this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
143 points (99.3% liked)
El Chisme
502 readers
166 users here now
Place for posting about the dumb shit public figures say.
Rules:
Rule 1: The subject of a post must be a public person.
Rule 2: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 3: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 4: No sectarianism.
Rule 5: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 6: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 7: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 8: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is probably in reference to a Trump campaign ad. Trump had a campaign ad that said "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you". Democrats think that it was a great ad. Gavin Newsom said it was a great ad. Democrats response to the ad is throwing trans people under the bus.
A good response to an anti-trans ad would be "stop blaming everything on transgender people". Then actually having policies that benefit people.
the mythology has become that this ad in particular was one of the main reasons Harris lost. It seems like Democrats liked the ad more than any hypothetical republican voters because I don't remember the chuds talking much about it.
Depending on which polling you read it was either the most impactful poll of the last election cycle (so says a Dem super PAC) or negligible on changing voting preferences but still negatively impacted acceptance of trans people (so says GLAAD).
Of course both those sponsoring organizations have their own vested interests in reaching those conclusions
When you put it in context, what she's saying here isn't really that bad. It's as good of a response as you can write while still making the mistake of engaging in the terms and framing your enemy imposed on you.
I guessed this was in response to something and context doesn't really improve it. Her campaign was neither trans-inclusive nor aimed for prosperity for all, even in the bounds of a limited liberal democracy.
There's something to be said about being put into boxes by opponents, but really it's we (the most important pronoun) Communists who have to deal with that, not someone with a billion dollar media campaign behind them. (not that important of a pronoun, apparently)
It's honestly just too corny to float in 2025. Maybe if she had a history of being genuine it would work, but... well...
That would require them having any sort of values, and the only ones they even pretend to hold are the ones they're paid to endorse