tequila4kapp said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

concordtom said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

movielover said:

---

A friend in PA explained Ferterman's appeal - 'abortion'. That, and the stoner / disaffected / extreme contingent.

---

Some people have "it" and others do not. If Oz can't pull ahead by a decent margin in this election cycle I tend to think it indicates he just doesn't have that it factor where he connects with voters.

---

To me it seems pretty clear that he doesn't. Fetterman's stroke is the reason he has a shot.

---

My Senate predictions:
NH - Bolduc
PA - Fetterman
OH - Vance
GA - Runoff, maybe Walker in a squeaker
CO - Bennett
AZ - Masters
WI - Johnson
NV - toss up. The Harry Reid machine still exists and Laxalt is reportedly Oz-like in not connecting with voters.

If my math is correct I think that puts R's +1 with a chance to get to +3. Dem's path for keeping the Senate are winning NH, NV and Zona to get them to +2 with GA being a run off.

---

What is your reaction should GA elect Walker?

---

Honest reaction: I don't especially care. Things are not great with this economy for me and my family. We are struggling in ways that we didn't in prior years. I am squarely in the camp of I just want change; D policies are not working for me. I am likely going to get the essence of my wish with R's taking back the House.

I am extremely cynical of establishment politicians who are fundamentally interested in gaining and keeping power. In my world view Mitch McConnell is as much of a tool as Schumer. The only thing R Senators do that I like is nominate judges who align with my view of how to interpret the C. I am not going to get that with a D as President anyways. So if Walker wins there is some potential nominal benefit of mitigating the worst of Biden's judicial nominations and potentially nominating better ones in 2+ years. But I gave up my pie in the sky views that Rs were pure and great many many moons ago. The judicial benefits stuff is fairly abstract...and in the meantime I care a lot more about much more tangible things like having some extra money at the end of the month.

---

How do you feel about the danger of getting more "election denial" people into office on the R side?

---

You guys are asking me personal questions. I'll answer. But let's understand we are entering the zone of someone's personal opinion and preferences, not fact based debate. So I'll appreciate some tact with your responses, as you obviously are going to disagree with me.

My answer: Zero concern. I see the Jan 6 House activities as being a total sham. There's likely an amount of truth to what they are pursuing but the entire thing was political theater and rigged, so I simply turn a blind eye to their supposed findings. (I think there were an assortment of irregularities in many states but I do not disbelieve the election results. Joe Biden is our President. I would call it a corollary to 1960 when Nixon was told the Kennedy's stole the election via the mob in Illinois. He chose not to challenge it, said it was more important to do what is best for the country, etc.)

---

As you said, you're in Oregon so your vote doesn't mean a whole lot on the national level. I'm legitimately interested in understanding your mindset and won't get agitated (though I can't promise others won't).

Obviously I agree that the election results were legitimate, and disliking the format of the House committee hearings is whatever, water under the bridge. My question is more about all the GOP candidates who are actively campaigning on the idea that the election was illegitimate and saying that they will make sure the right person wins next time. Some of these folks will get into positions where they legitimately have a say in certifying the next elections (governors, secretaries of state, Congress itself). Any worry that all of this talk could lead to another legitimate election being overturned illegitimately, for political reasons?

---

I believe we have substantial institutional checks and balances which work to negate the risk of that actually happening. D's have objected to the certification of virtually every election R's won since at least 2000. They were not able to overturn those legitimate elections either. In short, there are loons at the extremes on both sides but there are enough reasonable people and institutional constraints to limit their effectiveness.

---

We do have institutional checks, though if you get loons in positions of power at all levels along the way, those checks fall apart. I'm not in panic mode like some of my fellow travelers on the left, but the GOP is certainly getting closer to putting us in this situation.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Are you talking about Trump?

My views there are likely not as you suspect. I happen to agree with some / many of the America 1st agenda. Not all of it. But I am very worn down by the divisiveness. Trump is personally a tool. And IMO democrats have largely responded by showing their more ugly sides in return. They could have taken the high road, instead they get in the gutter with him. I'm tired of it all and want something better. (see the recent pot shot at DeSantis. You D's may not like DeSantis but for regular conservative types he's solid, certainly not deserving of in-family pot shots. And Trump is going to attack him? ***? I'm done with that version of politics).

