this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2025
684 points (95.1% liked)

Political Memes

9400 readers
2825 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've seen a depressing trend of Democratic politicians embracing anti trans talking points and compromising gender affirming care for young people. This is extremely concerning as states and the federal government are undermining access to care now more than ever. Democrats standing by trans people has far more dire consequences now than ever, yet we're being treated as politically disposable by people who used to campaign on lgbtq issues like Gavin Newsom and Pete Buttigieg.

I can't say I'm surprised. Liberal papers like the New York Times has been uncritically promoting unscientific transphobia for years that claims alternatives exist to gender affirming care. My guess is that people see a person transitioning as an unfortunate thing, desperately wishing there was another way. They ignore the fact that gender affirming care is both the best treatment for dysphoria, and one of the most successful treatments for any mental condition ever discovered.

To put it simply, making gender affirming care harder to obtain for kids will kill many of them. Kids being kept from care by their parents already drives people to suicide, and a slimy politician preventing supportive parents from helping their kids will do the same. Every time I see people claim these guys are our best shot at beating fascism, I die inside. I have no doubt that they'll eventually axe care for all adults like everyone who was originally "worried about fairness in sports" is currently pushing for. The only way they won't is if we make it a costly issue for them.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 4 hours ago

the old guard is trying to avoid another zohran, bernie, aoc, or the minnesota mayor, hence pedalling a republican lite is the best they can do.

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago

"Let's meet in the middle and only oppress people 50%"

[–] philosloppy@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago

liberals gonna lib but what does the acceptance, or rejection, of science have anything to do with it? Plenty of fascists have had no problem embracing science as a method of political expediency and plenty of leftists have rejected scientific advance as a measure of political progress.

Who said that??

[–] piefood@feddit.online 3 points 18 hours ago (22 children)

Not only Democratic politicians, I see it here in the Fediverse all the time. People seem to think that the Democrats winning is more important than human rights.

I just don't understood that kind of dogmatic thinking.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago (9 children)

I think it's more that people think winning is more important than performative losing. It's not pragmatic to promote talking points that hurt your own cause.

For example, I'd wager that cutting hundreds of billions from Medicaid will hurt the general population AND the trans population far more than gender affirming care for kids or trans rights in sports would benefit trans people.

And consider this, every time we lose, it's going to get worse and worse and keep shifting the Overton Window to the right.

Are we supposed to pretend that strategy and tactics aren't applicable to politics? Winning the broader war wins many smaller battles by default.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] TheFinn@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Winning an election is step one. Policies that benefit everyone (except maybe the very top) is next. Then win the next election and pull the country left. Then rinse and repeat. We didn't get here overnight.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

But Democrats aren't winning. They are moving to the right and losing. In the rare circumstances where they do win, they generally end up supporting right-wing policies anyway. It's almost like there's a correlation between those.....

[–] TheFinn@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

We have two different problems. The democratic party as everyone knows, is a feckless bunch. So it must be turned into a viable party once again. But we can't rehabilitate it and kneecap it at the same time. They also have to win (and then cycle/replace candidates that aren't with the program.)

The Tea Party did it to Republicans. We have to do it for Democrats... It would also be great to erode resistance to ranked choice voting.

It's a tall order. We should have been doing it twenty or thirty years ago.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago (11 children)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] twice_hatch@midwest.social 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I'm sure this time we'll get a third-party President!

[–] piefood@feddit.online 4 points 15 hours ago

I'm sure this time the Democrats won't betray us!

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›