235
Aren't the Republicans own strategists screaming that this tactic isn't working?
Yeah, guess she didn’t get (or couldn’t read?) the memo
As someone who went to Arkansas public schools I can assure you she "cain't reed."
Plus, her eyes be like oO
You've no idea if she's looking at you or looking for you.
One squirrel shootin’ eye and one tater diggin’ eye
You didn't get the memo? I'll make sure someone gets you a copy. You see, we're putting a cover sheet on all TPS reports now.
Y… yeah… I got the memo, it’s right here
I wouldn't doubt it. One thing Republicans used to be really good at was message discipline. Trump has almost literally eaten the brain of the party and those days are gone.
I didn't know Slagathor was still making noise. The bigger question is, why are we listening?
That cunt needs to STFU about everything
I thought she had gone away. Too bad.
She gov of Arkansas
First, this was a GOP talking point long ago. She's late to the party. Second, she had to include "biological children", inferring raising a kid that isn't yours by DNA means you have NO CLUE what being a parent is like. Adoption and foster parents would think differently.
Seriously, Sanders, get your own state in order before you chime in on things. And Arkansas, do better next time.
The GOP is also the same party that tells people getting abortions to "PuT iT uP fOr AdOpTiOn!"
I fucking love not having any kids. life is good as fuck
I fucking love my kids. Life is so great!
hell yes brother get it
Fascist apologist says what?
Hucklebeast Slanders
Fucking hell. These people and their birthing kinks.
Not an antinatalist, and not saying if you have kids you have a birthing kink. This is specific to these fundamentalist freaks who have this weird obsession with having kids for the sake of having kids.
Being a parent I'm sure can be an amazing thing and you can do it for the right reasons but this... Weird evangelical need to force people to birth and force people to enjoy it is wild
This is specific to these fundamentalist freaks who have this weird obsession with having kids for the sake of having kids.
And having kids the "right way," so no
- ivf
- pain killers
- cesarean
- adoption
- step children
I get that for many people, birthing a child will be the most dramatic experience of their lives (understandable), but there are other experiences to centre.
The majority of people physically can't have children at all, and we get up to all kinds of other things to define ourselves.
Can we throw a dig at Sanders for looking like a Muppet that's been curb stomped by Elmo several dozen times?
Seriously, let's crowdfund some corrective surgeries for that vile twat.
If all you find to attack someone on is their physical appearance then you might as well just shut up... There's plenty to criticize Republicans for.
It's not the only thing, it's just funny that on top of being ugly on the inside, so many of them fall squarely into uncanny valley on the outside too. It's an interesting pattern to observe. Now quit shaming people for speaking their minds on a casual discussion forum. They aren't hurting anybody.
Stop normalizing attacking people based on their physique, no matter where it's done there's nothing ok about it and you wouldn't accept it if it was an attack coming from the other side towards someone you appreciate.
I don't attack people who don't make a name for themselves by hurting others.
You aren't in any position to gatekeep me or my speech. I appreciate the moral apprehension to join in, you're encouraged to not join.
You're not here to teach me a lesson let alone anyone else here, keep that in mind 🫶
Then attack them on what they did, not on what they look like. Attacking people based on their appearance just shows that you don't have anything better to attack them on either because they're actually right or because you don't know enough to present a more compelling argument against them, in which case, as I said, you might as well just shut up.
Are we not allowed or capable of having nuanced, diverse thought about a person? There's certainly more than one thread in these replies...
Nobody is saying she's bad because she's ugly, just that she's ugly. You can draw those conclusions if you're bad faith, but they're obviously faulty conclusions that are more like what a parent tells their bullied child to make them feel better than anything politically sound.
This isn't the senate floor, this is lemmy. Maybe that guy doesn't care that much about the politics, maybe they do. We can't really tell from this comment alone. Regardless, they have just as much a right to be here as you do. So, you "just shut up" first lol and learn how to use a period while you're at it.
I'm sure if it was someone you liked your would be in agreement with me, that's the problem with these attacks, they have no value and disagreeing with them is as simple as saying what I've been saying from the get go "If that's all you have then clearly that person must be right."
If you think it's a good thing to lower yourself to their level to attack them then you're no better than them.
Lol no I wouldn't be. It's a silly line of attack to get upset over. Depending on the person I'd tell them they're wrong and/or they have other merits and move on with my life.
You are more than welcome to disagree and have a discussion about it but shutting down and telling them to shut up is not the right way to go about it.
And if she's going to preach an ideology for everyone else that makes it a moral failing to be unattractive then she should be the first one to die by her own sword. Quit playing defense for fascists.
Suck it up, buttercup.
So I'll start the GoFundMe with a meager donation of $5.
Any contributions from the morally superior ones on the audience?
Explain to me how what she thinks is relevant?
USA Today - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for USA Today:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/09/18/sarah-huckabee-sanders-biological-kids-insult/75277711007/
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
235 points (100.0% liked)
politics
26140 readers
3057 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS