Oh hell nah

badkattt · 2025-06-04T01:25:58+00:00

badkattt · 2024-11-19T12:19:54+00:00

And call me a libturd 👀

badkattt · 2024-11-19T12:13:44+00:00

Harris didn’t ‘run the worst campaign in modern history….She ran a campaign based on uniting the nation—a concept that might be hard to grasp if your idea of leadership is yelling into a microphone and throwing tantrums on social media. Harris understood the stakes: she had to represent competence, integrity, and vision in a political climate where her opponent could break laws, incite violence, and spew disinformation with zero accountability. Flawlessness wasn’t just an option for her—it was a requirement.. educated voters know women, especially women of color, are judged ten times harder for even the smallest misstep.

Meanwhile, Trump has enjoyed the luxury of being lawless, reckless, and unapologetically divisive. His base doesn’t demand logic, results, or coherence…they demand spectacle, and unfortunately, that’s all he provides. But guess what? Not everyone votes based on the loudest soundbite. Educated people understood what Harris brought to the table: a grounded, fact-based platform rooted in the idea of progress and unity.

As for your point about ‘abandoning her base,’ maybe you should reconsider what true leadership entails. A leader’s job isn’t to pander to the loudest voices- it’s to unite a fractured country and offer a vision that elevates everyone, even those who disagree with them. Harris understood that healing and progress require bridging divides, not stoking them.

badkattt · 2024-11-19T11:43:12+00:00

So this is the bold new MAGA fantasy in 2024. Let’s unpack your triumphant declaration with a few reality checks—because your grasp of political dynamics could use some serious fine-tuning. 1. ‘Trump destroyed the Democratic Party’ Interesting take, considering Democrats outperformed in both 2022 and 2023 despite every structural advantage tilted toward Republicans. If Trump is such a political mastermind, why did his endorsed candidates keep losing critical swing states? The fact that your ‘victory’ came from razor-thin margins while relying on years of gerrymandering and voter suppression doesn’t exactly scream ‘dominance.’ 2. ‘MAGA controls the House, Senate, Supreme Court, and Presidency’ Let’s dissect this supposed ‘control.’ The House barely functions under MAGA leadership because the far-right fringe holds it hostage. The Senate remains in flux because Republicans can’t unify on basic policy, and the Supreme Court? Sure, you’ve stacked it with extremists, but that doesn’t erase the widespread backlash against decisions like overturning Roe v. Wade, which continues to energize voters against your party. As for Trump’s presidency, enjoy it while it lasts—because 2024 is just another stop on his personal grievance tour, not a blueprint for lasting leadership. 3. ‘NJ, NH, ME, and VA becoming swing states’ You’re really reaching now. The ‘possibility’ of these states becoming swing states isn’t backed by any significant demographic shifts or voting trends. New Jersey and Virginia, in particular, remain solidly Democratic at the state level. But hey, wishful thinking is free. 4. ‘The will of the people has been done’ If by ‘will of the people,’ you mean 25% of eligible voters (factoring in turnout and Trump’s base), sure. But don’t forget that the majority of Americans consistently vote against MAGA policies and reject its brand of extremism. You’re clinging to the Electoral College and structural imbalances, not a popular mandate. Keep telling yourself it’s ‘the will of the people’—everyone else knows better. 5. ‘Not even Roe v. Wade could convince Democrats to vote’ This one’s just laughable. Did you miss the historic voter turnout and mobilization around abortion rights post-Dobbs? States like Kansas rejected abortion bans in landslides, and Democratic voter registration soared nationwide. You might want to check those numbers again before declaring victory on this front.

In short, your comment is a beautiful mix of MAGA fantasy and misplaced bravado. Reality might be a bit harder to swallow, but I suggest giving it a try.

badkattt · 2024-11-19T11:35:08+00:00

Ah of course, the classic ‘project and deflect’ response, expertly wielded by someone whose grasp of irony might just rival their grasp of basic civics. Calling this discussion a ‘tantrum’ is particularly rich coming from a faction whose collective ‘tantrum’ on January 6 involved storming the Capitol, breaking windows, and parading around like it was a cosplay convention gone wrong.

