Ok.

A lot of us who disapprove of the party are still going to vote for them. It doesn’t mean anything.

That’s what Hillary said.

You need to think of power coalitions and long term policy positions.

Again, you’re stuck in binary short term thinking. I need to be more long term and strategic than you do.

And yes, transphobic DNC candidates losing makes the party less transphobic in the long run. We need to make transphobia completely toxic in the Democratic party, and that’s only possible if transphobic candidates lose. Every win by a Dem transphobe means more transphobes winning the next primary cycle. Look at Labor in the UK now. They’ve been completely taken over by TERFs.

Again, you’re still stuck in this thought pattern where the only election that matters is the one in front of you. I’m thinking decades into the future here.

Right now, we are seeing a transformation of the Democratic party. DSA candidates for instance are pulling the party further left than it has gone in decades. Do you think that could have ever happened without Trump being elected. (Please don’t put words in my mouth and pretend I’m saying that means it’s a net positive that Trump won. You’re better than that.)

The only reason the DSA candidates are doing well now is that the old common sense understanding that corporate centrists are “more electable” has been completely shattered. That would not have been possible without the 2016 and 2024 elections.

Remember, parties are coalitions. There are both trans allies and TERFS in the Democratic party. And TERFS need to be seen as complete losers. Elect a TERF? Lose the general election as all the queer people sit it out.

Small minority groups have no real political power on their own. Queer people are never going to be able to win elections on their own. The only power small minority groups have is the ability to work as a spoiler. And if you’re not willing to exercise that power, you will have none.

And frankly, if both parties turn transphobe, this whole country can burn to the ground as far as I care. You don’t get to expect someone’s political support after you’ve decided they don’t count as a human being.

That’s what Kamala said.

Not always. For example, I as a trans person need to vote against any transphobic Democrat. I can’t afford to myopically pretend that only the election in front of me exists. If the Democrats go the way of Labor in the UK, I will lose civil rights for the rest of my life. If a Republican wins, there’s always the possibility of Democrats reverting things after the next election.

For me personally, a transphobic Democrat is far more dangerous to my safety and well being than any Republican. It’s more important to make sure at least one party isn’t transphobic than it is to win every election.

Despite that, the Democratic party has a lower approval rating than Trump. People see Trump as evil. They see Democrats as shiftless empty suits that believe in nothing.

It seems lost a noun.

Historically it took killing millions to defeat fascism.

You’re not even willing to be a little rude.

Waaaah, but what if we caaaan’t? What if it doesn’t work? What if the courts just overrule it?

Who fucking cares if it doesn’t work? Try it anyway and quit being a god-damn child.

Let’s stop this limp-wristed, self-defeating, surrender-in-advance attitude. Here’s an idea. Try having a god damned backbone. Try it anyway and see if it sticks. As long as you have a half-decent legal theory, give it a go.

Liberals are shiftless cowards. Republicans will happily try a dozen things out, expecting only one or two of them to hold up in court. Democrats second-guess themselves into paralysis.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/andy-beshear-threatens-legal-fight-over-mitch-mcconnell-senate-replacement/ar-AA27UPl2

I’m not sure how you haven’t head about this.

Beshear argued those laws may conflict with the Kentucky Constitution.

“It says I appoint all state officers when there’s a vacancy. The question is, does that apply to federal offices? Well, before there was ever a law in Kentucky on how this would work, multiple appointments were made by governors, assumingly under that provision,” he said.

Again, you’re clearly missing something here if the governor himself is claiming the power to fill vacancies by appointment.

We need to pass a law requiring employers to pay twice the payroll tax contribution for any office worker that they require to work in the office.

They have a Democratic governor, you silly goose!

You’re taking it for a given that a Republican will win an election in Kentucky.

And if Beshear calls up an election without having properly verified only for McConnell to show real proof of life, the Democratic governor of a deeply red state with two more years left is going to have a scandal on his hands.

We need to crucify any Democrat that thinks this way. Oh, no, a scandal! Anything but that! Cowards, the lot of 'em. Never willing to take a chance on anything. No desire to throw something at the wall and see what sticks. Meanwhile Republicans try a dozen things hoping a quarter of them stick. This is why Republicans deliver for their base, while Democrats don’t do shit. Democrats are sniveling cowards.

Look, I’m no expert in Kentucky law, but I do know you’re not representing this fully. The consensus among lawyers when interviewed on this matter in the press is that there’s legal ambiguity, and good case can be made for both points. I don’t understand it fully myself, but it’s obviously not as cut and dry as you’re pretending.

Yet, the Democratic governor of Kentucky continues to be a chicken-shit coward. He has the power to end this now, but he’s too much of a coward to do anything. He can simply declare the seat vacant by death or incapacitation and call for a special election. If McConnell still walks among the living, then he can show up in court to prove his health quite easily. It would be the quickest court case ever.

This is squarely on the hands of that sniveling coward Governor Beshear.

Here’s my proposal to bring more whimsy to the world:

Let’s legalize piracy on the high seas…but only if the pirates use 17th century-level ships, tools, equipment, and weapons. It will still be legal for other ships to defend themselves, and they can use modern stuff. So no guarantee the historical reenacting pirates will survive. But in the off chance they do, they can keep whatever booty they plunder, and do so legally. Their ships will be too small and fragile to be a threat to big vessels like cargo ships. But it sure would make the lives of billionaire yacht owners more interesting…

“But this isn’t the 17th century. Billionaire yachts are not Spanish galleons laden with gold!” You shout!

But no worry, historically, pirates often took more than valuable cargo. They often seized entire vessels…

What you’re describing sounds like positive nihilism. Nihilism need not be a bad thing. At least as I understand it:

One can say, “all life is pointless, nothing matters, why do anything?” - negative nihilism

Another can say, “all life is pointless, nothing matters, why NOT do anything?” - positive nihilism

I would say positive nihilism describes my personal philosophy to an extent. I tell people that I don’t so much feel the universe is pointless, but a complete absurdity. The universe is mad, so embrace the madness! Mostly this just involves building less of a fear of judgment. What could you ever do that is sillier than the very world around you?

Sorry. I just bristle at potential sea lioning.

Try three things to find out for yourself, and post the results here. If you still haven’t figured it out then, I’ll answer you.

I’m guessing the Tesseract list. Although, I haven’t actually found anyone posting a link to it. I’ve seen a few people ask for the link, but folks only respond with sarcasm.