected a Republican by a razor-thin margin (0.12%) and similarly in the 2022 election (turnout even lower, about 49.35%) that elected a Republican by a much larger margin.

So this initiative could be the difference that not only protects abortion rights in Florida, but leads to Democrats winning both the presidency and Senate, and it may lay the foundations for them winning back the governorship, which is important because DeSantis has not only been highly damaging to Florida but has been a negative figure on the national stage.

[mariacallous]

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration warned that it could restrict weapons transfers to Israel if the flow of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip does not increase. 

A letter sent Sunday by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin accused Israel of sharply reducing humanitarian assistance to Gaza Palestinians. The letter also referred to a memorandum President Joe Biden issued in February linking military aid to how the receiving country administers humanitarian relief. 

Israel was not named in the February memo but was widely seen as its target, at a time when the two governments were growing increasingly at odds over Israel’s conduct of the war.

“The amount of assistance entering Gaza in September was the lowest of any month during the past year,” the letter said, noting that the delivery of relief had improved considerably in the weeks immediately following Biden’s warning before decreasing again.

Giving Israel a 30-day deadline, the letter called for allowing in at least 350 trucks of relief a day, up from 69 per day in August, according to aid agencies. The letter also called for allowing people crowded in the coastal zone to move inward and for the removal of restrictions impeding the delivery of aid. The possible consequences outlined in the letter are broad, ranging from a second warning to suspending deliveries of weapons. 

“Failure to demonstrate a sustained commitment to implementing and maintaining these measures may have implications for U.S. policy,” it said, referring to Biden’s national security memo. “Remediation could include actions from refreshing the assurances to suspending any further transfers of defense articles or, as appropriate, defense services.”

Democratic officials have consistently called on Israel to let more aid into Gaza. The letter was sent the same day that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, tweeted her concern at the slowdown in aid delivery.

“The U.N. reports that no food has entered northern Gaza in nearly 2 weeks,” Harris wrote. “Israel must urgently do more to facilitate the flow of aid to those in need. Civilians must be protected and must have access to food, water, and medicine. International humanitarian law must be respected.”

When weighing in on Israel and Gaza, Harris has sought to straddle competing Democratic constituencies that are both crucial to her election chances: Jewish and pro-Israel voters seeking assurances that she would continue Biden’s overall robust backing for the country in its multi-front war, and progressives and Arab and Muslim Americans and pro-Palestinian activists appalled at Israel’s conduct. She has been campaigning hard in Michigan, a swing state with what is believed to be the country’s largest Arab American population as well as a large Jewish voter base.

The letter outlined a number of obstacles currently impeding humanitarian assistance, including strict customs rules. And it said the vast majority of Gaza’s 2 million residents had been pushed into a small strip stretching from near the border with Egypt to less than halfway into the enclave, which posed additional risks. 

“Extreme overcrowding has put these civilians at high risk of lethal contagion,” it said. “Humanitarian implementers report they are unable to meet essential survival needs of aid-dependent civilians.”

John Kirby, the National Security Council spokesman, said in a press call that the letter “follows a relatively recent decrease in humanitarian assistance reaching the people of Gaza, which is obviously something we’ve been very, very concerned about since the beginning of the conflict,” 

The letter, he said, was spurred by “the sense of urgency that we all have here about the desperate need of the people of Gaza for this humanitarian assistance.” International health officials have long said that Gaza is in a famine or close to it.

Kirby would not predict what the breadth of the consequences would be should Israel be deemed non-compliant, but he reiterated the Biden administration’s commitment to assisting Israel in defending itself from Iran, noting the pending deployment of missile batteries and U.S. troops to Israel. 

The deployment is “very much in keeping with the President’s strong desire that from an air defense perspective, our ally has what they need to defend themselves against, clearly, a very real, present, viable threat by Iran and its proxies,” he said.

An Israeli official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue, indicated to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that Israel would change its policies in response to the letter.

“The letter has been received and is being thoroughly reviewed by Israeli security officials,” the official said. “Israel takes this matter seriously and intends to address the concerns raised in this letter with our American counterparts.”

But Israel has also consistently denied that it is hindering aid delivery. On Monday, a day after the letter was sent but a day before it was leaked to the press, COGAT, the Israeli agency coordinating the delivery of goods into Gaza, tweeted video of what it said was 30 trucks entering the strip.

“Israel is not preventing the entry of humanitarian aid, with an emphasis on food, into Gaza,” it said.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the premier pro-Israel lobby, said on X that the letter was dangerous.

‘Threatening to cut off American support for Israel as it confronts Iran and its proxies on seven fronts weakens our ally, undermines American interests, and sends a dangerous message to our common enemies about U.S. support for our democratic allies,” AIPAC said in an unusually sharp rebuke to a president.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants to crush Hamas in Gaza, even as the military is increasingly focused on fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon. On Monday, the Associated Press reported that Netanyahu was considering a proposal to give Palestinian civilians a week to leave northern Gaza before aid would be cut off entirely. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant reportedly told Austin that the proposal would not be implemented.

“In the last two weeks, the IDF has been conducting a ground operation in northern Gaza to destroy Hamas terrorist infrastructure, which just this week launched rockets from northern Gaza towards civilian populations in Israel,” COGAT said. “Israel will continue to allow the entry of humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza, while simultaneously destroying Hamas’ military and governance infrastructures.”

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Armin Navabi

On the morning of the 7th of October, 2023, the Palestinian militant group Hamas orchestrated a multi-pronged assault against Israel from the Gaza Strip. Their fighters breached the heavily fortified border, committing a mass murder of more than a thousand Israeli civilians, including young children. The political discourse surrounding these brutal events and the war that has come in its wake, especially in the West, has been tinged with a misguided transposition of Western identity politics onto the Middle East that collapses all nuance and reduces a complex situation into a simple binary of “oppressor versus oppressed.” As such, leftists in English-speaking nations tend to see Palestine (including Hamas) as an oppressed, brown victim class whose freedom-fighting “resistance” against their oppressive, white, US-backed colonizers in Israel is a righteous cause with which to stand in solidarity. This simplistic view of the long-standing conflict in the Middle East leads to confused and contradictory thinking, as seen in the slogan (and now meme) “Queers for Palestine” brandished at anti-Israel rallies. It’s worth exploring just how incoherent this concept is.

On the surface, “Queers for Palestine” attempts to meld LGBT advocacy with Palestinian liberation, a juxtaposition that has precipitated a whirlpool of ridicule and criticism due to the fact that LGBT rights scarcely exist within the Muslim world, and the Palestinian territories are no exception. The slogan has been widely satirized with variations like “Chickens for KFC” or “Blacks for the KKK”, which highlight the basic lack of awareness of just how incompatible the values of the Western left are with the Islamic right they so readily champion.

The reality of the situation could not be more stark. Though it has much room to improve, Israel is at the forefront of LGBT rights in the Middle East. In Israel, LGBT people are visible members of society with legal protections, civil rights, and a plurality of public acceptance.

Palestine, by contrast, is quite a different story. The UCLA Williams Institute’s 2021 global report on LGBT acceptance rated Israel 44th out of the 175 countries/territories examined. Palestine came in at 130, behind Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Georgetown University likewise placed Palestine 160th out of 170 countries on their women’s peace and security index, in good company with most of the region. Amnesty International’s 2020 report on human rights highlights the criminalization of male same-sex relationships in Gaza, punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment, with a conspicuous absence of legal protections against anti-LGBT discrimination or harassment. This lack of civil rights has led hundreds of gay and bi Palestinians to flee to Israel to escape persecution. One such refugee, Ahmad Abu Marhia, a 25-year-old gay Palestinian man, was living under asylum in Israel. In 2022, he was kidnapped and beheaded in the West Bank city of Hebron. His murderers uploaded footage of the killing to social media.

However, every time these disparities are mentioned, critics are quick to lob accusations of "pinkwashing" — a concept invented to frame any discussion of Israel’s progressive stance on LGBT issues as a distraction from their mistreatment of Palestinians. The fact remains that these “Queers for Palestine” could march in Pride parades in Israel if they wanted to. In Palestine, they’d better be wearing iron neck guards if they don’t want to lose their heads.

Another disconcerting element of “Queers for Palestine” is that it popped up in prominent left-wing anti-Israel/pro-Palestine rallies in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’s terrorist attacks, before Israel had the chance to respond. As such, there is no way to interpret this slogan and the surrounding leftist fervor except as a signal of support not merely for Palestine, but specifically for Hamas, the jihadist movement with the explicit aim of eradicating the state of Israel. It's imperative to understand that Hamas, as detailed in its 1988 Covenant, is propelled by a fundamentalist Islamist ideology with the goal not only of eliminating all Jews but also conquering the world — just like ISIS. Senior Hamas official Mahmoud al-Zahar was recorded saying, “The entire planet will be under our law, there will be no more Jews or Christian traitors.”

[ One of the many memes that the original “Queers for Palestine” image spawned. ]

Western support for Hamas, under the guise of Palestinian liberation, overlooks the deep-seated radical Islamist ethos driving the organization, which, if unbridled, would jeopardize the very freedoms cherished by LGBT people across the developed world. Anyone who doubts this should try being gay, bi, or trans in most of the Middle East and North Africa’s (MENA) Muslim-majority countries. Virtually all of these nations have laws that criminalize homosexuality and being trans, some of which carry the death penalty. Human Rights Watch’s "Everyone Wants Me Dead" report succinctly encapsulates in its title alone the perilous environment faced by LGBT individuals in these regions.

Many on the Western left, including the LGBT left, have become enamored with Critical Social Justice, which provides a warped lens through which they perceive all of humanity as oppressors versus oppressed classes. Armed with this simplistic, binary worldview, leftists gravitate toward perceived liberation movements for other so-called oppressed groups. This narrow prism, however, obscures the universalist ideology of Islamism espoused by groups like Hamas, which, under a facade of anti-imperialist rhetoric, harbors a brutal dogma that is antithetical to the liberties and rights championed by LGBT activists. No amount of screaming about “pinkwashing” can drown out the irony of folks who believe in LGBT liberation cheerleading ideological movements from which they would flee as refugees.

To be sure, the Palestinian people have suffered more than their fair share, and it’s easy to see how the Palestinian resistance narrative can carry the allure of righteous rebellion, especially for factions of the hard left who have their own aspirations of a large-scale dismantling of our liberal society. The vicarious thrill of romanticized revolution that leads some to go far beyond simply advocating for the Palestinian people and expressing solidarity with Hamas, ignores the jihadist ideologies at the core of such organizations. These ideologies are oppressing LGBT Palestinians at this very moment, and given half a chance, they would oppress the very leftists now voicing support for the Palestinian cause. And, indeed, this has happened before.

The aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran is a harrowing tale of leftists being tortured and executed en masse by the very Islamic regime they supported for the sake of their anti-imperialist goals. Many Iranians who aligned with leftist organizations supported the revolution only to find themselves persecuted by Islamists they helped put in power.

Immediately following the revolution, the new regime led by Ayatollah Khomeini began systematically oppressing LGBT people and publicly executing them by the thousands. These atrocities were justified as a means to "eliminate corruption" and prevent the "contamination" of society. Between 4,000 to 6,000 gay, lesbian, and bi people have been executed since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Iran’s legal system, rooted in Islamic law, criminalizes consensual sexual relations between same-sex individuals, with penalties ranging from lashes to death. Iranian law does not distinguish between consensual and non-consensual same-sex intercourse, allowing authorities to prosecute both perpetrators and victims of sexual assault.

[ Source: The Algemeiner ]

Images of gay and bi men hanged from cranes so that they may slowly suffocate to death serve as grim reminders for anyone interested in human rights: align with Islamic fundamentalists at your peril.

"Queers for Palestine", and the nuanced realities it glosses over, underscores the need for a more informed and discerning discourse — a discourse that transcends catchy slogans and moral binaries and delves into the complex, often discordant ideologies at play in the Israel-Palestine conflict. That way, we can advocate for a better future without bolstering forces antithetical to liberal values, and without betraying LGBT people by undermining their very rights and freedoms. We can’t do that while overwriting the complicated dynamics of a 75-year foreign conflict with our own provincial identity politics.

==

Intersectionality is an institutionally acquired neurological disorder.

[mortalkombartwistedreflectionau]

Mirror Amaterasu/TR Amaterasu

Created alongside her brothers Abacus and Zaggot to replace Olaria as the protector gods of Seido. In her starter years, Amaterasu was guided alongside the other two by her older sister, but since she needed far more time to mediate between Abacus and Zaggot and thought Amaterasu was already pretty balanced, Olaria told her she could already be confident enough to start doing her duties, and even proposed her as Seido's representative in other realms, which Abacus and Zaggot accepted.

Amaterasu would since then frequently reunite with her fellow gods to discuss different matters, and also seek for more guidance due to her inexperience sometimes. A god in particular couldn't waste the chance to guide a young mind.

Cetrion took some of the free time the non-interference policy of the Elder Gods gave her to reunite with Amaterasu, and have exchanges about the good ways to perform their duties. Cetrion revealed her more about what she thought things should be than she did to anyone at the time, how according to her most mortals were 'ungrateful children too easily seduced by unvirtuous ways, and how important decisions for their fate should be in wiser hands than their own. While Amaterasu had doubts if this was really the way, especially for how it contradicted the teachings of her older sister, she took her words into account and kept her promise to keep what they said in their meetings in secret.

As time went on and Seido's society advanced until creating the Democratic Republic of Seido, Cetrion's teachings started to make Amaterasu see what the Elder Goddess really meant. Seido was not more of a perfect society than any other, it had instances of corruption, crime, need of some social movements, people's personal misfortunes, etc. All Amaterasu could see what its mistakes, ignoring everything else. A 'solution' was forming one in her mind. Lady Cetrion was right, they had to control mortals before they could harm themselves to protect them.

The rise of the Edenian Regime and its allies, as well as the start of Lady Cetrion's campaign to eliminate evil from the Netherrealm have only further convinced Amaterasu than she has taken the correct decision, and knows that all of them could be good allies when she finds the perfect chance to make her move. She knows that her siblings are likely to oppose her... but well, they are wise, they will understand eventually, she only needs to show them it is worth it.

Here's another OC of Ada! 🥳 🥳 🥳 

I also share with you a HF design of her original self, also made by Ada: