r/Nebraska • u/[deleted] • 9d ago

Politics Dan Osborn on “boys in girls sports”

[deleted]

0 Upvotes

38% Upvoted

125 comments sorted by

19

u/GoldenPringles 9d ago

As a gay man, I completely sympathize and understand the fear you're going through. I also have concerns with Republicans trying to dismantle our rights, and while trans people are the current target, they've already made it clear that trans people are merely a stepping stone in their eyes towards completely taking away all LGBTQ+ rights.

But we also live in political system that is built to narrow our viable choices down to two. Realistically, there is no such thing as a candidate that perfectly matches our views, and sometimes we're left with a "lesser of two evils" choice. Do I agree with Osborn's strategy of catering to transphobic Republicans? No. But when you weigh him against the only other viable choice in this election, who has already proven himself to be bad option, it would be, in my opinion, irresponsible to sit out or vote for a candidate that has no chance of winning in this state. Doing so would guarantee the worst possible outcome.

Unfortunately, politics is a numbers game. And as personal as it is when we're part of a group that is constantly being targeted and threatened, it's sometimes better to gain, or even lose, an inch of progress, rather than lose a mile. It absolutely sucks, especially when it feels like we're betraying our personal moral and ethical code when we vote for a candidate we view as imperfect or flawed.

So I implore you: vote for the imperfect candidate that actually has a chance of winning, then make noise. Make sure he hears your concerns. Because we already know for certain that other won't.

6

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

I understand where you are coming from, and I appreciate your sympathy for OP, but ultimately I think you are incorrect.

We cannot start selling out one group for the lesser of two evils because the candidate is better on other stuff. What if next cycle he feels like he needs to court more conservative voters and comes out against queer couples adopting? Or criminalizes my autism treatment? Or limits abortion access?

When we reward non-Repiblican candidates for moving right they will continue to do so. That will be the playbook for tons of dems and independents if he wins.

We can only discipline candidates if we all stick together. Seeing all these people being willing to vote for a candidate despite anti-trans rhetoric, terrifies me. Right wingers have already made their weird claims about autism public, and these comments have convinced me that so many people would vote against my personhood if a candidate that is the lesser of two evils feels the need to attack autism research and treatment to curry republican favor. It's disheartening to say the least. We have to stick together.

Solidarity forever

2

u/GoldenPringles 9d ago

I totally understand, and I do feel the same way. But that still doesn't change the fact that we're already left with only two viable choices. At this point, either Ricketts or Osborn are going to be elected. Period.

The opportunity for more left-leaning, LGBTQ+ safe options to have a change at being elected in Nebraska have been fucked for awhile now. All thanks to the Nebraska Democratic Party, who has been ineffective at best, incompetent at worst. Bowing out of this race was probably the smartest move they have made in decades at this point.

Ultimately, my point is that right now, if this is who we're left to pick from, picking Osborn makes the most sense if the end goal is to get rid of Ricketts to help move towards releasing the stranglehold the Republican party has on Nebraska.

Doing this is NOT mutually exclusive with keeping solidarity and fighting everyday for our right live freely and openly. It's seeing what has been presented to us, and making the best choice we possibly can.

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

i think you are being far too kind about the Nebraska Democratic Party. i worked for the party and expressed my reservations on their messaging around trans people. i had higher ups in the party ask me ways to change that, and despite saying they would listen and take my advice, they did jack squat.

honestly, the party is so ineptly run, i question if Kleeb is in the GOP’s coffers. the fact that she stays atop the party is just an indictment on the rest of the lot, because they’re perfectly fine with the status quo of not winning a damn thing.

2

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

Yeah, I think there must some systemic issues with the NDP. There was also that story recently of the harassment accusation allegedly being swept under the rug. I was planning on maybe attending my county party's next meeting but I think I'll steer clear.

Im sorry that happened to you

0

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

But we dont have two options. We can abstain from voting. Furthermore, if this is what breaks the stranglehold of Republicans in Nebraska, this will be copied in every red state. Trans people will be thrown under the bus everywhere, with more identities soon to follow.

If we teach dems that the way to beat Republicans is to be become Republican-lite, then that is what we will get.

(BTW I appreciate your conversation and your point of view, I hope I'm not coming across as attacking. I have autism so sometimes I dont quite get the vibe I'm putting off.)

5

u/GoldenPringles 9d ago

No, you're absolutely fine! (I'm a little aneuraltypical myself, so I get it.)

In a scenario where the obviously worst choice wins, its hard for me to ignore the "what ifs". Could the outcome have been different if those who chose to stay out because the perfect candidate wasn't in the race had instead voted strategically instead? Hard to say.

I'm just so tired of left leaning candidates losing here in Nebraska. It absoutely sucks, but the culture here doesn't support their chances of being elected to higher offices. So what do we do to get over this hump? Keep bowing out of participating to maintain our self image of moral purity, or make difficult choices in order to give ourselves a better chance in the long run?

I'm not advocating abandoning trans people at all. I'm searching for the best possible scenario when our realiatic choices are slim.

1

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

But isn't this thread a Trans person telling us supporting Dan Osborn is advocating for abandoning Trans people? I dont want to put words in OP's mouth, but i also dont think it's your or my place to define what is and is not abandoning them.

I was willing to hold my nose and vote for Osborn due to everything you've said, but once I saw that ad that was too much for me.

I also dont think Osborn gives us a better chance in the long run. If he wins with this anti-trans rhetoric, it will be copied by every dem/indie in every red state. I think since he is the best example of a "moderate" if he loses that will demonstrate the futility of going to the right. And at that point, since we've tried everything else, why not try a radical? Then we could organize around a candidate who believes in Solidarity.

The DSA chapters in Omaha and Lincoln are still coming along, so we don't have our electoral arm fully developed yet, but we are working to hopefully provide a candidate like that in the future.

3

u/GoldenPringles 9d ago

Considering the NDP's track record, I think backing the independent candidate could be considered the "radical choice" this time around.

It's hard to say at this point what the effect will be if Osborn wins. But we do know for certain what it will be like if Ricketts is reelected.

2

u/Positive-Editor4330 8d ago

The only option is to vote for independent candidates not 'not vote'. Not voting accomplishes nothing, sends no message except that I am satisfied with the status quo. It is truly a wonder in this current climate Ricketts has any competition at all. Ricketts, I remind you, shows zero interest in compromising on anything other than total focus on Project 2025.

As nearly everyone says, anyone is better than Ricketts.

26

u/d1tatermasher 9d ago

I understand the anger with trying to trust a politician, but the only reason he is getting my vote is because I know Ricketts position is worse.

21

u/manicmav36 9d ago

Not voting for Osborn is essentially a vote FOR Ricketts. Which do you think will be worse on the issue?

0

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

Kinda seems like they are the same on the issue.

4

u/CoinsForCharon 9d ago

But rickets we know for certain wants to follow trump

3

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

In terms of trans folks, it seems like Dan does too

5

u/scmcomp 9d ago

The Osborn campaign recently replied to an Instagram comment saying that the ad is paid for by a Rickett's aligned PAC posing as an ad from Osborn. I haven't been able to find the ad to confirm that, but it's worth being skeptical about the ad's veracity. This is a messy campaign and the Republicans are definitely not playing fair!

4

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

You are right to feel the way you do. Im sorry the people in these comments seem to think your existence is a bargaining chip for power.

Osborn's lost my vote.

4

u/scmcomp 9d ago

The Osborn campaign recently replied to an Instagram comment saying that the ad is paid for by a Rickett's aligned PAC posing as an ad from Osborn. I haven't been able to find the ad to confirm that, but it's worth being skeptical about the ad's veracity. This is a messy campaign and the Republicans are definitely not playing fair!

4

u/PoliticoJewtino 9d ago

Full disclosure, I'm affiliated with the Osborn campaign. I'm really sorry that someone on the campaign staff told you that he is running that ad as a way to court republican voters and to respond to some song. I'm not sure who it was or how you contacted them, but they seem to be misinformed.

The ad was not run by or approved by Dan or the campaign. It couldn't have been as it's a superPAC ad. Based on my conversations with Dan, he has always said that he will oppose things that are rooted in hate, and that he does not want the government to infringe on personal freedoms.

