152
95 House Dems, Including Trans Rep McBride, Vote To "Honor The Legacy" Of Charlie Kirk
(www.erininthemorning.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2025
152 points (96.9% liked)
United States | News & Politics
8498 readers
306 users here now
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
It's just political strategy to avoid getting dragged. This legislation is passing no matter what they do. By voting en masse like this they eliminated a cudgel the Republicans were going to use against them. There's a lot to be pissed at Dems about but the idiocy going on here is not them coming out of the closet as neonazis, its Dems backed into a corner doing what they can to get out of it. Congress is always stupid like this, it's how the game is played.
Capitulating to Nazis is how you win the game!
Tactics and strategy is how you win.
History has shown time and time again that appeasement doesn't work and yet here we are again
Yes, and if Democrats had the votes to stop this that would be relevant. Until there's more Democrats in Congress the Republicans get to keep doing what they want regardless. In this instance, for a piece of completely irrelevant legislation that has no real impact, the political context of this moment requires them to make a dumb vote. Republicans put this to vote exactly to create this situation where people like you are mad at Democrats instead of Republicans. It's the consolation prize for not being able to smear the no votes after the Democrats were smart enough not to fall into their trap.
If it's completely irrelevant and has no impact, why vote for it? All they accomplished was making us mad at them, they walked right into the Republican trap and not a single Republican voter is going to vote for Democrats because of this vote.
Because voting no will be used to smear them. That's the whole point, it forces Democrats into the position where you can hit them with brutal attack ads around this topic if they vote no. Democrats obviously are not neonazis Charlie Kirk supporters who have just been waiting for this day, its a silly accusation. They are just in a shitty situation where either way they vote sucks and they have to choose the least bad option. It happens all the time, especially when they are outnumbered as they currently are. Politics is dumb and messy like that in Congress.
Voting "no" would be used to smear them among the Republican base... who would never vote for them anyway. Who cares?
Voting "yes" is now going to hurt them among the Democratic base, and if you recall they lost the last election because they pissed off their own base! In what world is pissing off their own base the "least bad option"? That's how they always lose!
If a dumb vote about a pointless thing is enough to turn off a voter then I don't think they really were in the party base. They sound more like someone who is looking for an excuse. Certainly they are someone who doesn't understand what "the perfect is the enemy of the good" means, and doesn't understand how dire the circumstances will become if Republicans retain the House. The reality is shit is super fucked and fixating on stupid things like this is exactly what Republicans want. It is exactly why they made this vote happen, it was intended to smear and divide. Now here we are seeing it in action.
I really wish you guys would understand you are being played by Republicans. They do this to divide us because they know we're weaker that way.
Look guys I only voted to put a Hitler Statue that everyone has to give a big wet kiss on the lips in front of door to the House cause it'll pass anyway. Can't you see I'm only doing this cause I'm scared I'm not getting reelected and not because I'm complicit? I'm one of the good guys, unless someone asks, in that case I'm willing to compromise.
You're exaggerating and misrepresenting for dramatic effect. Hyperbolic nonsense like this doesn't contribute anything positive.
Did you forget what happened in the last election? They lost because they pissed off their base.
You can't just scream at the base and call them stupid and demand they vote for Democrats. You have to appeal to them or they will stay home, like they did in the most recent election. That's just how politics works. If Democrats keep doing this shit, they'll lose.
If the ads don’t work and these hypothetical voters were going to vote one way anyway, why have them?
There is a base of voters on each side that don’t change their votes. The middle that does change their votes is who the ads are for.
Then what happened in this last election? It wasn't the middle that swung the election for Trump, it was the millions of people who previously voted for Biden last time and stayed home this time. Shitting on the base is how Democrats lose.
Which is what the ads are for.
That's also a false narrative as more people voted for trump when he lost than most other presidents who won.
Political ads work. Which is unfortunate, but true. So the Dems are voting tactically, to not have a cudgel to be used against them. I think they'd be better off fighting that cudgel with talk of free speech instead but it still makes sense, even if I disagree.
What's a false narrative? That Democrats lost because their base stayed home? Because that's exactly what happened.
Democrats can ruin their election chances if they piss off their base. They will stay home if they get pissed off enough.
Democrats lost because more people voted trump. I agree that if more democrats went out to vote for Harris, trump would have lost, but equally, trump would have lost if more republicans stayed home. That’s the point about political ads and the use of wedge issues, like Charlie Kirk.
The numbers show that fewer Democrats turned out in 2024 than in 2020. Something happened. Was that entirely because of ads? Was nothing going on at the time that would anger the Democratic base?
Fewer democrats voted for Harris than voted for Biden. However, more democrats voted for Harris than every other winning president before 2020. 2020 just had an outsized number of votes.
Couldn't they also have not voted?
Yes, abstaining is an option but its effectively no different than voting no in this context. They could have also not voted as a bloc, but that's an even worse scenario for them for what should hopefully be obvious reasons.
"Umm acktually sweaty, they are forced to do this because you DIDN'T vote for them? They would've supported trans rights, but only if you actually gave them your vote? So this is actually your fault and not theirs that they are forced to bootlick nazis like this." - libs to leftists.
Bold strategy. Let's see how letting Nazis do whatever they want plays out for them, Cotton.
Tactics and strategy only works for those willing to use power when they can.
This is enabling those who they purport to be against
This is a meaningless vote, whether they voted yes or no had no impact on the outcome and the outcome is not significant. Another day honoring a piece of shit in America has no real impact on anyone, we've got plenty of them already. All it did was defuse the trap Republicans had set for them, and piss off people who don't understand how Congress operates.
It seems like beyond the pale for me.
I’m sure I’m not unique in that sentiment.