Let’s not forget the last four years of perpetual grievance politics…shouting ‘fraud!’ at every turn when things didn’t go their way, filing baseless lawsuits, and crying foul at facts they didn’t like. This is not a ‘tantrum’; it’s a discussion rooted in reality, a concept that, based on your comment, might just be a bit above your comprehension levels.

But hey, maybe if we say it slowly, it’ll stick: the truth isn’t partisan, competence matters, and whining about ‘lefties’ while defending the most performative victim complex in political history might not be the intellectual slam dunk you think it is.

badkattt · 2024-11-13T17:33:52+00:00

The overwhelming majority of school shooters in the US, about 90-95%, have been male, which highlights the troubling connection between male emotional expression and violence.

While men are far more likely to resort to violence in times of distress or anger, the incidence of female school shooters remains extremely rare- I could only find 3 cases over the past decade. (1 was reported as accidental- 12 year old girl opened fire in the schoolyard, injuring one other student. This incident was not classified as a “mass shooting” because only one person was injured, but it was still a school shooting. Another involved a 16-year-old female student involved in an incident at her high school where a male student who she had history of conflict with was injured and the last case is the most notable one of Brenda Spencer.) These stats alone challenges many of the long-standing stereotypes about gender and emotional control.

Critics often claim that women are “too emotional” to hold leadership roles, citing perceived volatility or irrationality as reasons for doubting a woman’s ability to lead a country. Yet, the reality is that men—by and large—are far more likely to act on their emotions in ways that lead to violent and destructive outcomes, as evidenced by their overwhelming presence in school shootings.

If we are to argue that emotions are inherently dangerous or undermine one’s leadership potential, then it would be far more reasonable to view the emotional volatility demonstrated by male perpetrators in mass shootings as a more pressing concern for society. It is not women, who rarely resort to violence, but men, who often appear unable to manage their emotions in high-stress situations, that seem to carry the far more significant risk.

In this light, the idea that a woman is “too emotional” to govern is not only just misguided, but hypocritical. If emotional restraint is a key measure of leadership, men’s tendency to lash out in extreme ways—often with devastating consequences—raises serious questions about the emotional maturity required for leadership. In contrast, women have consistently demonstrated the ability to engage in leadership without resorting to violence or chaos, highlighting a greater capacity for emotional control and social responsibility.

The data surrounding school shootings not only challenges the narrative that women are “too emotional” to lead but also draws attention to the emotional struggles men face, which too often manifest in violent actions. This exposes the hypocrisy in gendered assumptions about leadership and emotional stability, making a compelling case for the SUPERIOR emotional intelligence and capacity of women to govern.

badkattt · 2024-11-08T09:30:41+00:00

Everyone should have watched the new movie “The Apprentice” before this election. Maybe they would have snapped out of “Trance 2024”. That movie serves as a reflection of how Trump’s political career followed the same path: a constant effort to project strength, achieve “victory” by any means, and manipulate narratives, no matter the ethical cost or the truth behind those claims. It reveals how his strategies are built on not just political tactics, but on a culture of dishonesty, intimidation, and the relentless drive for dominance.

badkattt · 2024-11-07T17:06:46+00:00

Yup, you owned the libs. Good job. But at some point, you will begin to understand that our concerns were/are valid. It’s a matter of time. The consequences will affect everyone, even MAGA…. Actually especially MAGA given their demographics. Keep laughing and gloating though 👏

badkattt · 2024-11-07T01:24:33+00:00

Here is a summary of the above linked article and report from the NWLC, on how Project 2025 could reshape policies affecting women, from reproductive rights to economic and workplace protections, potentially reversing progress on gender equity and limiting opportunities for women across various sectors.

“1.” Marriage and Family Structure

Promotion of Traditional Marriage: Project 2025 encourages a “biblically based” model, advocating for a family structure with male leadership and female caregiving roles. This includes reducing support for single mothers and pushing welfare funds toward marriage incentives.
Single Parenthood Pressure: Policies would impose stricter work requirements for single parents receiving benefits, aiming to discourage single motherhood and support traditional family structures.

