Between 11,000 and 17,000 young voters will not be able to vote due to this … deliberate mistake. Why? Because the majority of young people vote democratic, which means in this election would vote for Harris. The right wing older people couldn’t have that despite the law clearly saying they should have been registered and now be allowed to vote. But because the right is afraid of who they will vote for they will deny these people their vote / their say. That is how the right needs to act to win, the republicans know they are unpopular, and they don’t want to serve but they demand to rule. So they stop the people against them from voting because they do not believe in democracy but in dictatorship, as long as they can be the dictators. Hugs.
The South Carolina flag flies outside city hall in North Charleston, S.C., Aug. 12, 2011. The state will hold runoff elections on Tuesday, June 25, 2024, to decide a handful of races where no candidate received a vote majority in the primary held just two weeks earlier. (AP Photo/Bruce Smith, File)
A judge declined to order South Carolina’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and State Election Commission (SEC) to register thousands of young voters whose registrations were mistakenly denied because they were not yet 18 when they registered but would be by Election Day. These voters will not be allowed to cast a ballot this November.
The Richland County judge called the requested relief “too drastic” and said it would “create disorder in the voting system.”
The court held a hearing Friday after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of South Carolina filed a lawsuit asking that the voters be registered despite the state’s voter registration deadline having passed.
South Carolina law allows 17-year-olds who will be 18 by the next election, and otherwise eligible, to register to vote. For the past 13 months, when a 17-year-old applied for a driver’s license or state ID and marked that they would like to register, the DMV’s system did not transmit their voter registration application to the SEC. As a result, approximately 17,000 young voters were not registered to vote despite indicating a desire to do so. These voters were also not notified that their registrations had been rejected.
The DMV has been working to identify the impacted voters. So far, 6,000 were able to register through other means and the names of the remaining 11,000 were sent to the SEC for processing. The SEC has thus far refused to register those 11,000 voters.
“Although thousands of these individuals were eligible to register to vote, were entitled to easily register through their [DMV] transaction, timely provided state officials with the information necessary to register, and indicated a desire to do so, SEC is unwilling to add them to the voter rolls or otherwise protect their fundamental right to cast a ballot in the 2024 general election,” the complaint read.
The ACLU asked the court to suspend the voter registration deadline, direct the DMV to identify all impacted voters and order the SEC to add those voters to the rolls. They also asked for every impacted voter to be notified of their registration status.
Civil rights advocates are suing the South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles and the state Election Commission for allegedly preventing thousands of 17-year-olds who will be 18 by Election Day from registering to vote.
The American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina said Tuesday that over the past year, the DMV has “unlawfully denied voter registration opportunities to over 17,000 young South Carolinians who were entitled to register to vote under” state law. Democracy Docket reached out to the DMV for comment.
The lawsuit references a statute that says a person who isn’t 18 by the time registration ends but “attains that age before the next ensuing election” and wants to register is “otherwise qualified.” In other words, a South Carolinian can register at 17, before they reach the lawful voting-age, if they will be eligible by the time the election actually happens.
“Therefore, individuals who turn 18 between January 4, 2024 (close of books for the first primary), and November 5, 2024 (Election Day), were eligible to register to vote … starting 120 days before January 4, 2024, which is September 6, 2023,” the complaint said.
The lawsuit alleges the DMV wrongfully denied those 17-year-old registrants, and says South Carolina’s DMV “will not provide, process, or transmit voter registration applications for anyone under the age of 18.” The ACLU also says the people who were rejected weren’t provided with written notification of the rejection, which is required by law.
The lawsuit says recently the DMV has been working to identify teens who registered between Sept. 5, 2023 and Oct. 14. A list of around 17,000 individuals was sent to the South Carolina Elections Commission (SEC), which determined that roughly 6,000 were able to successfully register to vote by other means. The DMV is now working on reviewing the remaining 11,000 registration forms to determine which individuals tried to register.
But the ACLU is seeking a more efficient solution, according to the lawsuit, and wants the SEC to give all of the affected individuals a chance to register.
“We appreciate SCDMV’s candor and the agency’s willingness to identify the affected voters,” Allen Chaney, legal director of the ACLU of South Carolina, said in a statement. “I am hopeful that the court will order the Election Commission to add these thousands of young, first-time voters to the voter rolls so that they can cast a ballot on Election Day.”
The nonprofit is asking a court to order the DMV to send a list of the impacted teens to the SEC by Thursday, and wants the SEC to notify those individuals and let them know they’re entitled to complete their voter registration application by Friday. This would allow the eligible registrants to be able to vote on Nov. 5.
Democracy Docket reached out to the SEC for comment.
These took several days to wade through. I admit I do it not only for the news but for the memes in the comment sections which are pure gold. But just reading the headlines and blurbs can give you a great idea of how really dangerous and disastrous the right / republicans are. Fox is a totally unhinged media arm of cult tRump. The rest of the right wing media is desperate for their cult ideas of ruling people and having control of their private lives, sexual expressions, and how people simply exist. Please look these over and read the ones that interest you. This shit is serious and real and we have few days left before a direction is chosen for this country. Also notice that why the right claims that crime is up and people are terrified to step outside their homes, crime is way down. Hugs
Harris appeared here in June 2021 when he attempted to bring a loaded and concealed handgun onto the House floor. He then denounced calls for his resignation as “cancel culture.”
In October 2021 he had to be physically separated from Democratic Rep. Collin Allred after an argument over the certification of the 2020 election, which Harris had voted against.
Residents pleaded with the council, arguing that such proposals were divisive, stoked fear among the community, and would further stretch city services. “It is not only unnecessary but also a complete waste of the city’s time, money and resources,” Alexander Ermels, president of PFLAG’s Odessa chapter and a transgender man, said. Mayor Javier Joven [photo], who is up for reelection in November, has said his mission has been to help the city “repent.”
Penalties include a $500 fine and trespassing charges. Odessa, located in west Texas, has a population of 120,000.
For the past 13 months, when a 17-year-old applied for a driver’s license or state ID and marked that they would like to register, the DMV’s system did not transmit their voter registration application to the SEC. As a result, approximately 17,000 young voters were not registered to vote despite indicating a desire to do so. These voters were also not notified that their registrations had been rejected.
The billionaire owners of the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times can hedge their bets about the possibility of a fascist in the White House, unrestrained by the rule of law and the idea that Americans are citizens, not subjects. The rest of us, including me, cannot. I want the United States that Donald Trump can’t, never could, and would never want to, give us all. That United States is one I believe Kamala Harris is working toward, and would continue to work toward as President.
In any year, Kamala Harris would be my choice for President of the United States. In this year, she is the only choice. She has my vote. She should have yours as well.
With two weeks until the election, Jon Stewart sifts through the increasingly weird and surreal election news: from Trump’s ramble about Arnold Palmer’s d*ck, to his shift at McDonald’s, to Kamala Harris’s campaign event with Liz Cheney. Plus, he breaks down the GOP’s reaction to Trump’s “enemy within” comment.
(Way to go-run for office! Especially in and as opposition to people like Steve Scalise-A)
A trans nonbinary Louisiana candidate for the U.S. House released a defiant campaign video this week, showing themself injecting testosterone to defend bodily autonomy.
Mel Manuel, who is running to unseat far-right House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, released the video on social media platforms on Tuesday. In the video, Manuel called on voters to “take a stand” while performing a routine testosterone injection.
“I believe that you, not the government, own your own body,” Manuel told viewers, wearing a “My Body My Choice” T-shirt. “LGBTQ+ rights are human rights.”
Manuel, who is running on a platform of abortion rights, universal healthcare, and gun control, highlighted a recent analysis that found Republicans had spent more than $65 million in anti-trans advertisements since the start of August. They also promoted Louisiana’s “Geaux Vote” app, which allows voters to find their polling location and get ballot information.
“To my LGBTQ+ family and our allies… No one is coming to save us,” Manuel wrote in the video description. “We have to show up at the polls for ourselves and for those we love. I’ve spent the last year and a half campaigning because we need to speak up and be represented before it’s too late. You can speak up now with your vote.”
Manuel is the cofounder of Queer Northshore, an LGBTQ+ activist organization based in St. Tammany Parish, and has previously organized against conservative book bans and anti-trans laws in the state. In contrast, Scalise has earned a reputation as a staunchly anti-LGBTQ+ Republican since first taking office in 2008, voting against the Byrd-Shepard Hate Crime Prevention Act, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and the Respect for Marriage Act; he is also firmly anti-trans, condemning “the left’s radical gender ideology” in a 2022 statement calling for trans girls to be banned from school sports. Scalise even once described himself as “David Duke without the baggage,” referring to the infamous former leader of the Ku Klux Klan.
Given that Manuel is running in opposition to all that, injecting T on camera is a pretty big flex. Still, that doesn’t necessarily mean they expect to win; as their campaign website notes, Manuel’s goal is simply to get 35% of the vote. “Even if your candidate doesn’t win, if we can move the needle to 35 percent or 40 percent of the vote, that means the next progressive candidate will get more funding,” they explained to The Nation last year. “There’s a very, very small chance at winning, and I understand that, but we can still use the role of candidacy as a platform in and of itself.”
(There is always a lot of news on https://currentstatus.io/ . The Current Status page sometimes doesn’t have any news a person wants to read, and some days, no news anyone needs to read. It compiles via algorithms based on what people are clicking on during a day. Sometimes it’s just discouraging to see what people are reading when they could be reading good and/or necessary stuff. Last night was necessary stuff, but I can’t post it all. I chose this one. -A)
The U.S. Naval Academy is under fire after it invited — then uninvited — a distinguished expert on authoritarianism and fascism to give a lecture.
Dr. Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a professor of history and Italian Studies at New York University, where her bio says she “writes about fascism, authoritarianism, propaganda, and the threats these present to democracies around the world.” She is the author of books on fascism and serves as an advisor to the nonpartisan nonprofit organization Protect Democracy. She is also an MSNBC opinion columnist, where she appears as a commentator, as she does on other news networks.
For weeks, since early October, right-wing media has been criticizing the U.S. Naval Academy for inviting her to speak.
The Daily Caller, founded by Tucker Carlson, described Dr. Ben-Ghiat as “an outspoken anti-Trump guest” who was invited to “give the keynote speech at a high-level lecture this month.”
“Ben-Ghiat announced that she’d be speaking at the event in an op-ed last month and further claimed that former President Donald Trump was an ‘authoritarian ‘and drew comparisons between him and world dictators,” The Daily Caller’s Jake Smith wrote in an opinion piece.
For weeks, since early October, right-wing media has been criticizing the U.S. Naval Academy for inviting her to speak.
The Daily Caller, founded by Tucker Carlson, described Dr. Ben-Ghiat as “an outspoken anti-Trump guest” who was invited to “give the keynote speech at a high-level lecture this month.”
“Ben-Ghiat announced that she’d be speaking at the event in an op-ed last month and further claimed that former President Donald Trump was an ‘authoritarian ‘and drew comparisons between him and world dictators,” The Daily Caller’s Jake Smith wrote in an opinion piece.
“Anti-Trump historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat is scheduled to lecture midshipmen on ‘authoritarianism,’” two Heritage Foundation officials, Mathew Lee and Wilson Beaver, wrote at The Daily Signal in a piece marked commentary. They called for the Naval Academy to retract the invitation to Dr. Ben-Ghiat.
The Heritage Foundation is the headquarters of Project 2025. The ACLU calls Project 2025, “a federal policy agenda and blueprint for a radical restructuring of the executive branch authored and published by former Trump administration officials in partnership with The Heritage Foundation, a longstanding conservative think tank that opposes abortion and reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights, immigrants’ rights, and racial equity. Project 2025’s largest publication, ‘Mandate For Leadership,’ is a 900-page manual for reorganizing the entire federal government agency by agency to serve a conservative agenda.”
Dr. Ben-Ghiat in her Substack piece also wrote about Trump’s visit to Arlington National Cemetery, where a cemetery official was “pushed,” allegedly by Trump campaign staffers, according to an Army report. A judge on Tuesday ordered the Pentagon to release its records related to Trump’s visit there in August, by the end of this week.
“The conduct of Trump and his campaign on those hallowed grounds violated federal prohibitions against election-linked activities at military cemeteries,” Ben-Ghiat wrote. “The photos and videos they took there also showed graves of U.S. service members whose families had not given permission. Additionally, a Trump aide shoved an Arlington employee who was trying to enforce the rules, and Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung claimed she initiated the aggression and was having a ‘mental health episode.’”
“It seems counter-intuitive when you are running for president and commander-in-chief to insult the U.S. military,” she added. “But that hasn’t stopped Trump: insulting and mocking the military are among his most consistent habits.”
On Tuesday, in an opinion piece in the Baltimore Banner, Rick Hutzell slammed the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025 for getting Dr. Ben-Ghiat’s lecture canceled. (The U.S. Naval Academy is based in Annapolis, Maryland.)
“If Trump wins, the right-wing thought police will come for the Naval Academy,” Hutzell wrote in a scorching editorial.
“You could hear the spittle fly as the Heritage Foundation shouted out its latest intellectual assault on the Naval Academy,” he wrote. “All over Ruth Ben-Ghiat and a lecture the midshipmen likely will never hear.”
“Her politics were the problem, not her lecture.”
“As controversies go, it was easy to miss this one. It all took place within the conservative media ecosystem. But it could foreshadow what might happen to the U.S. service academies if Trump is elected next month,” he added. “Deep within Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s 925-page roadmap for the next Republican president, its authors say they want the service academies scrubbed of anything and anyone deemed insufficiently pure of thought — exactly what they did to Ben-Ghiat.”
Ben-Ghiat in an email told Hutzell: “The lecture had nothing to do with contemporary America and I was not going to mention Mr. Trump at all in this strictly nonpartisan event at an institution, the U.S. Naval Academy, which I greatly admire.”
Hutzell wrote that Heritage “Foundation ‘researchers’ Matthew Lee and Wilson Beaver made the connection a month after Ben-Ghiat’s announcement and simply made up the rest, assuming she planned to attack Trump.” He also pointed to another piece at The Daily Signal by “Heritage Foundation mouthpieces Hans von Spakovsky and Cully Stimson,” and n0ted (sic) that “U.S. Rep. Keith Self — a West Point graduate who represents a district north and northeast of Dallas — wrote Vice Adm. Yvette M. Davids, the academy superintendent, and demanded that she cancel the lecture.”
He also reports The Daily Signal’s managing editor called for an apology from the Naval Academy, and Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee “called for an explanation.”
Rep. Nick LaLota, running for reelection in up-for-grabs NY-01, was one of the signers of this letter, demanding an explanation from the Naval Academy for inviting NYU historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat to give a history department lecture, after pressure from Heritage Foundation because… https://t.co/3BjZiIWoHYpic.twitter.com/rhp51zlJvL
“The harrumph over Ben-Ghirat (sic) smacks of hamfisted stagecraft. It’s not about protecting young minds from learning what tools authoritarians use, it’s about preparing the case for an intellectual bloodletting,” Hutzell concluded.
Others lashed out at the Naval Academy.
“This is a shameful move by @NavalAcademy. If our armed services are truly training people to be loyal to the Constitution, not to an individual, this is one lecture they need to hear. Very disappointing,” declared attorney and former FBI Special Agent Asha Rangappa, a legal and national security expert.
Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, a professor of law and MSNBC/NBC News legal analyst, pointing to Ben-Ghiat being disinvited, warned: “This is exactly what she’s been warning about—caving in to the demands of authoritarian leaders, even before they’re in place. Dangerous & shameful.”
Historian and professor of strategic studies Phillips P. O’Brien, author of several books including, “How the War Was Won: Air-Sea Power and Allied Victory in World War II,” called Hutzell’s editorial a “terribly worrying story about how MAGA pressure is already leading to censorship in the US military. The US Naval Academy disinvited the distinguished historian @ruthbenghiat from delivering a major lecture because of Heritage-MAGA pressure.”
Again I wish to thank Janet, whose link I will place below, for showing me the article that had this link. I was in a bit of despair of having to fight all over the same fights I fought as a kid. Not realizing for years my fight was over while hers has continued. I realized how self centered I was being. I am not sure if the links will come through, but if you go to the site linked above they list states where anti-trans attacks have failed. Again thanks Janet. Hugs
Voters have routinely rejected candidates who peddle transphobia and try to control their personal health care decisions, and polling shows widespread American support for equality, Democrats as defenders of young people, and a rejection of anti-transgender rhetoric.
In State After State, Anti-Trans Attacks Have Failed
In Arizona…
In Georgia…
In Kansas…
In Kentucky’s 2023 gubernatorial race…
In Michigan…
In Nevada…
In Ohio…
In Pennsylvania…
In Wisconsin…
In Virginia…
In 2022 Post-Election Polling, Equality Was a Winner and Anti-LGBTQ+ Attacks Were A Dud
Equality Voters delivered huge margins to Democrats at every level of the ballot.
At the U.S. House level, 81 percent of Equality Voters supported the Democratic candidate. Equality Voters delivered similar margins for Democratic U.S. Senate candidates and Democratic candidates for governor.
That number was comparable to the level of support Equality Voters gave Joe Biden in 2020 (also 81 percent) and nearly matched the level of support Black voters delivered this cycle (87 percent).
Among self-identified LGBTQ+ voters, who made up a midterm record 7 percent of the 2022 electorate, fully 80 percent supported U.S. House Democrats. LGBTQ+ voters delivered similar margins for Democratic U.S. Senate candidates and Democratic candidates for governor.
MAGA efforts to spread propaganda about and attack transgender people failed.
In this survey, voters were asked which specific issues motivated them to vote this year. Inflation (52 percent) and abortion (29 percent) ranked first and second on this list. Less than 5 percent identified gender affirming care for transgender youth or transgender participation in sports as issues motivating them to vote – last on this list.
This confirmed extensive research prior to the election that found anti-transgender attacks were only effective in riling up extreme members of the conservative base
While the attacks were ineffective with the general electorate and in fact repelled swing voters, they still caused harm, including increasing stigma, discrimination, and violence against the transgender community.
A Super Majority of Americans Support Equality
New data from Navigator Research shows strong majority support for LGBTQ+ equality, and deep concern over MAGA attacks on fundamental freedoms.
Nearly two-in-three Americans support federal nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people, including 58% of independents and 42% of Republicans.
61% say they will not support candidates who want to ban health care for transgender people, including 59% of independents and 41% of Republicans.
70% say they are concerned that politicians are attacking gay and transgender youth to divide us, maintain their political power and control, and score political points, a clear indication that the American people see through the MAGA anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.
A majority of Americans agree that parents, mental health professionals, and doctors are best equipped to decide the kind of care a child needs, not politicians.
The vast majority of Americans — 7 in 10 — think that politicians are not informed enough about abortion and gender-affirming care to create fair policies
According to September 2023 polling by The 19th and SurveyMonkey, Americans would prefer that politicians either protect transgender people or not focus on transgender issues at all. Only 17% of Americans, and only 29% of Republicans, say politicians should focus on restricting gender-affirming care.
Americans Believe the Amount of Anti-LGBTQ+ Legislation Is Excessive, Agreeing It Is “Political Theater”
Likely voters across all political parties look at GOP efforts to flood state legislatures with anti-LGBTQ+ legislation as political theater. Polling indicates that 64% of all likely voters, including 72% of Democrats, 65% of Independents, and 55% of Republicans think that there is “too much legislation” aimed at “limiting the rights of transgender and gay people in America” (Data For Progress survey of 1,220 likely voters, 3/24-26, 2023).
This quote from Cuban-American former Republican Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen sums it up:
“Intolerance is not a good look on anyone. I remain optimistic that voters will see through this charade and will encourage their elected officials to solve the real problems of America instead of masquerading as Moral Police Officers.”
Majorities Disapprove of Banning LGBTQ+ Content in Schools – and Seem Prepared to Punish Candidates Who Do So
When asked if middle school libraries should include materials related to “gender identity” (57% “should”) and “sexual orientation” (56%), the majority of Americans believe this content should be available. In fact, by a margin of 32 percentage points, Americans are more worried that “materials that could be valuable to students will be removed from school libraries”(62%), than worry that “materials that could be harmful to students will remain in school libraries”(30%).
Yet again, Democrats and Independents are in a different place than their GOP counterparts suggesting headaches for Republicans in the 2024 elections. (Grinnell College National Poll, 3/14-19, 2023)
Indeed, it looks like this issue could be a disqualifier for elected officials who support curriculum censorship and book bans, based on recent polling (Ipsos, 4/24-25, 2023 among 1,005 adults nationwide, the vast majority of whom are registered to vote). More than six in 10 Americans say they would be less likely to back a candidate who “supports policies that ban books in schools and in school libraries on subject matter that deals with sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity”(38% more likely, 62% less likely).
And Americans Trust Democrats to Defend Equality, Youth Wellbeing
The 2024 Navigator Research poll showed that President Biden and the Democratic Party are more trusted than Republicans to safeguard LGBTQ+ equality and protect America’s youth.
60% of those polled say they trust Democrats to protect the LGBTQ+ community, compared to just 19% who say they trust the GOP.
54% say they trust Democrats to protect the rights and freedoms of the community, compared to just 22% who say they trust the GOP.
46% say they trust Democrats to care for children’s wellbeing, compared to just 37% who say they trust the GOP.
I admit I was getting very discouraged lately. I fought the hate generated by hyper religious Anita Bryant as a gay kid growing up, listening to adults around me from my adoptive parents and hell spawn who were abusing me to teachers / adults around me. They bought in to her save the children as all gays are monsters who abuse little boys. Yes the irony was not lost on me that my adopted family bought into the lies. But we gay people fought for acceptance. In my last two years in the Army I was able to live almost fully out, until a new company commander came in who was an infantry officer who told me that if I did not leave the service when my time was up he would have me court marshaled for being gay. During the following years as a civilian in the late 1980s and 1990s I fought for acceptance living as an openly gay man. I got beat up at work, I lost promotions despite being told I had the best scores for a supervisory position, I was told no man was going to take direction from a fagot. I lost jobs when the bosses realized I was gay. It was a horrible time. But in the early 2000 it got better and as time moved on it got better. Schools were pushing acceptance and tolerance for those different. In 2015 in January we were the first gay couple in our county in Florida to be married by the county clerks and the entire office wanted to be involved. They gave us so much time, photos, and love it was incredible. When I go into doctor’s offices and mention my husband the people, especially younger workers are all supportive. I really though things were really moving forward. Then came the Libs of TikTok and Chaya Raichik who admitted to lying with the hate she spewed because as a Christian woman lying was not illegal was it. She found fame creating the most horrible attacks on innocent people demonizing the LGBTQ+ and their supporters and she glorified in it. Red state politician jumped on the bandwagon and the Christian nationalists thinking they found a way to force their morality / god on everyone in the nation led the charge to try to return the society to the 1950s and roll back the rights of everyone not white cis and straight. To hell with the rest of the population as long as their god is happy because of forcing their ways on everyone else.
Then Janet who has had a fight as hard or in a lot of ways far harder than I ever did to gain acceptance for who she is gave me some rays of sunshine and hope. Amazing how when people stick together and help each other the gloom and doom can be pushed back and strength be gained. Thank you, Janet, for this article. Hugs.
Data for Progress finds that among likely voters, Democrats, Independents and Republicans alike don’t want to see “mean-spirited” ads targeting the transgender community.
74% of voters say that transgender people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Polling released today from Data For Progress shows just how ineffective and unpopular the anti-transgender ads being run by MAGA candidates really are with voters.
Key findings from the poll back up the long-supported claims that anti-transgender rhetoric is not what wins elections:
The use of political attack ads against transgender people was described as “sad and shameful” by the majority of Democrats (61%) and Independents (58%), and even by a plurality of Republicans (41%). The majority of voters also said that they feel that these ads are “mean-spirited” and “out of hand”
85% of Republicans said candidates should back away from transgender messaging, more than the share of Democratic (75%) and independent (82%) voters who said the same
By a more than 20 point margin (52% to 31%), voters would back a candidate who supports transgender rights versus a candidate who opposes transgender rights; by similar margins (52% to 29%), voters trust the Democratic Party over the Republican Party to handle transgender issues
In addition, a study from Ground Media found that a recent Trump anti-trans advertisement yielded “no statistically significant shift” in voter choice, mobilization or likelihood to vote.
It’s not just the ads that voters dislike, it’s also the policies. Data for Progress found that among likely voters:
Nearly three in four (74%) say that transgender people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect
58% of respondents believe the government should be “less involved in regulating what transgender people are allowed to do, including health care they can receive”– including 61% of Independents and a plurality (45%) of Republicans
55% of respondents there is too much legislation targeting transgender people, and view them as “political theater”
Without a positive message or any plans to improve the lives of families, MAGA politicians continue to resort to these ads to try and distract voters from their failures and unpopular positions. But voters continue to prove that their efforts to spread hate and division are a political loser. Read more about the long history of the failure of anti–trans ads here.
(You may not like them all, or any of them. Listen to what you like; that’s what I’m doing. All the commentary is good. I saw this last night in my Women for KS newsletter, and wanted to share. Enjoy! -A)
Scottie's Playtime 
