It would take way more than just a semester

"In short, Ms. Comans was professionally targeted and personally attacked by government officials for no legitimate reason,” Fitzpatrick wrote.

“The attacks against Ms. Comans were based entirely on false information, and many government officials knew the accusations were untrue at the time they were made."

I’m so glad they were rebuked… That’ll teach 'em.

If they do it again they’ll certainly get a strong talking to.

Oh c’mon, it’s not like anyone serving a prestigious public office orchestrated an attack on the US Capitol in an effort to interrupt the transfer of power after a free and fair election.

Something like that would surely warrant an investigation to determine if it were Treason or ‘just’ Sedition.

(but really, we should be trying and executing all traitors in accordance with the US Constitution)

Let’s not let Republicans get away with calling this “Trump’s War” and distancing the party from him and his atrocities.

Republicans control Congress, and War is an Article I power, they’ve supported Trump every step of the way in this.

This isn’t just a Trump low, all of his actions sit squarely on the shoulders of every single Republican.

Every time Republicans refuse to do anything, they’re endorsing his behavior.

Sure. My point was refuting the other user’s claim that “tax free diesel only exists to be a tax relief mechanism”.

Off road diesel is still taxed, you’re just not paying the FHWA excise tax if you’re not using it on highways.

Is why tax-free diesel exists in the first place.

Tax free diesel exists because the dyed diesel is not being used on public roads. Fuel taxes aren’t random government money grabs, they directly fund roads, bridges, and other highway infrastructure.

More than half of the people listed in this article are solely on it for trans sports issues (15 out of 27).

It’s an article who’s sole purpose is discouraging Democrats from voting in the midterm.

The author is likely not even a real person.

The right to play women’s highschool sports isn’t the one we’re fighting for right now. Yes, it’s a long road to acceptance, yes we have to pick our battles.

No, opening that can of worms on a low rent conservative talk radio show is not worth jeopardizing a Democratic politicians’ overall viability with the general voting public.

Beyond that, the sports issue does have nuance, and for the 95% people in Iowa who’ve never had a conversation with a person they knew was trans, and the 68-80% of the state who can’t read at a highschool level… Yes nuance in the subject doesn’t really exist.

Their center-left party realized that every time they take away another right from the trans community, they get more support from conservatives and only lose support with trans people that they want to exclude anyway. Transphobic Democrats will steer the party into doing the same thing here if they can.

So your argument here is that these Democrats are attempting to steer the party into a transphobic agenda, so maybe a few party members attempting exert a small amount of pressure on the direction of party.

And your solution is for democrats to abstain from voting and… What… Allow Republicans complete control? I’m sure that will work well for you.

Or maybe these politicians aren’t transphobic at all and are simply attempting to walk a tightrope in an imperfect system so that they can take power away from a much worse party.

It’s interesting you quote that without showing the previous sentence

Oh please… Just because the author framed the statement with some weasel words doesn’t make the intent any less clear. “I’m not telling you what to do, but…”

Rob Sand, Democratic nominee for governor. Actively opposes transgender participation in sports, answering “no” when a conservative radio host asked whether “biological males” should play women’s sports.

When you pile weak examples like this into your list, it’s clear that you’re just trying to discredit any Democrat and discourage voting.

This article does argue for abstaining, it’s literally the entire point of writing this article just before midterms:

Many, myself included, have argued against voting for the worst offenders on this list even where it means a Republican takes the seat. A Republican victory costs the community one seat for one term.

And it’s such a fucking idiotic take.

It’s an article calling out politicians for their answers on “gotcha questions” like ‘do you want biological males playing women’s sports’

Okay, so which of the Dems named here are Republicans running as Democrats? I just want to look up the rest of their policies.

Trump is deeply unpopular with people attending a Republican Convention? That’s news to me.

Which one of these people are the same as their republican opposition if you’re Trans? Be specific.

Republicans will legitimately support making their medical treatment illegal at the federal level. If they win again, will probably support imprisoning or executing trans people, they are subhuman to the republican party.

While their Democrat counterpart might stop them from playing highschool sports.

Which ones?

Most of these states will never elect a progressive Dem (as proven by the primaries over and over again). Someone left of center is far better than a Republican.

I’m sure the Republican opponents in these states will be much better for Trans rights.

In fact, if we just allow another Republican majority in the legislative branch, they’ll probably just fix the whole thing.

They also canceled the Army’s Robotic Combat Vehicle (RCV) project because it used a hybrid powertrain.

The Army decided that a BEV with ICE generator fit the needs of the program best: quiet, high torque, and precision control.

Effectiveness is too woke for Trump’s military

And the consequences for those involved?

At the very least there should be an investigation as to how this data was developed, so that we can avoid making this ‘mistake’ in the future. Right?..

Because your race doesn’t exclude you from being a scumbag.