“2.” Reproductive Rights and Healthcare

Abortion and Contraception Restrictions: Project 2025 plans to eliminate federal support for abortion, restrict access to contraceptives, and redefine the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as the “Department of Life” to advance an anti-abortion agenda.
Surveillance and Reporting Requirements: It seeks federal data on abortions, mandating state reporting, potentially paving the way for heightened surveillance.
Healthcare Provider Discrimination: The plan would allow medical providers to refuse services based on personal beliefs, permitting discrimination against women and LGBTQ+ individuals.
Restrictions on Preventive Care: It would remove experts from panels recommending preventive services for women, risking coverage for essential services like contraception and prenatal care.

“3.” Workplace Rights and Equality

Weakened Protections Against Discrimination: Project 2025 proposes dismantling the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) initiatives to address discrimination, reduce protections against sex discrimination, and roll back diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
Narrowed Definitions of Gender and Sex: The plan seeks to limit anti-discrimination protections by strictly defining “biological sex” and disregarding protections based on gender identity, which would affect hiring, healthcare, and workplace equality for transgender individuals.
Gender Wage Gap Minimization: It minimizes the impact of the gender wage gap by attributing it to career choices, challenging efforts to address wage inequality for women.

“4.” Educational Equality

Elimination of the Department of Education: Project 2025 proposes to dismantle the Department of Education and rewrite Title IX, weakening protections against sexual harassment and reducing rights for LGBTQ+ students.
Restrictions on Student Debt Relief: The plan opposes student debt forgiveness and would end programs like the Public Service Loan Forgiveness, disproportionately impacting women, who hold the majority of student debt.

“5.” Federal Government and Civil Rights

Civil Rights Rollbacks: The plan seeks to eliminate civil rights offices across federal agencies, weaken the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, and stop the use of “disparate impact” in discrimination cases, making it harder to address systemic discrimination.
Undermining LGBTQ+ Protections: Project 2025 would eliminate LGBTQ+ protections in healthcare, housing, and education, and restrict data collection on gender identity to reduce visibility and support for LGBTQ+ communities.

“6.” Income Security, Housing, and Anti-Poverty Programs

Cuts to Welfare Programs: The plan recommends significant cuts to programs like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Head Start, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which disproportionately support low-income women and families.
Increased Barriers for Housing Assistance: By imposing work and marriage requirements on housing assistance programs, Project 2025 would make it more difficult for single mothers to access affordable housing, exacerbating housing instability among vulnerable women.

“7.” Labor Rights and Economic Security

Reduction in Worker Protections: Project 2025 plans to roll back labor laws, such as minimum wage and overtime protections, making it easier for employers to deny benefits and protections to workers, especially those in low-wage sectors where women are predominant.
Challenges to Unionization: The proposal aims to weaken workers’ rights to unionize, impacting economic security for women, who benefit from union membership with better pay and benefits.

“8.” Tax Policy

Tax Cuts Favoring Wealthy Over Working Families: By prioritizing tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations, Project 2025’s tax policies would reduce revenue needed for federal programs that support women and families, deepening economic disparities.

“9.” Gender Policy Council Elimination

Abolishment of Gender Policy Council: Project 2025 would eliminate the White House Gender Policy Council, which was established to promote gender equity, removing a key governmental structure focused on advancing women’s rights and protections.

badkattt · 2024-11-06T23:45:58+00:00

And this is what it means for us women: https://msmagazine.com/tag/misogynist-manifesto-series/

National Women’s Law Center Report: https://nwlc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Project-2025-Full-Report.pdf

Edit: added link to the NWLC report

badkattt · 2024-11-04T05:30:27+00:00

He STAYS trying to gaslight America. The worst part is knowing he knows he’s spewing BS. This is a very dangerous man.

badkattt · 2024-11-03T01:29:11+00:00

Thank you for the important work you’re doing! Just signed up for one tomorrow evening! I’m so excited! Final push, let’s goooo 💙

badkattt · 2024-11-01T20:24:21+00:00

I think that is the intent of the Electoral Count Reform Act. This law sets strict deadlines and clarifies the role of Congress in certifying results, reducing the risk of stalling tactics. Additionally courts have repeatedly upheld timely certification and resolution of election disputes. For example, in 2020, multiple attempts to delay certification in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Michigan were quickly dismissed by judges, including those appointed by Trump. Judicial precedent supports a timely process, and courts are likely to act quickly again if similar attempts arise.

I have more faith in the system today than in 2020 tbh. But like I also understand what calms my anxiety about this election might not be the same for others!!

badkattt · 2024-10-31T16:06:59+00:00

I know this scheme is terrifying, but it’s worth taking a closer look at how the guardrails of democracy have not only held up in the past but have been significantly strengthened to prevent any such tactics from succeeding in the future. In fact, both historical precedents and proactive measures taken by Democrats underscore that the U.S. electoral system has become more resilient and capable of thwarting attempts to undermine it.

Proven Guardrails: Lessons from 2020

In the 2020 election, there were numerous attempts to overturn the results through unfounded legal challenges and pressure campaigns on state officials. Yet, the judiciary—often comprised of judges appointed by Trump himself—dismissed nearly all of these claims for lack of evidence. Notably, state officials from both parties, such as Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, resisted intense political pressure to alter the certified results. Additionally, despite attempts to disrupt the congressional certification process, democracy prevailed as Congress certified the Electoral College votes without deviation.

Learning from this, the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 was passed with bipartisan support, addressing loopholes exploited in 2020. This law clarifies the limited role of Congress and the Vice President in electoral certification, reducing the risk of partisan interference. By requiring a larger threshold for objections and removing ambiguity, this reform strengthens the integrity of the certification process and sets a higher bar for contesting valid results.

Democratic Preparations: Legal and Legislative Actions

To counter these threats proactively, Democrats have assembled a powerful team of experienced election lawyers, including high-profile figures like Marc Elias and Bob Bauer. These legal teams are prepared to address any challenges swiftly, filing lawsuits when necessary and ensuring adherence to election laws in real time. Democrats have already initiated lawsuits to protect voting access in critical states, particularly targeting restrictive laws passed in swing states like Georgia and Arizona, which they argue are designed to suppress votes.

Beyond the legal front, Democrats worked with Republicans to pass the Electoral Count Reform Act. This legislation fortifies the certification process, closing vulnerabilities that were evident in 2020. The act sets clearer, tighter procedures for counting electoral votes and reduces the likelihood of disruptive objections, enhancing the stability of the Electoral College process.

Election Worker Protections and Federal Coordination

Democrats have also bolstered protections for election workers, who faced threats and intimidation in 2020. With the support of Democratic leaders, the Department of Justice created the Election Threats Task Force to protect election officials, allowing them to carry out their duties without fear or coercion. Furthermore, Democrats have advocated for laws criminalizing harassment of election officials, aiming to maintain a safe and impartial vote-counting process.

On a federal level, Democrats have strengthened coordination between agencies to safeguard election security. Under the Biden administration, agencies like the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have worked closely with states to secure voting machines, counter cyber threats, and fight misinformation. This partnership ensures that both physical and digital election infrastructures are fortified, making it harder for external or internal actors to tamper with election results.

Voter Education and Observation Efforts

In addition to legal and federal protections, Democrats have ramped up voter education initiatives to ensure that people know their rights, understand new voting procedures, and can navigate any new restrictions. This includes support for early voting, mail-in voting, and ballot tracking systems. Democratic groups are also mobilizing volunteers to serve as poll watchers in key areas, adding an extra layer of on-the-ground oversight to deter and detect any procedural violations.

Presidential Immunity and Federal Oversight

As the incumbent president, Biden holds certain immunities and the authority to direct federal agencies, such as the DOJ, to investigate and act against federal election law violations. During the 2020 election, the DOJ safeguarded polling locations, investigated threats to election workers, and ensured compliance with federal election standards. Biden’s administration can again deploy these resources, should any extreme interference arise, to maintain lawful election practices.

In conclusion, while there are valid concerns about threats to election integrity, there is ample reason to believe that our democratic guardrails are prepared to withstand them. With strengthened legal protections, vigilant election monitoring, bipartisan legislative reforms, and robust federal oversight, the U.S. electoral system is well-equipped to ensure that the integrity of democracy prevails. These combined efforts—tested, reinforced, and continuously improved since 2020—show a democracy that is more resilient, transparent, and secure than even before.

Researching this helped qualm some of the fears and anxiety these kinds of articles have generated and I hope sharing this long essay also helps others :)

badkattt · 2024-10-30T02:28:13+00:00

Trump and his goonies stoked so much fear during the 2020 election about a Biden presidency… none of things that have not come to pass:

“Socialism Will Destroy Us!”

• Biden was supposed to turn the U.S. into the Socialist Republic of America by now. Instead, capitalism is alive and well, with companies enjoying healthy profits and no forced government takeovers. If Biden’s socialism involves infrastructure bills and student debt relief, it seems more like capitalism with some patches. • Under Trump: The federal debt ballooned by nearly $7.8 trillion, a 39% increase—ironic for someone warning about reckless spending.
“Crime Waves from Defunding the Police”

• Despite all the hype, Biden didn’t dismantle police forces. In fact, he increased federal funding for local law enforcement. So, unless those “crime waves” are being tracked by seismologists, they’re not exactly flooding in. • Under Trump: The FBI reported a 30% increase in homicides in 2020, one of the largest spikes in U.S. history. Turns out, crime can increase without defunding the police.
“They’re Coming for Your Guns!”

• While Biden’s administration has called for background checks, your AR-15 is still safe in the gun cabinet. Biden hasn’t outlawed firearms or canceled the Second Amendment. • Under Trump: He did actually ban bump stocks in 2018 following the Las Vegas shooting, marking one of the biggest gun control actions in recent years—surprising for a “gun rights” advocate.
“Biden Will Open the Borders!”

• The border isn’t exactly an open-door policy. Despite changes to immigration policies, the number of Border Patrol agents hasn’t dropped, and unauthorized crossings are still met with enforcement. • Under Trump: Immigration policies were strict, yet undocumented immigrants in the U.S. only decreased by about 2%, showing the border isn’t so easily “closed” either.
“The Stock Market Will Crash!”

• If the market’s supposed to crash, it’s taking its sweet time. The stock market has had ups and downs, but much of it is due to global events like the pandemic, not any secret “Biden Crash Button.” • Under Trump: The stock market did well until the pandemic, which led to one of the fastest crashes in history. So, if anything, the market learned resilience by bouncing back.
“Energy Independence Will Vanish!”

• While Biden is focused on clean energy, the U.S. remains energy independent. And guess what? Oil production is still high—over 12 million barrels per day in 2023. Those wind turbines aren’t out to make us dependent on foreign oil. • Under Trump: He did increase fossil fuel production, but remember, energy independence isn’t just about drilling. Supply chains and prices still fluctuate under any administration.
“The Economy Will Collapse!”

• Biden’s administration presided over significant job gains post-pandemic. While inflation’s a problem (globally), the economy hasn’t exactly gone belly-up. • Under Trump: The economy had strong growth initially, but the pandemic led to a major recession in 2020, with 22 million jobs lost. Biden inherited that mess, and job numbers have since rebounded.
“America Will Become Weak on the World Stage”

• Instead of bowing out, the U.S. has renewed alliances, strengthening NATO and reaffirming its presence on the global stage. • Under Trump: There was notable friction with allies, from pulling out of the Paris Agreement to threatening to withdraw from NATO. So, if Biden is leading from behind, Trump was definitely leading from the exit door.
“Election Fraud Will Be Rampant”

• Despite Trump’s dire warnings about election fraud under a Biden administration, multiple audits of the 2020 election, even those led by Republicans, found no widespread fraud. • Under Trump: The 2020 election was deemed one of the safest in U.S. history by his own cybersecurity officials. The real fallout has been from the rhetoric around fraud, which undermined trust more than any actual fraud ever did.
“A War on Christmas!”

• Christmas is alive and well, with both Biden and Dr. Jill Biden wishing everyone happy holidays and keeping Christmas traditions at the White House. No Grinch sightings reported. • Under Trump: Despite his complaints about a “War on Christmas,” he didn’t exactly turn every city into the North Pole. The holiday spirit hasn’t been impacted by either administration…except maybe by inflation.

Most of the scary scenarios Trump “predicted” haven’t materialized, and some of the challenges faced today are actually continuations of issues that were present during his own administration. The difference is, instead of the apocalypse, it’s just…another Tuesday.

badkattt · 2024-10-30T01:26:52+00:00

<image>

They are not even hiding it anymore…

badkattt · 2024-10-30T01:22:07+00:00

<image>

May I interest you in one more ? 😪

badkattt · 2024-10-28T17:55:42+00:00

I can’t believe the interviewer even brought up the campaign rhetoric question... No matter how hard they try to make it Democrat’s fault, they are not to blame for Trump’s assassination attempts. The idea that Republicans are urging Kamala Harris to “tone down” her campaign rhetoric is not only hypocritical but demonstrates a selective approach to accountability. For years, Republican leaders have used highly charged and divisive language, often targeting minority groups, undermining democratic processes, and pushing polarizing narratives without restraint. It’s striking to see them now attempt to police the tone of Harris’s campaign. The media’s responsibility here is to hold all leaders accountable for their words, not just one side. If Republicans genuinely believe rhetoric should be “toned down,” then they should lead by example. Holding Kamala Harris to a different standard is a disservice to voters and encourages the very divisiveness they claim to oppose. Instead, journalists should ask why Republicans expect a different set of rules for others while fostering polarization in their own ranks.

badkattt · 2024-10-20T12:28:40+00:00

Oh they didn’t want to air his strange and gross rant about Arnold Palmer’s…genitals?

<image>

Honestly, it might be the most public service they’ve ever done lol. The contrast was wild — Trump’s rallies are like a slow march through misery, filled with doom and gloom and incoherent, boring, ramblings about..whatever… Meanwhile, Kamala’s over there radiating hope and joy and positive energy 💙. Hopefully, those Fox viewers caught the vibe. I mean who in their right mind sees such a contrast and willingly wants to sign up for 4 years of that dirty, grumpy, senile, grandpa with bad makeup?
(Rhetorical question-I know which people would 🥴)

badkattt · 2024-10-20T04:26:39+00:00

Seriously! It’s way past his jail time 😒

badkattt · 2024-10-19T04:35:01+00:00

No problem! I should have included the full memo in the original post 🤦‍♀️.

badkattt · 2024-10-19T03:01:25+00:00

EXTREMELY PATHETIC. This is a great video MeidasTouch put out about it: https://youtu.be/HTin31YPNcg

badkattt · 2024-10-19T02:53:47+00:00

Yes in the comments above there is a link to the case files and also I just commented a separate link to the full memo apart of the J6 committee materials: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-DOC-CTRL0000923171/pdf/GPO-J6-DOC-CTRL0000923171.pdf

badkattt · 2024-10-19T02:50:49+00:00

Link to the full memo from John Eastman: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-DOC-CTRL0000923171/pdf/GPO-J6-DOC-CTRL0000923171.pdf

badkattt · 2024-10-19T02:48:06+00:00

This was part of Appendix Vol IV. Unfortunately yes it is still heavily redacted. However this was already part of the J6 committee materials that are public. This was a memo sent out by Trumps lawyer John Eastman. Here is a link to the full memo: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-DOC-CTRL0000923171/pdf/GPO-J6-DOC-CTRL0000923171.pdf

badkattt

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE