KJK supports Trump

[NefertitiV]

After the Trump verdict today, KJK retweeted three supportive tweets to her timeline, including one from US ex-Fox host Megyn Kelly that says "Guilty on all counts. The country is disgraced. Alvin Bragg should be disbarred. They will rue the day they released this lawfare to corrupt a presidential election."

Another tweet makes fun of President Biden's stutter.

This is someone currently up for election herself. Given her recent remarks about barring rentals to all trans people, and the fact she has received funding from US conservative political groups, does this concern you?

That’s a good list of misogynists KJK could have stood against. I wonder why she didn’t

@Sloejelly so essentially you’d support trump ?
What’s your opinion on climate change ? For me that’s the biggest concern and will affect my kids more than anything else long after I’m dead. He’ll overturn any progress made and some. I’m petrified he’ll win purely because of that.

You can only run against one. She tried one on that list but he was deselected. She is now trying another.

What has Biden done on that front?

One women’s rights Trump is ahead of Biden.

Good grief we're up the uk , what has trump got to do with anything.
I'm more worried about Keir Starmer, Ed Davey . The SNP, Welsh Labour and which ever loon had got control of the greens clown car.

Jess Phillips may be many things but I don’t think she’s a misogynist. Do you?

She is on the list you linked asking why KJK wasn’t running against. She also seems to not understand what a woman is and without that fundamental understanding there can be no women’s rights.

She was. Others were on there several times. Others vociferously campaign to actively erode women’s rights. Why not them?

No idea. I think Jess Philips is an odd choice too.

What else has anyone here got to base their criticism/opinion of your posts on, other than how you choose to word those posts?

It's literally an anonymous forum.

Their response to requests to explain what they meant more clearly is very telling as to whether a poster is actually interested in others' opinion or just wants a bunfight.

People that genuinely want to discuss something and maybe learn something usually welcome the opportunity to refine their definitions and arguments.

People who don't tend to reply with things like 'read the op, it's not difficult'.

Actually, I don't think that at all. I did post earlier about some things I like about her. She is clearly a strong person.

She is behind Self ID and hates that women can annul their marriage if their husbands declare them both as 'lesbians' because they are now two women married to each other. She'd have them forced into that marriage if she could.

She is perfect to go up against so that KJK can question her at hustings.

That's the point of all this. Not to actually win a seat. But to get sunlight onto the issues.

I don't see any of the pure feminists standing as independents or getting their shit together to create a new party to do the same.

@CassieMaddox

People start threads or post on threads when they have things to discuss. I scroll through gazillions of threads I don't post on, either because other posters are saying what I would or I'm learning and have nothing to contribute.

You can't really project someone's interests from the threads they've started.

If one is interested in KJK and how she operates, what that says about politics generally about the rising influence of the American right in the English speaking world (I am too) this is the only place you stand half a chance of finding other posters to discuss it with.

Exactly - I rarely start threads. I post more often than that, but even that isn't too frequent. I read much more than I post. My username is changed every few months or so, so while it might seem I'm hyper-focused on a particular subject, it's likely only for that particular window of time.

Well there you go. Seems apt

Are you not able to access Twitter for yourself? Tweets are not the easiest to copy directly in any case.

Is that so? Oh dear.

Tweets are not the easiest to copy directly in any case.

Do you really not know how screenshots work?

Thank you. That would make her a good choice then.

@AstonScrapingsNameChange

People that genuinely want to discuss something and maybe learn something usually welcome the opportunity to refine their definitions and arguments.

Did you read through the number of posts that particular poster made? I answered them all, but in end, I felt they tended to nit-picking. There was little helpful there.

Sure. I could have put 3 images in. I didn't think of that. Would I have been criticised for that? Probably.

This is a diversion and irrelevant to the thread about KJK and Trump.
To answer OPs question, some posters aren't concerned. Fair enough. Some appear to be in denial mode which is interesting. Some are concerned. Fair enough.

Some seem to give a large amount of head space to KJK.

Many don’t, plus think she does a good job at keeping people talking about the issue. All these threads and posts

I don't think that's a fair assessment of her concerns about spousal veto.
I think its more to do with an ability of a spouse to block transition- which is also a massive infringement of someone's human rights.
The clause needs changed, that is clear.

KJK is a knob for standing against JP - she's one of the most vocal proponents of women's rights out there. It looks like click baity alt right activism rather than a genuine desire to support women.

Spouses can't block transition. Anyone can transition, they don't need a spouse's consent.

Which is why the term spousal veto was a complete misrepresentation. No-one can veto a man who wants to identify as a woman.

Yes you answered them. Disingenuously. You say you have an academic interest but that isn’t true. It’s not “nit-picking” it’s pointing out your lack of consistency throughout your thread.