It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The man who wrote the anti-trans bathroom bill just lost to a trans woman

page: 2
64
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

I'm so sorry that her gender is an issue to begin with.

What are her positions on taxes, healthcare, gun laws, free speech?

Voting for anyone based on color, gender, sexual preference, religion, is superficial and narrow-minded.



Why didn't you ask me about the incumbent's politics and if that's why he lost?


Sounds more like a single issue. The stupid bathroom laws.


So did he lose because his opponent is a trans woman or did he lose because he's a hateful, sniveling bigot, pandering to his crowd?

This thread is more about the poetry of his loss, not so much the politics of it.


I'd call it "ironic" more than "poetic" but to each his own I suppose.

I am just getting sick of the identity politics. It's like "celebrity" politics.

Issues are secondary if you're "this" color, or "that" gender.

It's an offshoot of voting along party lines.

Who cares if it's a bad idea or a bad law! If an (R or D) is for it, so am I!






I vote by looking at the issues, see which politician is lying and pretending to support the issues I agree with, then vote for him/her so I can be grossly disappointed later like I always am.



+2 more 
posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: face23785
Funny story. If there wasn't a transgender person involved it would be a non-story though. You've only really reached equality when you stop making your "first this, first that" the story of the day. Congrats to the winner though.


The article isn't because she's a "first this or first that" (she's not the first trans woman in office by a long shot). The news-worthy aspect is because of the poetic justice the incumbent faced at the hands of a trans woman when he spent a large part of his career ruining the lives of trans people.


It's literally the 2nd sentence in the article. And in a number of articles about this, it's right in the headline. I understand and appreciate the poetic justice angle though. Ruining the lives is a stretch though. On a scale of 1 to 10 in oppression, not being able to use the bathroom you want is about a negative 4 compared to what people elsewhere face. Let's keep things in perspective.


When you are going to a doctor for a urinary tract infection caused by holding it in because a legislator legislated you out of existence... then you can decide where it falls on the spectrum of ruining peoples' lives.


Do they frequent a lot of places that only have bathrooms for the gender opposite the one they identify with?



How many women do you know that feel comfortable being forced into a men's room?

It's not an option.


It absolutely is an option. Choosing to endanger your own health rather than use the opposite bathroom is silly, and it's no one's choice but your own. I'm a man. If they passed a law tomorrow that I had to use the women's restroom, I'd use it no problem. I've had to do it in places where the men's room was out of service. I used to clean women's bathrooms when I was a janitor in high school. It's not that scary. In a world where people are literally getting rounded up and executed for their religious beliefs or being sold into sex slavery and things like that, being forced to use the bathroom that corresponds to your anatomy is just not that bad, sorry. It only has as much impact on your life as you want it to have.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

I'm so sorry that her gender is an issue to begin with.

What are her positions on taxes, healthcare, gun laws, free speech?

Voting for anyone based on color, gender, sexual preference, religion, is superficial and narrow-minded.



That's what the article is for. She has a strong platform, well detailed. This thread is about the combination of the incumbent and her, specifically.

Are we not allowed to write threads that go beyond basic platforms? It's not about her politics. Why didn't you ask me about the incumbent's politics and if that's why he lost?


Because opposing someone based on their gender identity is superficial, narrow-minded, and bigoted. Policy platforms be damned. Even when it's clearly articulated in your linked article. Something about the pot calling the kettle black...sounds all-too-familiar...and transparent.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Abysha

I'm sure she'll be great, I just don't like the idea of people voting on emotion instead of platform. Voting on emotion instead of platform is what got us Trump. I just don't want to see it become a regular thing even if it works out sometimes.


Voting on emotion is what has kept Marshal getting re-elected over and over with his hate platform. Voting for Roem is the first sign of emotion being toned down in an election and allowing logic to step in.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

I'm so sorry that her gender is an issue to begin with.

What are her positions on taxes, healthcare, gun laws, free speech?

Voting for anyone based on color, gender, sexual preference, religion, is superficial and narrow-minded.



Why didn't you ask me about the incumbent's politics and if that's why he lost?


Sounds more like a single issue. The stupid bathroom laws.


So did he lose because his opponent is a trans woman or did he lose because he's a hateful, sniveling bigot, pandering to his crowd?

This thread is more about the poetry of his loss, not so much the politics of it.


I'd call it "ironic" more than "poetic" but to each his own I suppose.

I am just getting sick of the identity politics. It's like "celebrity" politics.

Issues are secondary if you're "this" color, or "that" gender.

It's an offshoot of voting along party lines.

Who cares if it's a bad idea or a bad law! If an (R or D) is for it, so am I!






I vote by looking at the issues, see which politician is lying and pretending to support the issues I agree with, then vote for him/her so I can be grossly disappointed later like I always am.


My question is why a politician like Marshal can win on identity politics (from the bigoted side of it) over and over but nobody complains about "identity politics" until the biggest panderers of them all lose to what they hate?
edit on 8-11-2017 by Abysha because: spellinz



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

Momentum is the change of velocity (speed). You don't need velocity initially. Going from 0 velocity to anything greater than 0 is a change in velocity and thus momentum. And this is a change in velocity. The election exceeded the polls and the state legislature flipped to blue, something that hasn't happened since 1989. Watching Republicans like you squirm and deny the coming wave of liberalism is funny. Bout time things started to turn around.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Abysha

Dunno.

I thought he was a dick for instituting the damn laws to begin with.


+1 more 
posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

Mentally ill? She was mentally fit enough to win the election. Isn't that the argument you guys make every time someone calls Trump an idiot?

Have you really allowed politics to make you an unempathetic asshole? She's a person just like you and me you know, just because she's transgender doesn't make her any less human.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Arnie123

Momentum is the change of velocity (speed). You don't need velocity initially. Going from 0 velocity to anything greater than 0 is a change in velocity and thus momentum. And this is a change in velocity. The election exceeded the polls and the state legislature flipped to blue, something that hasn't happened since 1989. Watching Republicans like you squirm and deny the coming wave of liberalism is funny. Bout time things started to turn around.


That's a great point. They've gone from 0 to about half a mile an hour.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

Dunno.

I thought he was a dick for instituting the damn laws to begin with.



But why wouldn't you accuse him of identity politics? When somebody bases their entire political premise and image on hating a particular group, isn't that identity politics?
edit on 8-11-2017 by Abysha because: spellinz... jesus, what's wrong with me today



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Trump is the reason it's probably going to happen too. He's pushed so many to the far left that it's bound to rebound and smack him and his supporters in the face eventually.

Whether that's a good thing I can't say, but usually the extreme of any side turns out to be a bad thing in my opinion. Hope I'm wrong.
edit on 11/8/2017 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

Dunno.

I thought he was a dick for instituting the damn laws to begin with.



But why wouldn't you accuse him of identity politics? When somebody bases their entire political premise and image on hatig a particular group, isn't that identity politics?


Where did you get the idea that I was defending him?

I just STATED that supporting a law based on political ideology is stupid.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Bob Marshall has been the delegate for that area for a long, long time. And he did a lot of good things for that area back in the 90s and early 00s. I met him a handful of times and found him to be a genuinely decent guy.

Ol' Bob's problem is that he slowly slid into a "castle on the hill" mentality and just lost touch with things. He stopped doing what got him elected time and time again, which was getting out into the community and talking to people. It was sad to hear of his behavior during this election, and I can't say I'm surprised that it may have cost him his seat.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Bob Marshall has been the delegate for that area for a long, long time. And he did a lot of good things for that area back in the 90s and early 00s. I met him a handful of times and found him to be a genuinely decent guy.

Ol' Bob's problem is that he slowly slid into a "castle on the hill" mentality and just lost touch with things. He stopped doing what got him elected time and time again, which was getting out into the community and talking to people. It was sad to hear of his behavior during this election, and I can't say I'm surprised that it may have cost him his seat.


Certainly sounds like he deserved to lose. Did he give a reason for refusing to debate?



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Progress has to start somewhere and we need to climb out of the Trump hole; not keep digging into it.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

Dunno.

I thought he was a dick for instituting the damn laws to begin with.



But why wouldn't you accuse him of identity politics? When somebody bases their entire political premise and image on hatig a particular group, isn't that identity politics?


Where did you get the idea that I was defending him?

I just STATED that supporting a law based on political ideology is stupid.


DC, I know you weren't defending him. I'd never accuse you of that. I was just pointing out that it's only called "identity politics" by many of you when referring to the people themselves but not when referring to those who pander to the base's hatred of those people.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Trump is the reason it's probably going to happen too. He's pushed so many to the far left that it's bound to rebound and smack him and his supporters in the face eventually.


I would argue that the far left is the reason for Trump to begin with. I think it's more likely that he'll push his base back toward the middle, rather than pushing them all the way to the left. The people who had a problem with super-progressive politics aren't going to stop having a problem with them just because of Trump. They're more likely to go with another conservative rather than going all the way left, I'd say.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Politics are always cyclical. That is a statement of fact. Trumpism can't last forever and the pendulum WILL swing back the other way. And just like a pendulum, the further you pull it away from the center before letting it swing back, the further it will swing back out into the other direction. But also like a pendulum things will slowly swing back to centricism.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Trump is the reason it's probably going to happen too. He's pushed so many to the far left that it's bound to rebound and smack him and his supporters in the face eventually.


I would argue that the far left is the reason for Trump to begin with. I think it's more likely that he'll push his base back toward the middle, rather than pushing them all the way to the left. The people who had a problem with super-progressive politics aren't going to stop having a problem with them just because of Trump. They're more likely to go with another conservative rather than going all the way left, I'd say.


Exactly. Most of the people I know who voted for Trump aren't even that big fans of him. They were just sick of the far left agenda. Clinton wasn't a far left candidate on everything, but the way she ran her campaign based on far left staples like her gender pushed people towards Trump. That's why you see his negative numbers so high, but people are still willing to vote for him. You don't have to like the guy that much to vote for him, you just have to like him more than the other guy (or lady).



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Bob Marshall has been the delegate for that area for a long, long time. And he did a lot of good things for that area back in the 90s and early 00s. I met him a handful of times and found him to be a genuinely decent guy.

Ol' Bob's problem is that he slowly slid into a "castle on the hill" mentality and just lost touch with things. He stopped doing what got him elected time and time again, which was getting out into the community and talking to people. It was sad to hear of his behavior during this election, and I can't say I'm surprised that it may have cost him his seat.


Certainly sounds like he deserved to lose. Did he give a reason for refusing to debate?


Not specifically, no. My understanding is that he wasn't doing much of anything public, because he was getting hammered on same-sex marriage and the bathroom bill. No debates, no press conferences without having the questions beforehand, etc.

ETA - I no longer live in that area, so my information isn't first-hand any more about this specific election. My initial comment about the OP is just my opinion based off having lived there for a fair bit of time.
edit on 8-11-2017 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join