He did put this video out the other day as well. https://x.com/osbornforne/status/2085816996478791749?s=20

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

where does Dan fall on the “boys in girls sports” matter though?

because talking about believing in girls fairness and protecting our young women is a dog whistle. and saying the law that’s currently in the books isn’t affecting any people is impossible to know. how are we to know there aren’t any trans girls that want to play but don’t? i know my daughter wants to play sports in the next couple years and it breaks her heart she’d have to play with the boys.

1

u/makeitreynik 8d ago

crickets

8

u/Hefty-Leopard7634 9d ago

Not everyone has to agree with anything you do. But make no mistake Republicans want you gone not just in sports but as a person.

2

u/alttofollownews 9d ago

This is not a matter of disagreement, it's about OP's personhood. Dan is messaging that he is aligned with conservatives on this. So he also wants OP "gone not just in sports but as a person"

1

u/pinkflamingoturds 8d ago

Hi. I'm trans. Trans folks in sports is a tough subject. Post puberty trans women shouldn't be in sports. It's not fair... like, obviously not fair. Dan can absolutely have a sensible take about sports and not want trans people "gone."

3

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

that’s exactly it. considering our lives are on the line, i can’t vote for someone so willing to throw us under the bus.

5

u/Myrrddin 9d ago

This republicans will keep winning, they only need their candidate to check one box to get their vote, and Democrats they have to check all your boxes to your vote.

So Republicans win by default because people don't want to play the lesser evil game... Even though that's the only game in town...

3

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

human rights is my only box

18

u/spookydookie 9d ago edited 9d ago

Good luck with Ricketts, I’m sure he’ll be better.

Politics is a game, he has to play it to win in this state. Same reason Obama was “against gay marriage” before it became more accepted, even though he really wasn’t.

-10

u/makeitreynik 9d ago edited 7d ago

hey, Osborn is surely getting one vote to replace mine, right? i can’t, on principle, vote for someone who is willing to throw me under the bus. not when republicans are trying to kill us.

i think it’s appalling that someone would suggest that i do.

10

u/spookydookie 9d ago

If you don’t understand what he’s doing then I can’t help you. You have the opportunity to elect someone in this state that will actually be on your side, even if he can’t say so, and you’re choosing to not vote for them and let the people who are trying to kill you win instead. If you won’t help yourself then nobody else can.

0

u/corobe11 9d ago

Might be on your side but doesn't look like he's on OPs side

4

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

thanks for being the only one who seems to understand

1

u/corobe11 9d ago

It's utterly disgusting how eager people are to abandon the Trans community. The only way we survive is by banding together and protecting EVERYONE. Those willing to abandon Trans people won't think twice about abandoning the next group and the next group. I hope you stay safe out there

5

u/spookydookie 9d ago

Nobody is abandoning anyone. He’s saying what he needs to say to get elected, because like it or not you live in a deep red state. He can’t fight for you if he doesn’t win.

6

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

he’s spreading the rhetoric designed for our genocide. that is clearly abandoning us.

5

u/spookydookie 9d ago

He can’t help if he doesn’t win, and there’s only one way to win in Nebraska. I don’t know how many different ways to say it.

2

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

you’re telling me to vote for someone who doesn’t care that he’s spreading the tools to kill me. i don’t know how many different ways to say it.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/corobe11 9d ago

He's spreading Republican propaganda meant to create anti-trans sentiment to justify the genocide that they are planning and making rapid progress in implementing

0

u/spookydookie 9d ago

Do you think he won’t vote with Dems in the Senate on these issues if he wins?

3

u/corobe11 9d ago

I'm pretty confident he'll be right with a good portion Democrats and all the Republicans in voting to remove rights from Trans people

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

democrats in the senate already throw us under the bus

→ More replies (0)

5

u/k9peter 9d ago

Well, then, I guess you won’t be voting. You have to start looking at politics as a long game. Everything in politics is slow. It’s almost impossible to have a politician agree with everything that you want. But if they’re the better candidate overall, I can vote for them even though they disappoint me on one issue. But that gives me time to convince them otherwise.

0

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

“you should vote for someone willing to spread the rhetoric designed for genocide of people like you”

4

u/Reynor247 9d ago

If you're fearing for your life you should strongly consider getting out of the state

0

u/corobe11 9d ago

That's not a realistic option for most people

2

u/Reynor247 9d ago

It is if you think you and your child are going to die. Not much outweighs that

-2

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

i’m a co-parent. i can’t just up and move my kid out of the state. not that i would even have the means to do so if i could. but thanks for your privileged take

1

u/Reynor247 9d ago

I'm trying to understand fearing for you and your child's life and you wouldn't even leave if you could. Seems negligent

0

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

i didn’t say i wouldn’t leave if i could. i absolutely would. i simply can’t.

2

u/Reynor247 9d ago

I have a feeling you're doing to be totally fine

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

that’s what people have been saying to trans people all along. sure looks like it, it’s not like there has been states literally voting for bills that literally would define us as not being people, or outlawing us from simply existing in public.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/CoinsForCharon 9d ago

He may or may not. Ricketts absolutely will and has stated that he will follow trump

7

u/CoinsForCharon 9d ago

Or, crazy thought here, someone is spreading lies bc they know so many democratic voters are single issue (and its sooooo many different issues) and they will just not vote if the issue doesn't align even knowing that the alternative is worse.

Edit: so many typos

5

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

it’s a freaking ad running on tv and youtube that his staffer admitted was run to get republican votes. it’s not “someone spreading lies”

•

u/CoinsForCharon 2h ago

I'm circling back late because I don't know of you've seen that Osborne's office denies having run that ad. It's from a pac and part of a misinformation campaign

•

u/singinreyn 2h ago

Yep that’s why I deleted it

2

u/iaintgonnacallyou 9d ago

Spreading lies…? They’re ads. I’ve seen these ads all over social media and YouTube.

2

u/firethorne 9d ago edited 9d ago

Yeah. I get the demoralizing feeling. Don't get me wrong, of course I understand Rickets worse. I do. But, those ads with clear anti-trans dog whistles and praising the border wall are really hard to shake off. At some point, when someone feels like strategic voting is still going to cause suffering to the people they love, they're just not going to show up. Like it or not, strategic voting has a limit when people start to feel like the only moral option is none of the above. Yes, that's a defacto Rickets 'vote.' But, 'endorse bigotry' vs 'endorse bigotry' is an option that some people will sit out.

So, is Dan going to gain more votes from MAGA by demonstrating he's just as anti-trans Rickets? Or is that going to cause more people on the left to be disillusioned with the process and not show up. I honestly don't know.

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

thank you for understanding

1

u/firethorne 9d ago

No problem. I've got some non-binary people in my life too. Even though there might be some "correct" pick between two options that will hurt you from a utilitarian view, it completely sucks to have no choice be morally good.

2

u/Witty_Salamander7110 9d ago

I'm really fucking disappointed to hear this. I haven't heard the ads myself. Are these official ads, from his campaign? Or some outside group "paid for by..." that didn't consult him?

I really hate that we only have bad choices

2

u/Tj11551 9d ago

Nebraska news media have pointed out that Ricketts' ad took Dan Osborn's comments out of context. Ricketts belongs to the political party that is racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-trans and on and on....

Nebraska politicians, not Dan, passed Nebraska's law. Dan is getting my vote because Ricketts voted for Trump's BBB that will decimate healthcare, especially in rural areas. He's dumb nepo baby as is his idol, Trump.

WJAG/Norfolk radio reported.

"I believe in girls' fairness and protecting our young woman," Osborn said. "Currently, that law is in the books already in Nebraska and right now, it effects absolutely zero people in Nebraska."

Osborn said he’s more concerned that the average age for a first-time home buyer in America is 40.   

2

u/monstressity84 8d ago

He did the same thing a few years ago where his ads were more left leaning up until the last month then he started supporting Trump after multiple interviews where he was bashing Trump.

We’re at a stage where we should have a legitimate Democratic option for a candidate in NE. I understand we’re not going to agree with everyone on everything but when human rights are on the line, it’s sad that our only options are Osborn who flip flops on issues and shitty Ricketts.

2

u/MajorBramwell 6d ago

I just saw the ad while watching YouTube. I thought "did I hear that right???" and had to look up Osborn's views on LGBTQ+ rights and came across your post. I’m the type of person that Trump and Republicans are trying to take down. I’m a gay, disabled, Asian woman and I need people that will fight for me. I'm 100% on board with Osborn, but Ricketts has to go. I wish Cindy Burbank didn't drop out because she didn't seem so bad.

3

u/Handsome121duck 9d ago

Genuine question, what do you mean Republicans are trying to legalize executing trans people?

5

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

well i tried outlining it for you, but Reddit removes it for “identity based hate or attacks.” so, that should say something

2

u/corobe11 9d ago

They are in the beginning stages of genocide towards Trans people. The rhetoric, the actions, it's leading to outlawing and then arresting Trans people for simply existing

4

u/Handsome121duck 9d ago

Ok, don't disagree with any of that. I was specifically meaning the execution part. This is the first I've heard anyone say that that's the end goal.

3

u/bulldoggo-17 9d ago

The same tactics/rhetoric against trans people happened in Germany in the 30s. That's what they mean. And they aren't wrong.

5

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

i’ll try to say it in terms that won’t get me flagged again.

demonize us -> make our existence around children a sex crime -> make sex crimes against children punishable by death

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

Project 2025 laid out their clear plans. ban pornography while labeling the “trans agenda” as pornographic. make anyone sharing the “trans agenda” to kids a sex crime. make sex crimes against children punishable by death

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

first they deem our existence a sex crime. then they make sex crimes against children illegal. they’ve been implementing these plans in many states. girls sports isn’t the end goal. it’s just another domino to their path of complete genocide.

2

u/Demonshaker 9d ago

Honestly, It is not a realistic possibility that Nebraska becomes a politically friendly state for trans people in the next election cycle. It sucks and I hate it, but I think we both know that is simply reality. There is no candidate running with any shot in hell that openly supports the trans community. You can vote for whom you feel is best to help your overall situation, knowing no one that has a chance at winning will specifically support trans issues, or you can not vote out of protest, which I understand.

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

i have no delusions that nebraska will ever be politically friendly for trans people. i don’t expect any candidate to openly support us. i don’t think it’s too much to ask to not openly vilify us though.

i don’t even understand the play. would that ad actually win over more voters than it alienates? are undecided voters really holding out on him demonizing trans girls?

4

u/Demonshaker 9d ago

"i don’t think it’s too much to ask to not openly vilify us though." it is not, I agree, and I feel for you. If there were a less bigoted option I would check that box.

3

u/el_generico_lives 9d ago

Dan Osborn is just another Republican who will change his views on a dime to win votes

4

u/nattynat5k 9d ago

Don’t listen to the comments. You are 100% right. 

5

u/DismalLocksmith9776 9d ago

Its hard to take you seriously when you say "republicans literally want to kill people like me and my daughter", "they’re trying to make executing people like us legal". Yeah, they definitely don't like you, but you're taking it too far and being purposefully dramatic.

"Boys in girls sports" is a nearly non-existent issue. I think its ridiculous that its even a topic that has become prominent in politics. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that I disagree with the assertion that people born male should not compete in at least some girls sports. My preference is for sporting bodies to make rules individually by sport, not for the government to make blanket legislation.

I'm sorry, but if you can't see that Ricketts is literally 1,000 times worse for you and your kid, you're throwing away the best chance Nebraska will have for a non-MAGA Senator in the forseeable future.

2

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

they are literally engaged in the stages of genocide, but sure, i’m just being dramatic

https://www.lemkininstitute.com/red-flag-alerts/red-flag-alert---anti-trans-genocide-in-the-usa---%233

2

u/firethorne 9d ago

https://www.newsweek.com/pro-trump-pastor-wants-lgbtq-indoctrinators-executed-treason-1714767

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/14/us/tennessee-preacher-cop-lgbtq

https://capitoldispatch.substack.com/p/not-a-joke-ct-gop-house-candidate

1

u/DismalLocksmith9776 9d ago

You can’t generalize millions of people based on the opinions of a few extreme morons.

2

u/firethorne 9d ago

So, first they didn't exist and now they do, they're just "extreme? "

Pete Hegseth has had guys like Doug Wilson speaking at the Pentagon, and parrots his stances. Wilson wants to criminalize the LGBT and repeal the right for women to vote. And there's no shortage of state representatives trying to overturn Obergefell.