I think Trump was right for 2016 but his window has closed. If he is losing people like me who are actually receptive to some amount of his policy stuff then...see window closing. My hunch today is he only gets elected if things continue to suck (IMO) with the economy AND D's nominate someone that really motivates R's. I currently see Biden as more of a guy who is too far to the left of the country and who is fighting dementia, not someone that people viscerally hate like HRC and Trump.

Also, I live in Oregon. My Presidential vote doesn't matter. Our ECs are going to the D candidate no matter what.

---

Yes, I'm talking about Trump, the leader of the Republican party who will be the GOP nominee in 2024. Same guy. He is likely to run unopposed for the GOP nomination and we're already seeing potential adversaries withdrawing like Tom Cotton.

As for being disappointed by the D's not taking the high road, we have all seen how Obama's high road failed. You can't fight insurgents with traditional warfare, we learned that lesson in Vietnam and elsewhere. Trump has realigned the battlefield in American politics and is the only Republican that matters. You might think DeSantis is a "regular conservative type" but he's really just a very slightly cleaned up version of Trump, He apes everything Trump does and spends most of his time as governor of Florida engaging in white grievance / culture war stunts. Let's not pretend like he is some old fashioned conservative type. If you want to talk about someone like Kasick or Larry Hogan or DeWine, then that's a completely different story. But there are very obvious reasons why people like that have no national platform and zero pull within the GOP. Your party has been completely overtaken by the crazies and it's caused ripple effects throughout the political landscape.

As for Trump's "agenda" I think we can dispense with pretending there is one. The GOP had an actual party platform in 2016 which Trump largely ignored (apart from literally forcing them to take out the anti-Russia elements) and in 20202 they removed the platform entirely. There still isn't a Republican policy platform because the party has realized that its base doesn't care about policy. There is no agenda - there is grievance / culture war nonsense. This works great for GOP politicians because they've never really had answers for anything and now they can focus on whinging about things that they have no intention of changing. Once in a while they'll make something up - like Trump saying he would like to execute all drug dealers without due process - because that's red meat for the base, but by and large the GOP is just here to ask questions, not to generate policy positions and execute on them.

Speaking of which, Trump's infrastructure week should be any day now and I hear the GOP is about 2 weeks away from announcing their amazing Obamacare replacement.

---

"My party"... I am registered "Non Affiliated" ("Independent" is an actual political party in Oregon). Sure, my world view is right of center but the only person/entity that agrees 100% of the time with me is me and I'm not running.

Re Republican platform, I agree with a lot of what you say. What does it mean to be a Republican anymore? Take away abortion and maybe being opposed to judicial activism and I don't know. It certainly isn't the party of Reagan. I tend to think many of Trump's policies align to 1950s-1960's Democrats; it certainly isn't traditional Repub dogma to be opposed to free trade, to flirt with Isolationism, etc. Anyway, I see the Republican party as being in the midst of an identity crisis. Who's going to win, the establishment people with no core beliefs other than winning elections or the Loon with some core political beliefs but who's primary interest is taking care of himself?

At the same time, I would say the same thing about D's. The party has moved massively to the left. On social issues it was only 14 years ago that Candidate Obama was opposed to gay marriage. Now we have drag shows being performed in elementary schools. Economically, the socialist Bernie Sanders wing has had a massive influence. There is exactly 1 prominent D in the entire country who is pro-life. This isn't the part of Kennedy or even Bill Clinton any longer.

One of the two parties is going to wise up and realize they can dominate if they just take a nominal move to the middle, where the Independents live. Or they can keep playing to people on both sides who drink the koolaid and believe their side is perfect and the other side is evil. Some of those people spend a lot of time on this board.

---

I hear you on all of this. I do agree that many in the democratic party have moved left but I'm not sure that I see the extremists as having taken over. On a global scale, the modern democratic party is very much middle of the road.

Setting that aside there is one thing on your list that really perplexes me.

I have to be honest, I don't understand the drag show phenomenon. It doesn't seem to be a partisan policy type of situation. When GOPers first started bring it up as part of their vast grievance/culture war, I thought they were making it up. I live in SF, less than half a mile from the Castro, and my elementary-aged kids have never been to a drag show. I've never heard a single person in real life suggest that kids should see drag shows or that our school should host one.

At some point recently,however, it seems like oppositional democrats stormed to the defense of drag shows. Nutjobs started showing up with guns to adult drag shows and committing vandalism/arson/etc. What started out as pretty obvious transphobia has led to what seems like an overreaction on the other side. I honestly don't know if the Democratic party supports any sort of drag shows with minors - I certainly don't think my kids should see any sort of burlesque, whether drag or otherwise. Again I don't really see this as a political issue (apart from transphobia - which is political and policy relevant) but I do wonder what the hell is going on if people are really feeling compelled to bring drag shows into elementary schools. I haven't heard Biden or any other prominent Democrat promote drag shows with children and I can't fathom that it's a position that any democrat would think is a winner. All you have to do is be anti transphobia. You can support transgender people (what I thought the democratic party was doing) without giving into the GOP culture war paradigm. I don't even understand really what drag shows have to do with transgender to begin with - I thought it was just flamboyant dudes who liked to dress up as women and lip-sync Liza Minelli songs. I honestly can't tell if this is all false flag garbage or otherwise, but I'm really beginning to wonder how the GOP manifested transphobia into progressives bringing drag shows into the classroom. I'm particularly concerned that the GOP will manage to do the same thing with scrotum tanning, child brides or any of the other made up culture war fixations they've developed.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Are you talking about Trump?

My views there are likely not as you suspect. I happen to agree with some / many of the America 1st agenda. Not all of it. But I am very worn down by the divisiveness. Trump is personally a tool. And IMO democrats have largely responded by showing their more ugly sides in return. They could have taken the high road, instead they get in the gutter with him. I'm tired of it all and want something better. (see the recent pot shot at DeSantis. You D's may not like DeSantis but for regular conservative types he's solid, certainly not deserving of in-family pot shots. And Trump is going to attack him? ***? I'm done with that version of politics).

I think Trump was right for 2016 but his window has closed. If he is losing people like me who are actually receptive to some amount of his policy stuff then...see window closing. My hunch today is he only gets elected if things continue to suck (IMO) with the economy AND D's nominate someone that really motivates R's. I currently see Biden as more of a guy who is too far to the left of the country and who is fighting dementia, not someone that people viscerally hate like HRC and Trump.

Also, I live in Oregon. My Presidential vote doesn't matter. Our ECs are going to the D candidate no matter what.

---

Yes, I'm talking about Trump, the leader of the Republican party who will be the GOP nominee in 2024. Same guy. He is likely to run unopposed for the GOP nomination and we're already seeing potential adversaries withdrawing like Tom Cotton.

As for being disappointed by the D's not taking the high road, we have all seen how Obama's high road failed. You can't fight insurgents with traditional warfare, we learned that lesson in Vietnam and elsewhere. Trump has realigned the battlefield in American politics and is the only Republican that matters. You might think DeSantis is a "regular conservative type" but he's really just a very slightly cleaned up version of Trump, He apes everything Trump does and spends most of his time as governor of Florida engaging in white grievance / culture war stunts. Let's not pretend like he is some old fashioned conservative type. If you want to talk about someone like Kasick or Larry Hogan or DeWine, then that's a completely different story. But there are very obvious reasons why people like that have no national platform and zero pull within the GOP. Your party has been completely overtaken by the crazies and it's caused ripple effects throughout the political landscape.

As for Trump's "agenda" I think we can dispense with pretending there is one. The GOP had an actual party platform in 2016 which Trump largely ignored (apart from literally forcing them to take out the anti-Russia elements) and in 20202 they removed the platform entirely. There still isn't a Republican policy platform because the party has realized that its base doesn't care about policy. There is no agenda - there is grievance / culture war nonsense. This works great for GOP politicians because they've never really had answers for anything and now they can focus on whinging about things that they have no intention of changing. Once in a while they'll make something up - like Trump saying he would like to execute all drug dealers without due process - because that's red meat for the base, but by and large the GOP is just here to ask questions, not to generate policy positions and execute on them.

Speaking of which, Trump's infrastructure week should be any day now and I hear the GOP is about 2 weeks away from announcing their amazing Obamacare replacement.

---

"My party"... I am registered "Non Affiliated" ("Independent" is an actual political party in Oregon). Sure, my world view is right of center but the only person/entity that agrees 100% of the time with me is me and I'm not running.

Re Republican platform, I agree with a lot of what you say. What does it mean to be a Republican anymore? Take away abortion and maybe being opposed to judicial activism and I don't know. It certainly isn't the party of Reagan. I tend to think many of Trump's policies align to 1950s-1960's Democrats; it certainly isn't traditional Repub dogma to be opposed to free trade, to flirt with Isolationism, etc. Anyway, I see the Republican party as being in the midst of an identity crisis. Who's going to win, the establishment people with no core beliefs other than winning elections or the Loon with some core political beliefs but who's primary interest is taking care of himself?

At the same time, I would say the same thing about D's. The party has moved massively to the left. On social issues it was only 14 years ago that Candidate Obama was opposed to gay marriage. Now we have drag shows being performed in elementary schools. Economically, the socialist Bernie Sanders wing has had a massive influence. There is exactly 1 prominent D in the entire country who is pro-life. This isn't the part of Kennedy or even Bill Clinton any longer.

One of the two parties is going to wise up and realize they can dominate if they just take a nominal move to the middle, where the Independents live. Or they can keep playing to people on both sides who drink the koolaid and believe their side is perfect and the other side is evil. Some of those people spend a lot of time on this board.

---

You and I could not be more aligned on how we view the current state of the "Republican" party (which, as you indicate, is more aligned with the racists Dixiecrats and far left Bernie Sanders before he went mainstream), the far left shift of the Democrats (it is difficult for me to explain how much of a disappointment Biden has been - a candidate I supported financially and in the ballot - he has lost touch with middle America, did not bring normalcy or unity to the country, demonstrated no competence in messaging, unifying, or decision making - what is his platform? At least he is not Trump? Really?). I would vote enthusiastically for any candidate like Bill Clinton, Obama, the first George Bush, McCain, Romney, etc. We don't have any like that. My vote does not count in this liberal beach city in California anyway, and, despite my disgust with how poorly the left govern, I cannot bring myself to vote for the election deniers, not because I buy into the fear tactics of the left (we had the biggest election denier in the White House but our judiciary system worked and he won almost no legal challenge), but because candidates who further the ignorance of Americans on basics like our form of government (what is government other than a social contract for us to all behave) and weakening of the democracy on something they know to be false (i.e., the election was not stolen) show such lack of moral character or judgment that, even if I agree with their policies, I do not want them anywhere near power.

I have no hope that either party will wise up. There will be crazies (or those acting crazy despite knowing better, including Cruz and Hawley) because the primaries favor the crazies. Trump or Biden are not the biggest threats. Walker or AOC are not the biggest issues. The biggest issues are the primaries that force extreme positions and force us to choose among two crazies or morons. The biggest issues are biased media that create tribes (all you need to do is look here at how unwilling the left or the right is on doing something as basic as listening to counter views or engage in anything other than reflexive insults - main reason this board is a waste of our time - craziness is not limited to one side of the tribe - tribal identify creates bias on which is crazier (it is always the other side), but they are both crazy). When someone points out the obvious fault shared by both, there are reflexive claims of false equivalency, whataboutism, etc. No original thought left.

I have no hope of things improving because the causes of this current state are so deeply rooted into our society that it will never change. I have submitted my ballots with chagrin (not going to disclose how I voted to agenda-filled strangers on this board - you are not entitled to know and you don't deserve to know), and I have participated in this democracy knowing that losers on both sides will complain about how rigged it is.

One final assessment of the Democrats during this election cycle. While I recognize neither party is truly responsible for the economic and social issues, when you shout Defund the Police or eliminate cash bail and crime rate rises or when you shout spend and spend more under the lie that inflation is not an issue or transitory and people are struggling due to inflation, you created the messaging headache. Most people are not digging deeper into the global causes of inflation or recession, difficulty creating enough prisons, etc. People are not going to do massive research but will vote based on anger and those they believe are responsible based on messaging and who had power. Those who had power and had poor messaging in times like these are screwed. I have a hard time pointing to anything those in power did in the last two years and think those in power have done a great job that is manifested in an improved quality of life.

Democrats can complain about how idiotic Americans are, but who are the idiots who still cannot connect simple dots and who allow morons on their side to pollute the messaging that matter most to independents and undecided (and trust me, it is not what happen two years ago and it is not abortion - it is crime, it is the economy, it is their children - and no amount of stats, counter arguments will dilute what they feel and what they experience) . The Democrats always act as if this is the first election they ever ran.

Came by to visit how much folks here have progressed in their journey here. Not much has changed. And that is why I don't think much will change in our society. This board is a microcosm of America. Tribes arguing the same thing over and over again because their sense of identity and superiority is tied to their tribe being the superior tribe. It has nothing to do working together for a better tomorrow. It is about what we always fight about - just being superior to others based on political beliefs, skin color, economic class, beauty, etc.

I've seen stories about kids attending drag shows (hey, it's a big country and I'm sure you can find an example of any weird behavior somewhere), but when was one performed in an elementary school? I confess I've missed that one.

Though again, it's a big country with a lot of schools so I wouldn't be shocked if someone did something weird at one of them.

8.7% increase in social security payments this year. Thank you Democrats.

sycasey said:

---

I've seen stories about kids attending drag shows (hey, it's a big country and I'm sure you can find an example of any weird behavior somewhere), but when was one performed in an elementary school? I confess I've missed that one.

Though again, it's a big country with a lot of schools so I wouldn't be shocked if someone did something weird at one of them.

---

The earliest instance of something like this I see is from 2018: https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/08/06/k-12-schools-bringing-in-drag-queens-to-teach-gender-ideology/

From 2022:
The New York Post reported that New York and New York City spent more than $200,000 on drag shows at schools.
"Last month alone, Drag Story Hour NYCa nonprofit whose outrageously cross-dressed performers interact with kids as young as 3earned $46,000 from city contracts for appearances at public schools, street festivals, and libraries, city records show," The Post reported.
Drag Story Hour NYC's website says that it has "produced 49 Drag Story Hour programs for 34 individual public schools."

Google searches show other instances in other states.

tequila4kapp said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

concordtom said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

movielover said:

---

A friend in PA explained Ferterman's appeal - 'abortion'. That, and the stoner / disaffected / extreme contingent.

---

Some people have "it" and others do not. If Oz can't pull ahead by a decent margin in this election cycle I tend to think it indicates he just doesn't have that it factor where he connects with voters.

---

To me it seems pretty clear that he doesn't. Fetterman's stroke is the reason he has a shot.

---

My Senate predictions:
NH - Bolduc
PA - Fetterman
OH - Vance
GA - Runoff, maybe Walker in a squeaker
CO - Bennett
AZ - Masters
WI - Johnson
NV - toss up. The Harry Reid machine still exists and Laxalt is reportedly Oz-like in not connecting with voters.

If my math is correct I think that puts R's +1 with a chance to get to +3. Dem's path for keeping the Senate are winning NH, NV and Zona to get them to +2 with GA being a run off.

---

What is your reaction should GA elect Walker?

---

Honest reaction: I don't especially care. Things are not great with this economy for me and my family. We are struggling in ways that we didn't in prior years. I am squarely in the camp of I just want change; D policies are not working for me. I am likely going to get the essence of my wish with R's taking back the House.

I am extremely cynical of establishment politicians who are fundamentally interested in gaining and keeping power. In my world view Mitch McConnell is as much of a tool as Schumer. The only thing R Senators do that I like is nominate judges who align with my view of how to interpret the C. I am not going to get that with a D as President anyways. So if Walker wins there is some potential nominal benefit of mitigating the worst of Biden's judicial nominations and potentially nominating better ones in 2+ years. But I gave up my pie in the sky views that Rs were pure and great many many moons ago. The judicial benefits stuff is fairly abstract...and in the meantime I care a lot more about much more tangible things like having some extra money at the end of the month.

---

How do you feel about the danger of getting more "election denial" people into office on the R side?

---

You guys are asking me personal questions. I'll answer. But let's understand we are entering the zone of someone's personal opinion and preferences, not fact based debate. So I'll appreciate some tact with your responses, as you obviously are going to disagree with me.

My answer: Zero concern. I see the Jan 6 House activities as being a total sham. There's likely an amount of truth to what they are pursuing but the entire thing was political theater and rigged, so I simply turn a blind eye to their supposed findings. (I think there were an assortment of irregularities in many states but I do not disbelieve the election results. Joe Biden is our President. I would call it a corollary to 1960 when Nixon was told the Kennedy's stole the election via the mob in Illinois. He chose not to challenge it, said it was more important to do what is best for the country, etc.)

---

Sorry. I think your blind eye (the side of you that thinks it's "theater") is really missing a lot of FACTS.

I guess you think Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger threw their political careers in the trash for nothing, huh?

I can't believe people believe the claim that it's all theater. You must watch Foxnews and listen to conservative talk radio? Where are you getting your information?

movielover said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I've seen stories about kids attending drag shows (hey, it's a big country and I'm sure you can find an example of any weird behavior somewhere), but when was one performed in an elementary school? I confess I've missed that one.

Though again, it's a big country with a lot of schools so I wouldn't be shocked if someone did something weird at one of them.

---

The earliest instance of something like this I see is from 2018: https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/08/06/k-12-schools-bringing-in-drag-queens-to-teach-gender-ideology/

From 2022:
The New York Post reported that New York and New York City spent more than $200,000 on drag shows at schools.
"Last month alone, Drag Story Hour NYCa nonprofit whose outrageously cross-dressed performers interact with kids as young as 3earned $46,000 from city contracts for appearances at public schools, street festivals, and libraries, city records show," The Post reported.
Drag Story Hour NYC's website says that it has "produced 49 Drag Story Hour programs for 34 individual public schools."

Google searches show other instances in other states.

---

Oh I see, so they're like coming in to read storybooks to them. I get why people might still object to it, but the way people talked about it you would think they were doing literal stripteases or
something.

---

Why are they trying to sexualize our children?

FTR, I'd be against:
- the Leather lunch hour
- the polygamous lunch hour
- the tattoo lunch hour

They've had events in Campbell, San Lorenzo, Montana.

---

You sound sex obsessed. There is nothing more sexual about the presence of a trans person than there is the presence of a cis person.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Time to cap voting age. If 16 is too young to vote, how is 80 not too old?

Just voted and was approached by an elderly woman looking on her NYC ballot for Dr. Oz. I don’t really know where to go from here. Perhaps to the bar.

— Sarah Meyer (@SarahMeyerNYC) November 8, 2022

---

OH MY GOODNESS!

Well, bless her little heart.
At least Dr. Oz is a real doctor on TV and not a fake one.

Was she still trying to vote for Trump too?
lol

movielover said:

---

We're not talking about trans, we're talking about Drag Queen Hour.

---

My bad.

You seem obsessed with sex. The presence of a man dressed like a woman is no more sexual than the presence of a man dressed like a man.

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

We're not talking about trans, we're talking about Drag Queen Hour.

---

My bad.

You seem obsessed with sex. The presence of a man dressed like a woman is no more sexual than the presence of a man dressed like a man.

---

Agreed. If all that is happening is that a man dressed as a woman is reading children a story, I have no problem with that. However, if we are paying them to do that, I have a problem. Teachers are perfectly capable of reading stories aloud and the schools need to save every penny they can.

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

We're not talking about trans, we're talking about Drag Queen Hour.

---

My bad.

You seem obsessed with sex. The presence of a man dressed like a woman is no more sexual than the presence of a man dressed like a man.

---

Of course it is different. You see men dressed as men everywhere every day. You basically have to go searching to find a man dress like a woman, so inserting that intentionally into any environment - much less a school setting for young children - is more everything.

---

Maybe more who are inclined should do so. It would normalize the trait and not have so many people freaking out.

Like, really, once you get used to it, who f-ing cares?????

It's so stupid.

Walker running about 4.5 points worse than Kemp in early GA results.

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

We're not talking about trans, we're talking about Drag Queen Hour.

---

My bad.

You seem obsessed with sex. The presence of a man dressed like a woman is no more sexual than the presence of a man dressed like a man.

---

Of course it is different. You see men dressed as men everywhere every day. You basically have to go searching to find a man dress like a woman, so inserting that intentionally into any environment - much less a school setting for young children - is more everything.

---

The feeling you're expressing is your discomfort with something you are not used to. That is your problem. It is not the drag queen's problem and it is not a result of the drag queen's presence sexualizing anything.

It is also an argument for exposing children to drag queen's so when they are fully functioning adults they don't get queavy over the presence of a man dressed like a woman, like you do.

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

We're not talking about trans, we're talking about Drag Queen Hour.

---

My bad.

You seem obsessed with sex. The presence of a man dressed like a woman is no more sexual than the presence of a man dressed like a man.

---

Of course it is different. You see men dressed as men everywhere every day. You basically have to go searching to find a man dress like a woman, so inserting that intentionally into any environment - much less a school setting for young children - is more everything.

---

The feeling you're expressing is your discomfort with something you are not used to. That is your problem. It is not the drag queen's problem and it is not a result of the drag queen's presence sexualizing anything.

It is also an argument for exposing children to drag queen's so when they are fully functioning adults they don't get queavy over the presence of a man dressed like a woman, like you do.

---

Wrong. Believe it or not some people are actually able to hold beliefs for reasons, not fear and hatred.

Just because men have the right to dress as a women does not mean it is appropriate to put them in elementary schools.

---

You said it had that queavy effect in "any environment ".

movielover said their presence was "sexualizing".

You have both made bad arguments that reflect your own issues, not issues of the drag queen community.

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

We're not talking about trans, we're talking about Drag Queen Hour.

---

My bad.

You seem obsessed with sex. The presence of a man dressed like a woman is no more sexual than the presence of a man dressed like a man.

---

Of course it is different. You see men dressed as men everywhere every day. You basically have to go searching to find a man dress like a woman, so inserting that intentionally into any environment - much less a school setting for young children - is more everything.

---

The feeling you're expressing is your discomfort with something you are not used to. That is your problem. It is not the drag queen's problem and it is not a result of the drag queen's presence sexualizing anything.

It is also an argument for exposing children to drag queen's so when they are fully functioning adults they don't get queavy over the presence of a man dressed like a woman, like you do.

---

Wrong. Believe it or not some people are actually able to hold beliefs for reasons, not fear and hatred.

Just because men have the right to dress as a women does not mean it is appropriate to put them in elementary schools.

---

You said it had that queavy effect in "any environment ".

movielover said their presence was "sexualizing".

You have both made bad arguments that reflect your own issues, not issues of the drag queen community.

---

Okay, correction. Inserting a drag queen into any environment other than a drag show. Drag queens are not present in any other environment. Inserting them where they are not normally present is the point.

---

I was at a wedding a couple months ago in which a man dressed as a woman gave a speech for his brother, the groom. It was great. I don't know what your hang-up is but you should get over it.

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

We're not talking about trans, we're talking about Drag Queen Hour.

---

My bad.

You seem obsessed with sex. The presence of a man dressed like a woman is no more sexual than the presence of a man dressed like a man.

---

Of course it is different. You see men dressed as men everywhere every day. You basically have to go searching to find a man dress like a woman, so inserting that intentionally into any environment - much less a school setting for young children - is more everything.

---

The feeling you're expressing is your discomfort with something you are not used to. That is your problem. It is not the drag queen's problem and it is not a result of the drag queen's presence sexualizing anything.

It is also an argument for exposing children to drag queen's so when they are fully functioning adults they don't get queavy over the presence of a man dressed like a woman, like you do.

---

Wrong. Believe it or not some people are actually able to hold beliefs for reasons, not fear and hatred.

Just because men have the right to dress as a women does not mean it is appropriate to put them in elementary schools.

---

You said it had that queavy effect in "any environment ".

movielover said their presence was "sexualizing".

You have both made bad arguments that reflect your own issues, not issues of the drag queen community.

---

Okay, correction. Inserting a drag queen into any environment other than a drag show. Drag queens are not present in any other environment. Inserting them where they are not normally present is the point.

---

I was at a wedding a couple months ago in which a man dressed as a woman gave a speech for his brother, the groom. It was great. I don't know what your hang-up is but you should get over it.

---

That is wonderful.
The fact you cannot even concede that drag queens appearing generally in other location besides drag shows says a lot more about you than me.
How about we both agree to move on to the election, generally?

---

Men who want to dress as women should be treated the same as everybody else, wherever they are.

NVBear78 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Anyway, the current polling average seems to indicate a national environment that is close to even (the "generic ballot" national polls tend to sit somewhere between +2 R and +2 D). Thanks to gerrymandering, a tied national vote means Republicans win the House, so I expect that will happen. The Senate, because of the specific seats up this cycle and the poor candidates selected by GOP voters, is closer to a toss-up in this environment. I legitimately have no idea which way it goes.

---

The House already flipped as of 5:30 PM (PST). Waiting now to see the final margin.

---

So far:
House R+5
Governors D +2

Too early