ok you guys this is the only political thing i will be posting on here but re: the 2018 and 2020 elections -
YOU HAVE TO VOTE. AND DEMOCRATS HAVE TO WIN THEIR CAMPAIGNS FOR STATE LEGISLATURES. IT IS SO SO SO IMPORTANT.
why is it so important?
because in 2020 we will have a census, which means that in 2022 districts will be redrawn.
what does that have to do with anything?
GERRYMANDERING.
wtf is gerrymandering?
gerrymandering is the redrawing of districts to benefit a specific political party. basically, if the republican party is gerrymandering, they will split a heavily democratic area into different districts and lump them in with primarily republican areas in order to dilute the voting power of democrats. democrats will do the same to republicans. this practice has been deemed unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, but they’ve never agreed on a way to regulate it, so it still happens.
in most states, the state legislature creates a redistricting plan, so if you want elections for the next 10 years to swing democratic, you NEED to elect democrats to your state legislature. as of now, most states are districted to favor republicans, and in 2022 republicans would only gerrymander more, making it even harder for democrats to be elected.
BE READY TO MOBILIZE AND CAMPAIGN FOR DEMOCRATS AT THE LOCAL AND STATE LEVEL IN 2018 AND 2020, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WE ELECT WILL HAVE A HUGE SAY IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS OF OUR GOVERNMENT.
[Video of venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough standing amid vegetation. On a near-horizontal branch above his head is a brown and yellow greater bird of paradise, about the size of a crow, with big floaty yellow plumage puffing out along its back.]
Bird: Pwuk. Pwuk. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: This, surely – Bird (hopping along the branch): WUKWUKWUkwukwukwukoooh. Oooh. Oooh.
[Cut. Same shot.]
Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: This, surely, is one – Bird: Kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark kark. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: This, surely –
[Cut. Same shot but the bird is on the other side now and venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough has his hand on the branch.]
Bird (hopping up and down on venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough’s fingers): Eh-eh. Eh-eh. Eh-urrrr. Eh-urrrr. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: Close up – Bird (hopping away from him): Tiktiktiktik. Tiktiktiktik. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – the plumes – Bird (hopping around): Huek. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – are truly – Bird: Huek. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – exquisite. Bird: Huek. Eh-eh. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: The gauzy – Bird (hopping and spinning on the spot): HukWUKWUKWukwukoooh. Oooh. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: …
[Cut. Same shot but the bird is back on the original side of the branch.]
Bird: Aark. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: Of course, by the eighteenth century – Bird: Ehhh. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – naturalists realized that birds of paradise – Bird (hops across to the other side of the branch) Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – did have – Bird (hopping back again): Krrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – legs. Even so – Bird: WUKWUKWUKWukwukwukooh.
[Cut. Same shot.] Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough (apparently trying to tickle the bird’s tummy): – by about the eighteenth century – Bird (hops away and spins round) Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – and so – Bird: AAAAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK AAAK aaak. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough (wearily): … Very well.
[Cut. Same shot.]
Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – but Karl Linnaeus, the great – Bird (vibrating rapidly on the spot and then flapping its wings): PWAAAAAAAK. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – classifier of the natural world – Bird: AAAAAUUUH AAAUUUH AAAUUUH AAAUUUH AAAUUUH AAAUUUH AAAUUUH AAUUH. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – when he came to allocate a scientific name – Bird: … Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – to this bird – Bird: … Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – called it – Bird: Wooo-ooo. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – wooo-ooo – Bird (surveys the surroundings with a dignified turn of the head) Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: ‘paradisia apoda’: the bird of paradise – Bird: Hoooo. Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough: – without legs. Bird: Eh-eh.
I’ve been planning to teach students how to describe videos and write transcripts and I shall save this post for this very purpose.
Yes, I did reblog this yesterday too. It’s good.
For teaching: ???
I think I’ve skipped this video so many times in the past. Thank you, transcriptionist. Please do not skip this video again, friends. I am laughing til tears form in my eyes.
OH LOOK MY FAVORITE VIDEO EVER IS BACK
It’s the “Venerable TV naturalist David Attenborough (wearily): … Very well.” that gets me every time.
All it means when people say “you’re speaking from a place of privilege” is that you’re likely to underestimate how bad the problem is by default because you are never personally exposed to that problem. It’s not a moral judgement of how difficult your life is.
President Obama is working really hard to keep the transition of power running as smoothly as it can given the dumpster fire on the other side of the hand-off. Part of that has been painting a cheerful picture of his first meeting with Donald Trump. But in an interview with the New Yorker, Obama let slip that reality might have been a little closer to what we all suspected:
“I think I can’t characterize it without…” Obama began before stopping. “At some point over a beer—off the record.”
It was a noticeably different tone than the one employed by the White House after the meeting: That it was "a little less awkward" than the media might have imagined, in the words of Press Secretary Josh Earnest.
Obama has been characterized by extreme poise and graciousness throughout his presidency. The transition has to be putting that to its toughest test yet.
Let’s take this one slowly. David Duke is a noted white supremacist and former Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard. Donald Trump is a president elect who drew support not just from Duke but from an array of other white supremacists as he ran a campaign catering to, yes, white supremacists. Then, upon being elected, he named a white supremacist (albeit one who prefers to be called a “nationalist”) as his top adviser. Then he chose someone for attorney general who in 1986 was considered too racist to be a federal judge. And a national security adviser who’s a notorious Islamophobe whose anti-Semitic retweet spurred Duke’s approval today.
When a run-of-the-mill Republican or Democrat says things about Trump, it may or may not signify anything about Trump specifically. It may be about the bigger partisan picture. But when a fringe extremist racist like David Duke embraces a president elect, that says something significant. When white supremacists in general are like “whoa, this Trump guy is our dream come true and doing things we never thought we’d see from a president,” that signifies something about Donald Trump. They’re not just trolling here.
In short: It is significant that white supremacists are excited about the president elect. It is significant that they are excited about his top adviser. It is significant that they are excited about his national security adviser. It is significant because Trump is doing something to win all this approval, and we need to be paying attention to just what that is.
If I see one more fool say, “But FDR was a Democrat…” without bothering to educate themselves on how the parties basically swapped positions on social issues over the course of the last 75 years… as if the sins of FDR as a Democrat mean that Trump as a Republican deserves a shot at repeating this stain on our nation’s history…
“Planned Parenthood confirmed that yes, people are putting their money where their tweets are. Of 160,000 donations made to Planned Parenthood since the election, 20,000 have been made in Mike Pence’s name, according to a spokesperson. That’s 12.5 percent of all donations.”
loves it
From what I’ve understood, making them IN his name is a bad idea—Planned Parenthood donations are tax deductible, and he may end up with a tax write-off.
From the PP site: “Your contribution to Planned Parenthood Federation of America is tax-deductible to the fullest extent allowable.”
When donating, select the box which says “Yes, my gift is in honor or in memory of someone special.”
Making them out to Mike Pence in the “IN HONOR” section still gets a notification to his office, while not running the risk of giving him any tax deductions. Plus, you’ll get a deduction for yourself.
Abuse Victim: “So anyway when I think about my past abuse I have anxiety and panic attacks and a lot of it is repressed anyway.”
Some Dickhead: “Right, but could you maybe wade through that a little to give me a succinct example of something I’d consider abusive… you know for curiosity sake?”
Abuse Victim: “So you just want me to relive all tha-”
Some Dickhead: “Not all of it! Just the part that you consider the worst so I can summarily judge whether you were really abused or dismiss you as overly sensitive.”
“A grassroots idea to donate to Planned Parenthood in Vice President-Elect Mike Pence‘s name has spread since the election. The social media campaign encourages citizens to show their support for women’s rights by donating “in honor” of the Indiana governor, who has infamously tried to defund the non-profit organization. For each donation, he receives a thank-you certificate.
Planned Parenthood confirmed that it has received 20,000 contributions in Pence’s name since the election. According to the Indianapolis Star, there have been 160,000 donations to Planned Parenthood in the last week — 12.5 percent in the name of Pence.
While a member of Congress in 2007, Pence was the first to introduce a bill calling for an end to Planned Parenthood funding. Although the bill did not pass, he has continued to fight the non-profit throughout his political career.
Several celebrities donated to Planned Parenthood in the seven days since the election, including Katy Perry (who gave $10,000), and Amy Schumer and Amber Tamblyn, who said they donated in Pence’s name.”
I remember my brother trying to convince me I was too old for cartoons when I was a teenager. He wanted to know if I was going to keep watching cartoons when I was in my forties. Unsurprisingly, the answer is, "yes."
In this post-election hate-crime spike, self defense is more important than ever. Practice this move until it becomes muscle memory and teach your body to react before thinking.
remember when captain america punched hitler in the face on the cover of his first issue
Like the X-Men and Luke Cage weren’t created during the Civil Right’s Movement during the 60’s for no fucking reason at all…
Like the X-Men didn’t have an ongoing plot about the Legacy Virus at the same time as the AIDS crisis.
Like Wonder Woman wasn’t William Moulton Marston’s outlet for his ideas on progressive feminism, queer sexuality, and bondage.
Like Green Arrow/Green Arrow wasn’t a series devoted to an ongoing left wing/right wing political debate between its heroes, including an award-winning story in which they confronted drug addiction.
Like Will Eisner’s graphic novel Fagin the Jew wasn’t written as an extended apology to the world for creating a racist caricature in Ebony White.
Like how after the Watergate scandal, Steve Rogers didn’t become so disillusioned with his country that he stopped being Captain America and started fighting crime as Nomad, the man without a country.
Can somebody explain to me why this is a problem? Why is voter ID bad???
How do you not have ID?? License? Passport?
Also how is that proof that’s it’s rigged. Why do those 300,000 people not have ID? Does that mean they are illigal immigrants(seriously I have no clue) cuz if that’s the case, they have no right to vote. Needing ID vote makes so much sense to me. In Canadian elections, you need ID vote
Please somebody explain to me what the issue is with needing ID to vote
Because most likely if they don’t have a drivers license they probably can’t afford a passport which are the two forms of ID they’d accept so it makes the poor people unable to vote
Fair enough.
Isn’t the purpose of an ID to prevent voter fraud? I think that pretty important
I do agree it is important but it would be better if they made IDs more accessible for people who wouldn’t normally be able to afford it
True I don’t know the prices and how possible it is to reduce prices (what affects, what needs to be taken into account) but something to consider
My original question stemmed from the fact that so many people are against voter ID in general, as if proving who you are is a violation. I’ve seen so much hate for it months prior to the elections. Plus the tweet claims it’s evidence of it being rigged which I found quite dumb. I don’t support either candidate but jeeeez
But idk I’m Canadian I don’t know a whole lote about how things are done and what the process is so…yea
To clear some of this up for those who aren’t familiar with voter ID laws:
Here is an excellent article written a few years ago (by a former Republican!) about how these requirements put a disproportionate burden on certain groups of voters - specifically, those who are likely to be Democrats. A few key points:
“7% of the general voting public doesn’t have an adequate photo ID, but those figures rise precipitously when you hit certain groups: 15% of voting age citizens making less than $35,000 a year, 18% of Americans over 65, and a full quarter of African Americans.”
“…the documents one needs to get a photo ID aren’t (free) and the prices haven’t been reduced. Lost your naturalization certificate? That’ll be $345. Don’t have a birth certificate because you’re black and were born in the segregated south? You have to go to court.”
“One can only hope that would-be voters have access to a car or adequate public transportation, and a boss who won’t mind if they take several hours off work to go get their ID, particularly if they live in, say, the third of Texas counties that have no ID-issuing offices at all.”
“(Republican) Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, to take an example, signed a strict voter ID law and then made a move to start closing DMV offices in areas full of Democrats, while increasing office hours in areas full of Republicans—this in a state in which half of blacks and Hispanics are estimated to lack a driver’s license and a quarter of its DMV offices are open less than one day per month. (Sauk City’s is open a whopping four times a year.)”
So basically, there are a lot - A LOT - of Americans who are legally eligible to vote but lack a DMV-issued I.D. Most of those people are from demographic groups perceived as likely to vote Democratic.
The “rigged” part? Is that Republican state and local officials have actively worked to make it harder for Democratic-skewing demographic groups - especially the poor - to obtain DMV-issued I.D.s, while enacting laws that require them to show those I.D.s in order to vote.
Ensuring no voter fraud is a good thing, it helps uphold the integrity and people’s trust of the voting system. That being said, overly strict regulations end up targeting minority groups. (also a little weird that for USA’s federal elections there isn’t a federal standard? IDK state powers are weird)
So how do other countries decrease fraud and inequality? Since one of the above posters mentioned Canada -> in Canada there are 2 big ways you can prove you’re you without photo ID. (Any combination of 2 pieces out of 48 pieces of listed non-photo ID, or 2 pieces of ID with name and a person who will testify you live where you say you live) http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=ids&document=index&lang=e
Oh, and employers are legally obligated to give you time off to vote, and cannot deduct your pay for going to vote. These measures would go a long way in decreasing bias at the polls. (Oh and a federal standard. Did I mention a federal standard?)
There is also the basic history in the U.S. of disenfranchising PoC, specifically black voters in the South. Voter fraud is almost non-existent in the U.S. It has become and continues to be a talking point of the Republican party because it is based in racism. Legally, they can’t say, “No black person is allowed to vote. No Latinx is allowed to vote,” but states continue to pass laws that make it specifically harder for those groups to vote, whether it is the “literacy tests” of the Jim Crow era (seriously, try taking that test; many of these types of tests had intentionally confusing questions) or a voting places with extreme waiting times in poorer areas. We also see shorter early voter periods in these areas, which makes it harder for the poor working class to vote since Election Day isn’t a holiday in the U.S.
This doesn’t even touch the issue the amount of documentation you need in order to get an ID these days in the US. If you are homeless or a migrant worker of any kind, it’s pretty much impossible.
There is also the major issue that these laws have never been universally applied. A white person going to vote gets a cheery wave and a “just sign next to your name,” while a black person has to have two forms of ID just to prove who they are and if they don’t have the ‘right kind’ of ID–again often determined by people at the polling place– they are turned away. So while folks can say that having ID just makes sense, U.S. history speaks volumes as to why it shouldn’t be implemented.
In her first public appearance since conceding to Donald Trump last week, Hillary Clinton delivered an emotional speech and urged her supporters to remain committed to fighting for progressive ideals despite her unexpected election defeat.
"I know many of you are deeply disappointed about the results of the election—I am too, more than I can ever express," Clinton said, speaking to guests at a gala Wednesday for the Children's Defense Fund, the child's advocacy organization where she started her career after law school.
"I know that over the past week a lot of people have asked themselves whether America was the country we thought it was," she said holding back tears. "The divisions laid bare by this election run deep, but please listen to me when I say this: America is worth it. Our children are worth it."
As the crowd interrupted her remarks with applause and cheers, Clinton also acknowledged that coming to speak at the Washington, DC, event was not easy for her, but her sense of the importance of this work for children and families outweighed the difficulty.
"Stay engaged on every level," she said forcefully. "We need you, America needs you—your energy, your ambition, your talent. That's how we get through this."
Step right up and listen to the inane babbling of an entire generation… reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it reblog it … Continued
I’ll do this one in Q & A format, in no small part because it will include questions that people have actually asked me, and that I want to address:
So, Scalzi, how are you doing?
I’m better than I was last week, thanks. I’m eating and sleeping normally again, and I can go for hours at a time without thinking about the fact that a racist buffoon will soon be President of the United States, and when I do think of it, the emotion I feel is closer to exasperation than outright despair. This doesn’t mean it’s not still a problem — hey, look at the mess he’s making of the transition! — but that my reaction to it is more usefully in line.
Plus, you know. A week’s enough time for me. President Obama (enjoy that while it lasts) had a conference call to Democrats in which he said he’d give people until Thanksgiving to grieve and then it would be time for them to get their shit together (I’m paraphrasing). I think for most people that’s about right. I needed a little less time. Others might need more. But by and large, after a while you have to stop being sad, or at least just being sad, and you gotta figure out what to do after that.
Which includes the rest of your life, I will note. Today I talked to my editor about which books I’ll be publishing over the next couple of years, and with my agent about some business in Germany, and later today my new monitor will arrive and I’ll reinstall my desktop and later on I’ll help my wife take a spare sofa we have over to the house of a friend, and so on. I don’t think any of us can or should ignore the mess that’s happening or the mess we’re going into. But everything else is still going on as well. I don’t think you can effectively deal with the former without keeping up with the latter.
But you’re still pissed, yes?
Well, yeah. That’s not going to change any time soon. We’re going from a president who was competent and scandal-free to one who is… not, in either case, and who is bringing along anti-semites and grifters and putting them at the levers of this country. Over in the congress, Paul Ryan and his party pals are salivating at the idea of breaking Medicare and the ACA. Around the country, bigots are celebrating Trump’s win by yelling at minorities, women and LGTBQ folks and leaving racist, threatening messages for them. And Trump’s not even president yet. Yes, I’m still pissed.
But I don’t think that it’s useful or effective for me to be pissed every single moment of my waking life. Scratch that — I know it’s not, because I’m me, and I know me and my body. More than that I just don’t think I could do it. So, yes. I’m going to be pissed, and I suspect I’ll continue to be. I’m going to be other things, too, in their moment.
So be honest with us: How bad do you think it’s going to get?
Well, as I said on Twitter yesterday, it’s sad when “too incompetent to function” is the best-case scenario with an incoming presidential administration. At this point it’s pretty clear that Trump didn’t expect to win, and maybe didn’t even want to win, and as a result he really made no plan to be president. But he did win, and now he has to work with the people he brought with him, and, well. He’s not bringing the best, is he? Cronies and sycophants and bigots, very few of whom have government experience or know how any of this works. I mean, there’s Pence and Gingrich (shudder) and then…? They don’t even have Christie anymore, now that Jared Kushner has chucked him and all his pals out of the boat.
We’ve had massively corrupt and incompetent administrations before — Harding and Grant come to mind, and George W. Bush’s administration was no great picnic either, although it’s rapidly looking better than it used to — and we’ve survived them. But we didn’t do ourselves any favors having had them. Be that as it may, if Trump’s administration suddenly developed competence, it might be terrifying. If all Trump’s administration gives us is incompetence and graft, then we’ll have gotten off easy. The problem is that Trump is an easy-to-goad narcissist who will have control of a military and a nuclear arsenal, and also he doesn’t actually give a shit about democracy, so there’s a lot more that could go worse than not. I don’t think Trump will get a chance to use the nuclear arsenal, but then I also thought he wouldn’t be president either, and look where that got me.
The problem isn’t that I don’t know what Trump and his party pals are going to do. The problem is that they don’t know. Trump didn’t have policies, he had stump speech lines. Now Trump has literally no idea what to do next. And if he doesn’t know, how can any of us know? The only thing we can do is believe his stump speech lines and work from there. The result is nice if you’re white, male and in the 1%. It’s less rosy for everyone else.
So: I think it’s going to be bad. I hope that the bad falls within historical norms. I wouldn’t count on it.
Then what can people who oppose Trump do?
Well, first you can remember that Clinton got more individual votes than Trump did. Trump won’t become president because more American voters wanted him to be so. He’ll become president because of the electoral college. And while that’s the way that goes, the point is of this —
But if we convince enough electoral college electors that Trump is bad they can choose not to vote for him!
Yeah, I mean, you can try that? But let me be real blunt and tell you that’s pretty much in the category of “wishful thinking,” and in the meantime the electors who are getting calls and emails are probably feeling like they’re being doxxed and harassed. Which is not going to help.
But Trump!
I know. I’m unhappy too. Look, I’m not telling you that you can’t do it, if you think you must. I am telling you that I wouldn’t do it, I don’t think it will work, and that you’re probably just antagonizing people and maybe even making them feel unsafe and afraid. Your call.
Grumble. Continue, then.
— as I was saying, Clinton got more individual votes than Trump. When you realize that the (yes, tiny but even so) plurality of American voters who roused themselves to vote didn’t vote for an incompetent bigot and his racist, sexist, anti-Semitic funboy pals, it’s a comforting thought. There are more of you than of them. And while that’s a cold comfort because Trump and his pals are still going to be running the country, remember that you’re not alone and that you still have a lot of power to speak and protest and effect positive action. Which will take effort on your part. If the whole of your political and social action is retweeting people (including me), you have a problem. The next four years will require more from you, I expect.
And also, for fuck’s sake, vote. Everyone has a favorite reason for why Trump won — racist fan boys, James Comey, voter suppression, emails, fake news, Gary Johnson and Jill Stein — and my favorite, which I will note does not obviate any other possible explanation, is that generally fewer people showed up to vote. Now, I think that is in no small part to voter suppression; when you make it harder to vote, then people don’t vote as much. But I don’t think it can be laid entirely at the feet of that. I think some people just… sat this one out. One of the less amusing little tidbits to come out of the protests that have been going on around the country is that at least some of those now protesting who could have voted, didn’t. And my thought about that is: You can make time to stand around yelling, but not make time to vote? Gee, thanks.
I am a Trump voter and I am not sad that I voted for him!
This is my standard response to Trump voters: I hope you never have cause to be unhappy that you voted for him.
What is that supposed to mean?
I mean that — to the extent that one subscribes to the idea that Trump voters gave him the nod for economic reasons rather than the other, more racist features of his campaign, which is a thing many will tell you — I am skeptical his administration will be beneficial to anyone other than those who are in or near the top 1% of income earners in the country. For that one percent, and leaving out all the short- and long-term repercussions of Trump’s trade, social, international and environmental policies, which are likely to be considerable, he’s going to be great. But for everyone else the crystal ball is less clear.
We’ll see.
Yup, we will. I will say that for the sake of my neighbors, and again on purely economic grounds, I hope I’m wrong.
I will also say that if you did vote for Trump for racial reasons, then fuck you, and I hope you’re bitterly disappointed.
Hey, now that you brought it up, this Vox article says that calling people racist isn’t the way to confront racism.
I don’t necessarily disagree, depending on the situation.
But you wrote that piece where you called people racists!
What I wrote was that people who voted for Trump for reasons other than racism still had to accept that they voted for racist policies as part of his overall package, and that those racist policies will have an effect on other people’s lives.
That’s a subtle distinction, pal.
I suppose it might be for some. To be clear, again, I don’t think most people who voted for Trump would be actively racist or bigoted to another person in their day-to-day lives; most of the people I know who voted for Trump — and I know many — are in that “not actively racist” category. But that doesn’t change the fact that Trump has racist policies (and sexist policies, and Mike Pence, his VP, is definitely homophobic as shit, and considering Trump is going to leave a lot of policy to him, that’s a thing), and they weren’t hidden. People knew they were there and voted for them anyway. It’s not an accusation, it’s just a fact. One that Trump voters have factor in moving forward, whether they like it or not.
(To be clear, I do think that Trump did get nearly all of the out-and-out racist vote, too. The KKK and the American Nazi Party are delighted Trump won (and that Steve Bannon gets to hang out in the White House), and the people yelling racist, sexist, homophobic and anti-Semitic bullshit at other people from their cars are delighted too. Not everyone who voted for Trump is an active racist, but active racists love that they voted for Trump. And that, too, is a thing Trump voters have to factor in, whether they like it or not.)
As I’ve said before I think it’s okay to point out to people that their votes have consequences, intentional or otherwise, even if it makes them uncomfortable (especially if it makes them uncomfortable). And also, you know. If someone points out that Trump has racist policies and you voted for them when you voted for him, and your immediate reaction is to clutch pearls and cry how dare you call me a racist, maybe there’s some self-examination you need to do.
Okay, but, look, really: I’m not racist.
I’m very glad to hear it. One way you can show that is to be willing to step up when Trump and his administration pursue racist policies. And how will you know which policies are the racist ones? When in doubt, listen to the people who will be affected by them, and believe them.
(And do that for the policies that will affect women, too.)