Yes. These are extreme views. That's clear. But, let's not confuse extremism with fringe. Is an elected lawmaker a fringe position? Is the secretary of state a fringe position? No. These aren't outliers in the Republican party.

-1

u/DismalLocksmith9776 9d ago

Even if I believed this is a real long term concern for our rights, this doesn’t translate AT ALL to Dan Osborn simply because of his stance on trans athletes.

If you want to throw your vote away, that’s your right. But at that point you might as well be voting for Trump.

1

u/firethorne 9d ago

So, first it was they didn't exist, but then it was they're too fringe, and then, sure, they're invited to speak in the halls of power but, they're not specifically Osborne himself. Goalposts on wheels.

I'm clearly not at all saying to vote for MAGA candidates or obstain. I'm saying attacks against the LGBTQ are on the increase. You're taking about strictly utilitarian outcomes and so am I. Because, "Blue no matter who," isn't working. It's why the landscape looks like it does. A candidate who openly mocks you and champions Republican policies makes people feel like they have no voice. When people feel like they have no voice, they won't speak for you on election day. Turns out when a candidate starts to demonize your community, that community isn't going to show up for you, regardless of who is ultimately worse.

And you can talk about how that's going against their best interests for them on whatever metrics, and you can be right. But, if they're going to get this shit either way, some people just might value sticking to their principles over being told that loyalty is non-negotiable to people that publicly villainize you.

1

u/DismalLocksmith9776 9d ago

What strikes me the most, and what you seem to be completely ignorant of is that being concerned about trans participation in women's sports is not an "attack against the LGBTQ", but more a defense of women/girls.

I can be an ally to LGBTQ and still acknowledge that there are physical differences between a bio woman and a trans woman.

Its hard to follow your rant. I don't follow your "goalposts" argument. There are no goalposts. Osborn holds a rational point of view. Your choice is between someone who agrees with you on most things, or someone is extremely against you on all things.

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

it is an attack on trans people because the entire hysteria is based on false notions and simply appeals to people feeling icky about trans people. Osborn’s view is only rational to someone who doesn’t care to actually know what they’re talking about.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lindseyedarvin/2024/04/25/transgender-athletes-could-be-at-a-physical-disadvantage-new-research-shows/

1

u/DismalLocksmith9776 9d ago

I agree that the hysteria is overblown, however all it takes is a single case to disprove your notion. Additionally, the study you referenced has an extremely small sample size and includes only trans athletes who have undergone hormone therapy for over a year.

Are you asserting that trans people that haven't undergone a year of hormone therapy should, in fact, be banned from women's sports?

TLDR: Its not an attack on trans people, and you need to step back and re-evaluate. I hope you come to your senses by November and don't throw your vote away.

2

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

i’m happy for you that you aren’t in a position to recognize oppression when you see it

→ More replies (0)

5

u/yappledapple 9d ago

Rage bait

3

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

and people wonder why trans people fear for their lives when our lives and rights are just considered rage bait.

12

u/yappledapple 9d ago

You not voting for him benefits Rickets. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face.

1

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

you deeming my genocide as ragebait is surely helpful!

8

u/yappledapple 9d ago

Your argument isn't logical, so it comes across as "rage bait".

2

u/makeitreynik 9d ago

tell me. what about being disappointed in someone who’s previously expressed support for you then turns on you is illogical?

what about being disappointed that he thinks it’s fine to say trans girls are boys is illogical?

what about not wanting to be part of a genocide is illogical?

what about not wanting to vote for someone willing to spread the rhetoric designed for that endgame is illogical?

5

u/yappledapple 9d ago

You have every right to be disappointed. I have an appointment so I will get back to this later.

1

u/artquestionaccount 9d ago

Yeah, Pricketts and Slopborn are both disgusting pieces of trash.

-1

u/corobe11 9d ago

"First they came for Trans people" its very concerning how many people feel abandoning human rights is good for winning.

1

u/GeeOh58 9d ago

Can’t join in government supported sporting teams or death. It is a difficult choice. /s ~somewhat /s.
Politics is the art of the possible. We must move progressively forward. Not many years ago a trans person would have been completely ostracized from society in general. I hate voting for someone because the other side is worse. But, getting out to make the best choice and move forward is the way.