Today marks the third anniversary of President Biden signing EO 13988, "Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation" (a.k.a., signaling his total contempt for women and girls as a sex class). @WDI_USAhttps://t.co/IA7q7MUVMr
Tangentially related to this, give the Conservative Movement (in all its forms and iterations) one thing. For decades they have been better at framing issues in a way that people identify and resonate with. This hasn’t given them majority support in the population as a whole, but it has enabled them to recruit and keep a significant plurality who vote a ticket regardless of who’s on it or what they’ll do, who turn out to primaries, and who will work as devout activists. Democrats appear to operate as a loose coalition of allied groups, many of which are lukewarm about many of the issues, and some of whom will actively work against the Dems when they don’t get 100% their way. both deluded and stupid in their own way.
So, EO 13988 being the case, does that mean that if I ever visit the US again, I can walk into any womens’ facility north or south of the Mason-Dixom Line wearing a T-shirt reading ‘Don’t try to stop me; EO 13988 and all that.! , and I will be able to do whatever I bloody-well like?
I’m packing my gear and painting my T-shirt tonight.!
Rob, I don’t agree with you on this. I don’t think conservatives have framed this issue well at all for the most part.
It’s highly debatable whether conservatives have really gotten any political mileage out of their positions on trans issues. It helps rile up their base, but the evidence of them winning over any swing/independent voters or Democrats is sketchy. People tried to credit this issue for helping Glenn Youngkin win in Virginia, but that case is weak at best. Certainly the issue didn’t propel Ron DeSantis to success in the GOP presidential race, and Trump doesn’t really seem to push the issue much.
Meanwhile, the ugly rhetoric often used by social conservatives on trans issues has I think poisoned the well. A lot of persuadable people associate any dissent from trans activist talking points as being equivalent to, or a mask hiding, the nasty stuff from the right.
Screechy, I agree it’s one of the weaker examples. Then again, they’re not trying to persuade you and me, they’re trying to persuade people who are looking for any excuse to hurt trans, gay, lesbian, and liberals in general, so even their weakly argued approach works well enough.
Charlie Sykes recently interviewed Tina Nguyen about how she and many other young people are recruited into the more extreme corners of the CM and become tools for others. It was quite eye opening. A secular version of the love bombing used by religious and cult recruiters, with the overlay of handing people careers.
Tangentially related to this, give the Conservative Movement (in all its forms and iterations) one thing. For decades they have been better at framing issues in a way that people identify and resonate with. This hasn’t given them majority support in the population as a whole, but it has enabled them to recruit and keep a significant plurality who vote a ticket regardless of who’s on it or what they’ll do, who turn out to primaries, and who will work as devout activists. Democrats appear to operate as a loose coalition of allied groups, many of which are lukewarm about many of the issues, and some of whom will actively work against the Dems when they don’t get 100% their way. both deluded and stupid in their own way.
So, EO 13988 being the case, does that mean that if I ever visit the US again, I can walk into any womens’ facility north or south of the Mason-Dixom Line wearing a T-shirt reading ‘Don’t try to stop me; EO 13988 and all that.! , and I will be able to do whatever I bloody-well like?
I’m packing my gear and painting my T-shirt tonight.!
Rob, I don’t agree with you on this. I don’t think conservatives have framed this issue well at all for the most part.
It’s highly debatable whether conservatives have really gotten any political mileage out of their positions on trans issues. It helps rile up their base, but the evidence of them winning over any swing/independent voters or Democrats is sketchy. People tried to credit this issue for helping Glenn Youngkin win in Virginia, but that case is weak at best. Certainly the issue didn’t propel Ron DeSantis to success in the GOP presidential race, and Trump doesn’t really seem to push the issue much.
Meanwhile, the ugly rhetoric often used by social conservatives on trans issues has I think poisoned the well. A lot of persuadable people associate any dissent from trans activist talking points as being equivalent to, or a mask hiding, the nasty stuff from the right.
Screechy, I agree it’s one of the weaker examples. Then again, they’re not trying to persuade you and me, they’re trying to persuade people who are looking for any excuse to hurt trans, gay, lesbian, and liberals in general, so even their weakly argued approach works well enough.
Charlie Sykes recently interviewed Tina Nguyen about how she and many other young people are recruited into the more extreme corners of the CM and become tools for others. It was quite eye opening. A secular version of the love bombing used by religious and cult recruiters, with the overlay of handing people careers.
https://podcasts.apple.com/nz/podcast/the-bulwark-podcast/id1447684472?i=1000642010579