Trannies for Trump

[steviedresses]

My issue with President Trump has nothing to do with negotiations with North Korea, China, Iran, or building a wall, or draining the swamp, or repealing Obamacare, or any of the other policy decisions he is trying to enact.

My issue with Trump is his willingness to divide the country. He is systematically creating an US vs THEM mentality which I fear will lead to civil war. His instance on calling NBC and CNN 'Fake News', saying NFL players Don't belong in the country, and his continued derogatory treatment of anyone who opposes him are all intended to create an enemy within the United States that his supporters can rally against.

Remember, this is the President who wanted to change the libel laws so he could sue the NY Times.

And I will part with this bomb... these are the same tactics Adolf Hitler and the Nazis used when they came to power.

I don't own a gun. I am going to buy several. I am going to Arizona to take a real gun handling course. I am going to become expert in the usage of the firearms, so much so that if (when) I have to defend myself from the coming right wing dictatorship I will at least take a couple of them down with me.

Oh, I live in the heart of Trumpland, yes, the belly of America. There are sane people here, but not many.

[filghy2]

And I will part with this bomb... these are the same tactics Adolf Hitler and the Nazis used when they came to power.

Don't you know it is taboo to mention Hitler and the Nazis (see page one of this thread)? Most people probably don't realise that Hitler was voted into power through constitutional means and was very popular in Germany until things started to go badly in WWII.

Rather than Nazi Germany, however, I think the more relevant example is what has happened in places like Hungary, Poland and Turkey in recent years. In each case the ruling party, after being voted into power, has ruthlessly manipulated the system to entrench itself, suppress opposition and systematically undermine independent institutions like the legal system, while using the same sort of 'us vs them' rhetoric to keep it's supporters on side.

It's not inevitable that the US will go the same way, but if half the country and their elected representatives continue to give Trump a free pass for whatever he does then the conditions for it to happen will be in place. Putting the President above the law is the first step on the way to autocracy.

[nysprod]

Excellent post.

The one thing I will say is that things go in cycles.

And we need control of the House, at the least.

[filghy2]

And we need control of the House, at the least.

It's been estimated that Democrats will need a margin of up to 11 per cent in order to get a House majority, due to gerrymandering in states governed by Republicans. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...ats-house-2018 That's the sort of manipulation I was referring to. You can also bet that voter suppression will continue to be ramped up in the name of combating 'voter fraud'.

[Nick Danger]

Closed minds make for shit-tier conversations, and results count for a hell of a lot more than speculation.

I am not closed-minded. I'm a snow-white small business owner who was raised about 40 miles from the birthplace of the KKK. But that didn't stop me from voting for a black Democrat when given a choice between Obama and a grizzled war-hawk riding on little more than 50 years of ex-POW status, or Obama and an elitist religious fanatic. I may have even voted Democratic at that point no matter who was running, since I have a helpful understanding of the fact that the back-and-forth political cycle is necessary to keep our country strong.

But I suppose you all wanted Hillary. And I suppose further that even after her childish, months-long post-election tantrum revealed that she was really just a power-hungry dilettante all along, you'd still maintain she was the better choice.

Because your minds are closed. With the possible exception of Stavros, who at least does the reading.

I suggest you all sit back and observe the prosperity the USA is experiencing, and will continue to experience for the next several years, as President Trump leverages our military might into dollars and cents. Enjoy it - you're an American and you are entitled to reap the benefits. You sure as hell are going to reap the down-side of being American, so you may as well get something out of it.

But you really should stop trying to convince people that we're living some kind of nightmare here just because you personally can't get everything you want. LGBT rights have come a long, long, long way in the last decade. The American state of mind is turning away from persecuting people over their sex lives. I can almost guarantee you that in 2024, we'll have a new Democratic administration and most likely, a final solution (no nazi joke intended) to the LGBT rights problem - in the form of a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing them. In fact it wouldn't surprise me at all if that is the very first thing on the new agenda. When the time comes.

It's not going to happen while Donald Trump is President though, and the reason SHOULD be obvious.

[broncofan]

I can almost guarantee you that in 2024, we'll have a new Democratic administration and most likely, a final solution (no nazi joke intended) to the LGBT rights problem - in the form of a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing them.

We're most likely to have a Constitutional amendment? What would that amendment say? A constitutional amendment requires 38 states to ratify it. Have you seen a map of the U.S. lately?

I think the ratification of a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing gay rights is very unlikely. I have a feeling you're just talking but can you tell me what it is you think will happen there? Also, what is it the amendment would provide that isn't guaranteed by the 14th amendment, particularly after Obergefell?

[yodajazz]

My issue with President Trump has nothing to do with negotiations with North Korea, China, Iran, or building a wall, or draining the swamp, or repealing Obamacare, or any of the other policy decisions he is trying to enact.

My issue with Trump is his willingness to divide the country. He is systematically creating an US vs THEM mentality which I fear will lead to civil war. His instance on calling NBC and CNN 'Fake News', saying NFL players Don't belong in the country, and his continued derogatory treatment of anyone who opposes him are all intended to create an enemy within the United States that his supporters can rally against.

Remember, this is the President who wanted to change the libel laws so he could sue the NY Times.

And I will part with this bomb... these are the same tactics Adolf Hitler and the Nazis used when they came to power.

I don't own a gun. I am going to buy several. I am going to Arizona to take a real gun handling course. I am going to become expert in the usage of the firearms, so much so that if (when) I have to defend myself from the coming right wing dictatorship I will at least take a couple of them down with me.

Oh, I live in the heart of Trumpland, yes, the belly of America. There are sane people here, but not many.

I strongly agree. I'll take the ban, and compare current America to the rise of Hitler. I don't know a lot about recent Eastern Europe these days, but I did study the rise of Nazi Germany as a youth. I can't help but feel a certain deja vu, about how Illegal immigrants, are being rounded up, these days. Hitler rounded up, other classes of people, besides the jews, that included, gypsies, and gays. So today's administration has that similarity. Not with rounding them up, but more like what I call scapegoating. In some ways there are some similarities with Mussolini's more classic fascism, with corporate interests, united with the public interests. I may read Madeline Albright's new book, "Fascism: A Warning", next. So it appears that i am not the only one concerned about the direction, we are headed.

[Nick Danger]

We're most likely to have a Constitutional amendment? What would that amendment say? A constitutional amendment requires 38 states to ratify it. Have you seen a map of the U.S. lately?

I think the ratification of a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing gay rights is very unlikely. I have a feeling you're just talking but can you tell me what it is you think will happen there? Also, what is it the amendment would provide that isn't guaranteed by the 14th amendment, particularly after Obergefell?

That’s the short view, Bronco. In 6 years, everything will be different.

1. The economy will be better. You’ll just have to trust me on that one.

2. The majority of the early Baby Boomer generation will be deceased, meaning a lot fewer votes for Jesus and a lot more votes for earthly concerns.

3. People will be tired of Republican politics.

4. Assuming the LGBT community don’t overplay their hand and create a backlash - you know, by demanding there be 112 genders or some other nonsense - it will seem totally natural to people to validate their rights further, in a very permanent manner.

I see it coming. Watching American politics play out isn’t much different than watching the ebb and flow of the ocean tide - do it long enough and you know exactly when to move your towel.

[Stavros]

LGBT rights have come a long, long, long way in the last decade. The American state of mind is turning away from persecuting people over their sex lives. I can almost guarantee you that in 2024, we'll have a new Democratic administration and most likely, a final solution (no nazi joke intended) to the LGBT rights problem - in the form of a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing them. In fact it wouldn't surprise me at all if that is the very first thing on the new agenda. When the time comes.

But the point I have been making, Nick, is that you don't need an amendment to the Constitution because LGBTQIAPN/B people are citizens with the same rights as every other American, they don't need a special amendment as if they were some new species of American who need special treatment. The other key point is that the withdrawal of the right of Transgendered Americans to serve in the military if they choose to do so, is nothing but vindictive, and was made because the Obama Presidency made it easier and if Obama did it, then the Republicans must undo it. It has no political benefit -if anything Americas should see it for the spiteful act that it is- and has no economic justification as the Military spends more proving its limp-dicked personnel with Viagra. Yes, it might just be a temporary glitch while these people are making the decisions, but what message does it send to Americans who want to serve but are told 'We don't want you'. In the longer term it adds to the problems that Transgendered Americas have across a range of issues in health, education and work, with the bleak assessment they may make that nobody cares about them, at a time when teenagers in particular need a lot of support. An example of how a small, even trivial policy decision made out of spite can in fact have a more serious impact elsewhere, and thus cost more to repair in the longer term.

[Nick Danger]

But the point I have been making, Nick, is that you don't need an amendment to the Constitution because LGBTQIAPN/B people are citizens with the same rights as every other American, they don't need a special amendment as if they were some new species of American who need special treatment. The other key point is that the withdrawal of the right of Transgendered Americans to serve in the military if they choose to do so, is nothing but vindictive, and was made because the Obama Presidency made it easier and if Obama did it, then the Republicans must undo it. It has no political benefit -if anything Americas should see it for the spiteful act that it is- and has no economic justification as the Military spends more proving its limp-dicked personnel with Viagra. Yes, it might just be a temporary glitch while these people are making the decisions, but what message does it send to Americans who want to serve but are told 'We don't want you'. In the longer term it adds to the problems that Transgendered Americas have across a range of issues in health, education and work, with the bleak assessment they may make that nobody cares about them, at a time when teenagers in particular need a lot of support. An example of how a small, even trivial policy decision made out of spite can in fact have a more serious impact elsewhere, and thus cost more to repair in the longer term.

You do need a Constitutional amendment, Stavros, because being a citizen of this country does not guarantee you the rights of which you speak. There are many citizens who can't join the armed forces. My grandfather fought in WWII, but my father couldn't join because of a vision impairment. Some people are conscientious objectors for religious or other reasons - the mere stating of their beliefs denies them entry into the armed forces. And the list goes on.

The current administration is willing to look at transgenderism as a mental health problem, and would probably be willing to take it one step further and define homosexuality that way. If there were a Constitutional amendment defining their rights, he'd be unable to do that. It surprises me that people don't see it that way.

Both the 10th and 15th amendments define rights for specific groups of people. LBGT people are a specific group of people who are complaining that their rights are being violated. It's practically a generic case study in the best possible use of a Constitutional amendment.

Also, Presidents love signing amendments. It becomes a huge part of their legacy.

It needs to happen and it will happen.

And as for "sending the wrong message," well, by political standards, Trump is sending exactly the right message to his voting base, and doesn't give much of a flying fuck what the LGBT community - most certainly, for the most part, NOT his voting base - thinks about it.