What exactly is the democratic party going to stand for in 2026 and 2028?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

I really wanted to read the NYT article, but don't have a subscription. I found this summary piece and am sharing:

https://nypost.com/2025/06/26/us-news/gay-journalist-says-lgbtq-movement-has-gone-from-civil-rights-success-to-madness/

Sullivan is 100% spot on.

Sullivan continued, “But this illiberalism made a fateful, strategic mistake. In the gay rights movement, there had always been an unspoken golden rule: Leave children out of it. We knew very well that any overreach there could provoke the most ancient blood libel against us: that we groom and abuse kids… So what did the gender revolutionaries go and do? They focused almost entirely on children and minors.”

He detailed how gender ideology proponents taught kids that “being a boy or a girl was something they could choose and change at will,” allowed biological males to compete in female sports, and, in some places, allowed kids to socially transition at school “without their parents’ knowledge or permission.”

The author then mentioned the “most radical of all: gender-affirming care for minors, which can lead to irreversible sex changes for children.”

And this right here is why the Republican party won. Sure...MAGA is full of their own radicals too. But which radicalism are you willing to live with? Which radicalism is the lesser of two evils.

Honestly...I voted for Harris...but my kids are adults and missed the whole gender radicalism. If my kids were still in elementary school I just might have voted for Trump.

Um, no. You don’t vote for an insurrectionist because of this “radicalism”. Hard to imagine being a parent and thinking Trump is a good choice. My kids are 12 and 14 and never in a million years would I vote for Trump because what parents claim they gave to clutch their pearls over.


We are in this mess because of all the fear mongering. Truly pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

I really wanted to read the NYT article, but don't have a subscription. I found this summary piece and am sharing:

https://nypost.com/2025/06/26/us-news/gay-journalist-says-lgbtq-movement-has-gone-from-civil-rights-success-to-madness/

Sullivan is 100% spot on.

Sullivan continued, “But this illiberalism made a fateful, strategic mistake. In the gay rights movement, there had always been an unspoken golden rule: Leave children out of it. We knew very well that any overreach there could provoke the most ancient blood libel against us: that we groom and abuse kids… So what did the gender revolutionaries go and do? They focused almost entirely on children and minors.”

He detailed how gender ideology proponents taught kids that “being a boy or a girl was something they could choose and change at will,” allowed biological males to compete in female sports, and, in some places, allowed kids to socially transition at school “without their parents’ knowledge or permission.”

The author then mentioned the “most radical of all: gender-affirming care for minors, which can lead to irreversible sex changes for children.”

And this right here is why the Republican party won. Sure...MAGA is full of their own radicals too. But which radicalism are you willing to live with? Which radicalism is the lesser of two evils.

Honestly...I voted for Harris...but my kids are adults and missed the whole gender radicalism. If my kids were still in elementary school I just might have voted for Trump.

Trumps radical governance is infinitely more destructive. It’s not even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

I really wanted to read the NYT article, but don't have a subscription. I found this summary piece and am sharing:

https://nypost.com/2025/06/26/us-news/gay-journalist-says-lgbtq-movement-has-gone-from-civil-rights-success-to-madness/

Sullivan is 100% spot on.

Sullivan continued, “But this illiberalism made a fateful, strategic mistake. In the gay rights movement, there had always been an unspoken golden rule: Leave children out of it. We knew very well that any overreach there could provoke the most ancient blood libel against us: that we groom and abuse kids… So what did the gender revolutionaries go and do? They focused almost entirely on children and minors.”

He detailed how gender ideology proponents taught kids that “being a boy or a girl was something they could choose and change at will,” allowed biological males to compete in female sports, and, in some places, allowed kids to socially transition at school “without their parents’ knowledge or permission.”

The author then mentioned the “most radical of all: gender-affirming care for minors, which can lead to irreversible sex changes for children.”

And this right here is why the Republican party won. Sure...MAGA is full of their own radicals too. But which radicalism are you willing to live with? Which radicalism is the lesser of two evils.

Honestly...I voted for Harris...but my kids are adults and missed the whole gender radicalism. If my kids were still in elementary school I just might have voted for Trump.

Teach kids that some people are different and that they deserve respect, or vote for fascism?

Hmmmm.

lol, I don’t believe you at all.

I don't care what you believe. Either way...yes, that is what I taught my kids. My DD had a trans friend in HS. I had no fears at all about it.

But that's not what is happening now - did you even bother to read Sullivan's article? He is a gay writer and not afraid to tell it like it is. I am simply agreeing with PP who mentioned the article and totally 100% agree with what Sullivan wrote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are the Ds out to sea? I LOATHE trump. But where are we in 2024?

The Border?
Tariffs?
Taxes and Spending?
Social Justice?
DEI?
Russia / Ukraine?
Energy?
EV policy?

Just a hunch, but I think they will think it over long & hard, & then announce a bold stand against all things Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are the Ds out to sea? I LOATHE trump. But where are we in 2024?

The Border?
Tariffs?
Taxes and Spending?
Social Justice?
DEI?
Russia / Ukraine?
Energy?
EV policy?

Just a hunch, but I think they will think it over long & hard, & then announce a bold stand against all things Trump.

That would be a pretty good start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

I agree with you, but I just do not think this is possible. At the end of the day, this is a conflicts of rights legal question, and so far the Democratic position has been that when sex-based rights and trans rights collide, trans rights prevail and are more important. Unfortunately for the Democrats, this is both electorally unpopular and frankly it’s on the wrong side of history, because it is essentially repackaged homophobia and sexism. But this is the Democratic party line, at least currently.

I don’t know how Democrats thread this conflicts-of-rights needle they’ve recklessly created, but a mealy-mouthed approach will just create more opportunities for Republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

But kids can get gunned down in school but it’s just thoughts and prayers by Republicans.

Our country is truly broken that this is totally acceptable by many in the voting electorate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

huh??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

But kids can get gunned down in school but it’s just thoughts and prayers by Republicans.

Our country is truly broken that this is totally acceptable by many in the voting electorate.

Look, I agree with you. I think gun control is critically important. But that does not mean that the Democrats haven’t made their position on trans rights extremely clear, and the voters will respond accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

huh??

What exactly are you confused about? It is quite clearly written.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

huh??

What exactly are you confused about? It is quite clearly written.

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

I agree with you, but I just do not think this is possible. At the end of the day, this is a conflicts of rights legal question, and so far the Democratic position has been that when sex-based rights and trans rights collide, trans rights prevail and are more important. [b]Unfortunately for the Democrats, this is both electorally unpopular and frankly it’s on the wrong side of history, because it is essentially repackaged homophobia and sexism. But this is the Democratic party line, at least currently.

I don’t know how Democrats thread this conflicts-of-rights needle they’ve recklessly created, but a mealy-mouthed approach will just create more opportunities for Republicans.

Well stated, and thank you for admitting that it is a Democratic position.
I do disagree with your further assessment that it is repackaged homophobia.
Dems do need to have this Sista Soljah moment and really do need to pay attention to Sullivan's article.
It doesn't matter who the GOP candidate is in 2028 because this wedge issue will still be a deciding factor in 2028 if the Dems don't shed this far left radicalism (as stated by Sullivan).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

huh??

What exactly are you confused about? It is quite clearly written.

Typical response from Dems..."huh" -- the continue to be obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great article by Andrew Sullivan in the NYT today about how the advances made for LGT rights are being set back by the extreme Left’s all or nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. It really lays out well how things have been taken off the rails and how it’s turning off so many Americans, this dyed in the wool Democrat included. The party needs to have a Sista Soljah moment with this contingent and show the world that yes, we are ok with trans people and want to support them, but there are limits, esp. when it comes to children. This could help remove this as a wedge issue and show that Dems don’t fall for all of the far Left nonsense.

This +100.

Unfortunately, I don't see the Dems shedding themselves of the extreme left’s all-or-nothing approach to trans issues and trying to get rid of genders. No more so than I see the Republicans shedding themselves of the extreme right's all-or-nothing approach to abortion.

Extremism on both sides is what is ruining our society.

So, dyed-in-the-wool democrat…what is the Dem position on trans rights? We know what the MAGA policy is on abortion.

Largely their position is that when there is a legal conflict between trans rights and women’s rights, trans rights is more important. For instance, the right to safety, privacy, and dignity that Democrats typically espouse for female prisoners is less important than the right of trans women to be placed in women’s prisons. Etc. In any event, their general position is that women’s rights are less important than trans rights.

huh??

What exactly are you confused about? It is quite clearly written.

Typical response from Dems..."huh" -- the continue to be obtuse.

The “huh” is avoidance. That PP knows that take is correct, but because that’s the current position of the Democrats on trans issues, she has to pretend confusion. They have nowhere else to go other than pretending confusion.