In a hostile interview on Fox News, Kamala Harris was pressed to answer anti-trans ads. Rather than cede ground, she contrasted her priorities with Trump's spending on ads designed to "create fear."
Kamala Harris out there showing Colin Allred from TX how to handle antitrans questions intended to spread harmful misinformation. I’m still fucking tossed about that Allred/cruz debate 24 hours later…
Boom! Kamala shows us how it's done. She didn't play on their field--she flipped that question around and made them answer to her! Love a woman with a backbone.
My issue here is that there is an active campaign, that most cisgender people seem unaware of or downplay, to eradicate transgender people completely from public life, from self-determination, from bodily autonomy, from health care, from basic human rights of all kinds.
We, as a demographic, are powerless in the face of this attack. There are simply not enough of us.
The ONLY power we have is in convincing cisgender people who are NOT bigots, who BELIEVE in equality and human rights, to take up the cause with us.
Minimizing it. Refusing to engage. Not talking about it...these are accepting the war on us that's already happening. Letting it go. Saying "It's not important enough to fight".
The status quo favors the oppressor. Inaction IS an action. Not choosing IS a choice.
"I'll follow the law." is not strong advocacy. What will you do if they change the law?
Here's a strong response: "Trans prisoners, like every other prisoner, are entitled, in fact required by the 8th amendment, to the same necessary medical care, as determined by them and their doctors, as any other prisoner."
If you think we're human. If you think we deserve the same rights and place in society as everyone else, GET IN THE GAME!
Because once they're done with us...they're coming for you next.
Some days are downer days and then Erin posts and my day is brighter. I was unable to get FOX network. Perhaps my TV is too far to the right. Thanks to you Erin I can now watch the video multiple times...:)
This is fantastic! So glad that she took this transphobic BS head on and said she'd follow the law, there is medically necessary surgery, and said this isn't what Americans want to focus on. It's the exact context I needed to know that she's not going to abandon us after she's elected.
I know people would like more from her on trans rights, and they aren't wrong, in regards to the ads it seems like a problem that takes care of itself. It's clear people don't like seeing them and "want it to stop" and the people who could make it stop are the GOP, but they won't. That I would hope is the message most people receive. So not engaging is a pretty good move.
It seems like we’re seeing the old Washington “two-step” again, which used to be called Clintonian Triangulation. This happens when a candidate, once confident their base has no alternative, shifts toward the center. I disagree with this approach—it can make everyone feel manipulated.
Trump, on the other hand, didn’t triangulate. His core supporters, though not numerically enough to win, still uphold him as their champion. His unwavering stance (whether right or wrong) conveys strength, which can appeal to those who are undecided or in the middle politically.
It feels like we’re sticking with a flawed political strategy. Hopefully, this White House link can provide some helpful context: FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Advances Equality and Visibility for Transgender Americans (March 31, 2022).
I agree with you that it's worrisome Kamala didn't take a stronger pro trans stance but I feel based on her history that she is a genuine ally for our community. The question she was asked was basically a "gotcha" question that could lead down a rabbit hole of trying to explain to a Fox audience why trans people should have a place in our world. Shutting down the line of enquiry was the best use of the limited air time that she had in order to get to a lot of important issues.
I put fox viewers in the group of myopic, self centered voters who are only interested in one thing which is, (what is this candidate going to do for me). I think the vast majority of Americans don't have the mental bandwidth to realize that the numerous issues we face as a nation are much bigger than their one special issue.
I'm not a one issue voter but in this election it's very easy to not vote for Trump based on just one of his many bad qualities. I wish people could see past their own noses but a smart person like Kamala Harris knows that shes going to have to win votes from a lot of people who are uninformed and and short sighted. The Republicans know this as well which is why they are depending on votes from people whose interests they have every intention of ignoring once elected.
I lament that our schools can not prepare people to be intelligent voters but they could and should make it a bigger part of the required curriculum.
I agree that Kamala Harris is a genuine ally, and I’d say that —unfortunately —there was no win in taking more interview time to run into a trap set by the interviewer. Allred (an attorney!) caught the fear being ‘mongered’ and waffled in his ad, ultimately looking weak to likely voters in TX. This was a very poor move because his option was to phrase his stance exactly as he wanted and come across as definite, principled and strong. (If the ad is his true feeling, then I’m beyond disappointed.) I love it that Kamala, our candidate for the top office, shut that mess down and wrested control of the interview back. And demonstrated leadership for Dem candidates who are afraid.
Kamala's choice of accepting an interview on Fox was essentially "running headlong into a trap". I admire that she had the guts to try to turn it around as an opportunity to reach some swing voters or change some minds. Most politicians on the left would not take the risk of appearing. I wonder what her campaign advisors' position was on this. Such interviews have the potential to do more harm than good for a political candidate. I saw the interview as a win overall for Harris but I think the bigger question is what did Fox viewers think. Did she score any points with swing voters?
Good question. My guess is that she’s such a strong debater that she knows she’ll look strong and fierce for not being afraid to do it, and that she’ll come out better than even. (And she did.) And my take is that as a woman candidate for the top office, she needs to counter any doubts that she can handle it compared to a man. I’m sure she’ll get more chance to clarify her support for the lgbtqia2SP community—and she won’t be manipulated into being defensive about it.
Kamala Harris out there showing Colin Allred from TX how to handle antitrans questions intended to spread harmful misinformation. I’m still fucking tossed about that Allred/cruz debate 24 hours later…
Maybe she will tell them off the two idiots who stepped out of line.
Boom! Kamala shows us how it's done. She didn't play on their field--she flipped that question around and made them answer to her! Love a woman with a backbone.
My issue here is that there is an active campaign, that most cisgender people seem unaware of or downplay, to eradicate transgender people completely from public life, from self-determination, from bodily autonomy, from health care, from basic human rights of all kinds.
We, as a demographic, are powerless in the face of this attack. There are simply not enough of us.
The ONLY power we have is in convincing cisgender people who are NOT bigots, who BELIEVE in equality and human rights, to take up the cause with us.
Minimizing it. Refusing to engage. Not talking about it...these are accepting the war on us that's already happening. Letting it go. Saying "It's not important enough to fight".
The status quo favors the oppressor. Inaction IS an action. Not choosing IS a choice.
"I'll follow the law." is not strong advocacy. What will you do if they change the law?
Here's a strong response: "Trans prisoners, like every other prisoner, are entitled, in fact required by the 8th amendment, to the same necessary medical care, as determined by them and their doctors, as any other prisoner."
If you think we're human. If you think we deserve the same rights and place in society as everyone else, GET IN THE GAME!
Because once they're done with us...they're coming for you next.
Thanks for following that interview for me and others who couldn't watch. As always, your reporting is uniquely important.
Could be one of the single most effective things a politician has done to help us in quite a while.
About time! Thanks to a "fellow follower" she was asked the question and came through. I so agree with your post.
Meant to say felon follower.
My vote won’t be influenced by how much I hate Trump, but by how much I love Kamala Harris, our democracy, and my neighbors.
💙
Well done Kamala!
Wonderful news and a great antidote to the back pedalling from Alfred and Brown. Huge relief here.
That was leadership! Let's hope that the rest of the democrats learned something from her.
Thanks Erin!
I want her to be on my side against the bullies!!!
Fuck all bullies.
More power to her, I hope it works.
Some days are downer days and then Erin posts and my day is brighter. I was unable to get FOX network. Perhaps my TV is too far to the right. Thanks to you Erin I can now watch the video multiple times...:)
whew!
This is fantastic! So glad that she took this transphobic BS head on and said she'd follow the law, there is medically necessary surgery, and said this isn't what Americans want to focus on. It's the exact context I needed to know that she's not going to abandon us after she's elected.
Brava!
Amazing as usual!!!!!!
I know people would like more from her on trans rights, and they aren't wrong, in regards to the ads it seems like a problem that takes care of itself. It's clear people don't like seeing them and "want it to stop" and the people who could make it stop are the GOP, but they won't. That I would hope is the message most people receive. So not engaging is a pretty good move.
It seems like we’re seeing the old Washington “two-step” again, which used to be called Clintonian Triangulation. This happens when a candidate, once confident their base has no alternative, shifts toward the center. I disagree with this approach—it can make everyone feel manipulated.
Trump, on the other hand, didn’t triangulate. His core supporters, though not numerically enough to win, still uphold him as their champion. His unwavering stance (whether right or wrong) conveys strength, which can appeal to those who are undecided or in the middle politically.
It feels like we’re sticking with a flawed political strategy. Hopefully, this White House link can provide some helpful context: FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Advances Equality and Visibility for Transgender Americans (March 31, 2022).
White House Fact Sheet
I agree with you that it's worrisome Kamala didn't take a stronger pro trans stance but I feel based on her history that she is a genuine ally for our community. The question she was asked was basically a "gotcha" question that could lead down a rabbit hole of trying to explain to a Fox audience why trans people should have a place in our world. Shutting down the line of enquiry was the best use of the limited air time that she had in order to get to a lot of important issues.
I put fox viewers in the group of myopic, self centered voters who are only interested in one thing which is, (what is this candidate going to do for me). I think the vast majority of Americans don't have the mental bandwidth to realize that the numerous issues we face as a nation are much bigger than their one special issue.
I'm not a one issue voter but in this election it's very easy to not vote for Trump based on just one of his many bad qualities. I wish people could see past their own noses but a smart person like Kamala Harris knows that shes going to have to win votes from a lot of people who are uninformed and and short sighted. The Republicans know this as well which is why they are depending on votes from people whose interests they have every intention of ignoring once elected.
I lament that our schools can not prepare people to be intelligent voters but they could and should make it a bigger part of the required curriculum.
I agree that Kamala Harris is a genuine ally, and I’d say that —unfortunately —there was no win in taking more interview time to run into a trap set by the interviewer. Allred (an attorney!) caught the fear being ‘mongered’ and waffled in his ad, ultimately looking weak to likely voters in TX. This was a very poor move because his option was to phrase his stance exactly as he wanted and come across as definite, principled and strong. (If the ad is his true feeling, then I’m beyond disappointed.) I love it that Kamala, our candidate for the top office, shut that mess down and wrested control of the interview back. And demonstrated leadership for Dem candidates who are afraid.
Kamala's choice of accepting an interview on Fox was essentially "running headlong into a trap". I admire that she had the guts to try to turn it around as an opportunity to reach some swing voters or change some minds. Most politicians on the left would not take the risk of appearing. I wonder what her campaign advisors' position was on this. Such interviews have the potential to do more harm than good for a political candidate. I saw the interview as a win overall for Harris but I think the bigger question is what did Fox viewers think. Did she score any points with swing voters?
Good question. My guess is that she’s such a strong debater that she knows she’ll look strong and fierce for not being afraid to do it, and that she’ll come out better than even. (And she did.) And my take is that as a woman candidate for the top office, she needs to counter any doubts that she can handle it compared to a man. I’m sure she’ll get more chance to clarify her support for the lgbtqia2SP community—and she won’t be manipulated into being defensive about it.