If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it. |
A bill in the senate to stop it recently failed on a party line vote. The dem leaders, are, in fact, supportive of. it. |
Sounds to me like the Dems in the Senate support a state or local jurisdiction's right to determine whether or not biological males can compete in women's sports. If Dems in the Senate supported a bill that protected a right for biological males to compete in women's sports as a Federal law, your point would be valid. |
Title IX protects women’s sports and is a federal law. |
Trump’s approval is going up not down. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-update-polls-2074502 https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52286-donald-trump-rising-popularity-approval-budget-2026-midterms-democrats-leader-policing-race-elon-musk-may-30-june-2-2025-economist-yougov-poll https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/06/04/trump-approval-rating-tracker-bounces-back-from-april-slump-in-latest-poll/ |
And California has a state law that expands on Title IX to include a ban on gender identity discrimination. Other states do not. If you think a Federal Law should be made to rule California's state law unconstitutional, that's your opinion and your entitled to it. Some people think states should have the right to make decisions on social issues. Kinda like how some people supported Roe V Wade while others thought states should be allowed to determine abortion laws within their borders. Get it? |
I get that the court precedents don’t allow state laws to trump federal, and I get that violations for Title IX allow for a loss of federal education funding. Get it? |
Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life. |
When even Gavin is saying it’s unfair for boys to claim girls’ sports championships, you know the tide has turned. Why Dems aren’t folding on this issue is beyond me. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/california-governor-gavin-newsom-transgender-athletes-sports-unfair?srsltid=AfmBOopzR2KG11QWDezw3A5XPQxrXcu0Gx-kKkMDKLd5Y8KlQ3jRDO92 |
And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally. |
…while Democrats continue to sink. |
You need to also go red on border security, but that’ll never happen. Just look at all the illegal criminals you welcomed, and are STILL fighting FOR the CRIMINALS. |
Polls in 2025 are as meaningless as they were in 2017 or 2021. Remember when Biden was viewed more favorably than the GOP in 2021? |
What evidence do you have that approval ratings are improving for the party that just lost Congress and the presidency? |
This ad illustrates what I think are the Democrats' three biggest problems: 1. None of the decision makers and insiders in charge of picking which policies to highlight and selling the party and its candidates to the American people has anything in common with most Americans. 2. Worse, these weirdo decision makers and insiders have completely marginalized anyone remotely normal. Thus, even the "normal people" lower down the food chain or on the periphery of their circles who should serve as a fresh pair of eyes on ideas are either ultra weird as well or feel they have to play weird to avoid being marginalized. 3. Worst of all, Democratic decision makers have zero self-awareness. They have no clue that they and everyone in their circles have nothing in common epistemologically, ontologically, and experientially with 99% of Americans. I could grab 100 random people off the street and hardly any would need more than 15 seconds of that ad to say that only the Black actor is believable as a typical man. The other alleged men are clearly gay, trans, or effeminate. Selecting outliers to speak on behalf of the majority comes off as unwitting parody or yet another manipulative attempt to displace traditional masculinity with newfangled varieties Democrats find less offensive. Yet no one who had anything to do with this ad from conceptualization to airing understood that? If ever there was a smoking gun that Democrats are led by elitist fringe weirdos in a very delusional echo chamber.... |