US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5253

On September 19 2025 23:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


On one hand, creating a Charlie Kirk holiday is one step away from creating a Donald Trump holiday and two steps away from creating an Adolf Hitler holiday.
+ Show Spoiler +

On September 21 2025 05:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


Definitely pissed about it. Here's the full text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolution/719/text

On September 21 2025 06:57 LightSpectra wrote:
It's a meaningless resolution that Dems only voted for so we don't have to hear millions of dollars of attack ads about Dems being so bloodthirsty they won't even vote for a meaningless resolution condemning political violence.

You'll see pushback, but it'll be aimed at anyone that doesn't want to vote for the kind of bloviating assholes that steal/destroy unhoused people's things for a publicity stunt, aid and abet genocide, throw trans people, immigrants, and others to the fascists in the name of being "pragmatic", "civil", "democratic" "lesser evilism", etc. Hell, they'll even try to paint it like they're doing people a favor by only sacrificing some of us in their "compromise" with the fascists.

On September 21 2025 07:07 Zambrah wrote:


No, we can't try Democrats having balls, we're too busy trying to kick the electorate/leftists in theirs.



Yeah, it is meaningless, doing anything to preempt Republican attacks is idiotic and wasteful, you can be barely to the left of Adolf Hitler and the Republicans will call you a Communist because Republicans do not rely on reality, or truth, and cannot be debunked.

This is the same dumbass playbook that has Republicans running circles around Democrats. Drag the Democrats into doing something right leaning because then Republicans cant attack them on it, their base finds it depressing and Republicans attack them on it anyway, how many times does that need to happen before the lesson is learned?

On September 21 2025 06:57 LightSpectra wrote:
It's a meaningless resolution that Dems only voted for so we don't have to hear millions of dollars of attack ads about Dems being so bloodthirsty they won't even vote for a meaningless resolution condemning political violence.

On September 21 2025 07:43 WombaT wrote:

So what? They’ll be attacked anyway.

At some point they have to stop chasing unicorns and deal with the actual horses they have in the stable.

Does the person who goes ‘hm, I was a bit on the fence between Trump and his band of merry cucks, and the Dems, but man not venerating Charlie Kirk affronted my sense of decency, I’m going with the former’ even exist?

On September 21 2025 07:41 LightSpectra wrote:


Republicans have done dozens of repulsive things this week and you're blowing your top over a meaningless resolution that changes absolutely nothing for anyone. There's certainly a lesson to be learned here, but it looks like you haven't.

On September 21 2025 07:45 LightSpectra wrote:


+ Show Spoiler +

The right crawls over broken glass to vote for someone to destroy their own livelihood+ Show Spoiler +

On September 21 2025 07:59 WombaT wrote:

Republicans aren’t courting my vote. I mean, neither are the Dems given my locale, but they’d be my realistic option if I was Stateside.

Labour in the UK (who, funnily enough I also can’t actually vote for, so they’re as detached as the Dems to me functionally) have also decided to try and emulate the American Democratic Party in this regard, and quel fucking surprise it doesn’t work.

They are haemorrhaging support by constantly throwing bones to the right, and, like the Dems (with some notable exceptions) having no fucking balls whatsoever, and taking their actual core constituencies for granted while they try to chase their own unicorns.

It’s not even a centrism problem. For myself, for some of my peers look the UK is quite a centrist kinda country, so centre-left is kinda the most one can realistically hope for, at least for now.

As someone reasonably far left, but whose pragmatism (or perhaps indeed, pessimism) outweighs his idealism that is somewhat tolerable to me. Not ideal, but I thought if we could get Blair style centre left politics after 14 years of the Tories, yeah that’s ok. Yes I know, the Iraq War, but aside from that, New Labour was pretty bloody good for the country, they had some serious political talent in their ranks, and they actually did some good, centre left governing.

When you show no balls, no moral gumption, and continuously make pointless overtures to the right, who will never vote for you, then you start to piss people off. In the UK context, there are some other parties to vote for, and there’s always the staying at home option.

On September 21 2025 07:45 LightSpectra wrote:


Does the "I would vote Dems for democracy, science, human rights and common decency, but they voted for this meaningless resolution so I'll stay home" person exist?

The right crawls over broken glass to vote for someone to destroy their own livelihood because it'll take down some minorities in the same sinking ship, while the left have to do this completely idiotic circular firing squad garbage every thirty seconds.

Democratic Congresswoman Yvette Clarke says she voted against a Republican-led resolution Friday honouring slain right-wing advocate Charlie Kirk.

“I will always condemn senseless acts of political violence,” Clarke, the daughter of Jamaican immigrants who represents the 9th Congressional District in Brooklyn, told the Caribbean Media Corporation (CMC) on Friday.

“No American—regardless of party or ideology—should fear retribution or violence for speaking freely. Charlie Kirk’s murder was a horrific act of political violence and a stain on the United States, and any nation where young children lose their father solely because of the opinions he espoused is a nation in desperate need of healing and a different path forward,” Clarke said.

“I extend my deepest condolences to the Kirk family, friends, and loved ones, and I pray for strength and comfort for his wife, Erika, their two young children, and all who mourn his loss,” added the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC). “I also commend law enforcement and the suspect’s family for their cooperation in seeking justice for this heinous crime.

“As a Black woman in America, I am painfully mindful of our nation’s history and the violence rooted in bigotry and hate that continues to impact Black and brown communities,” Clarke continued. “And that is precisely why I cannot in good conscience vote to celebrate Charlie Kirk’s legacy. Mr. Kirk denounced the Civil Rights Act of 1964, describing it as a ‘mistake’ and an ‘anti-white weapon.’ He disparaged the transformative work of Dr Martin Luther King Jr, who gave his life for peace and equality. He demeaned Black women, including Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and others in positions of leadership, dismissing their intelligence and accomplishments as nothing more than ‘DEI hires.’ He also spread disinformation and hate-fuelled rhetoric against Muslim, Jewish, and immigrant communities, while championing lax gun laws despite the devastating toll of gun violence in our nation.”

“Rather than seek to heal a wounded union, this bill aims only to push us further apart,” Clarke said. “For these reasons, I cannot and will not vote to honour a legacy defined by bigotry and division. To do so would dishonour the countless victims of political violence who are too often ignored. If we are to recognise one, we must recognise all.”

She said Kirk undoubtedly valued his right to exercise the First Amendment right to free speech.

“Yet, I am deeply troubled by how this administration has chosen to weaponise free speech, targeting critics under the guise of honouring his legacy,” Clarke said. “Free speech is essential to our democracy—but it cannot be used as a shield for hate.

“If my colleagues feel compelled to pass this legislation, that is their decision,” she added. “I have paid respects to Mr Kirk and his family, but I will not pretend to respect the painful words and ideas he so proudly held, nor will I honour a man who built a career out of dishonouring people like me. I, however, will instead lend my support to Representative Veasey and Pettersen’s resolution that ‘condemns all forms of political violence, including assassination and attempted assassination of public officials, candidates, and public figures, regardless of political party or ideology.’

“If Republican leadership is serious about addressing this crisis of political violence rather than scoring political points over Democrats, so will they,” Clarke continued.

On September 21 2025 08:13 WombaT wrote:

Yes.

No.

Not on this specific thing, I highly doubt it’s a straw that breaks even the camel with severe osteoporosis’ back, not in isolation.

As part of a continual pattern, yes it absolutely does have an impact. It’s uninspiring. It’s actively alienating if you are in one of the demographics Charlie Kirk shit on routinely to see those who are supposed to be in your camp gargling his balls.

Here’s how it’s done. Maybe Yvette Clarke, who I’ve never encountered before is some monster. This statement, fucking bang on. She lead with the general human decency, and she finished by pointing out Kirk’s lack of it.


She absolutely crushed that, why can’t Dem leadership do the same? It’s not that bloody complicated

On September 21 2025 08:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Very well said by Democratic Congresswoman Yvette Clarke.