this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
506 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2825 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

By the time this election rolled around, Moms for Liberty seemed to have already realized their brand had become poisonous. As the Daily Beast reported, "In 2021, Moms for Liberty claimed credit for 33 seats in Bucks County," but in this election cycle, the group "endorsed only a single candidate in the county." The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that some Republican candidates wanted the group to keep its distance, fearful of the taint. And that was my sense of things in the Pennridge district this fall. School board members who had links to Moms for Liberty tried to downplay it and ended up getting outed by investigators from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

all 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] krayj 115 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There were two races in my local school district that I just voted on. I don't even have kids of my own, but it's important to me that the next generation gets the best education possible. Since I didn't know any of the candidates, I was digging up their backgrounds and endorsements and a couple of them were proudly affiliated with "Moms for Liberty"...and that is an automatic 'nope' from me. That group is a toxin with a carefully chose name to sound reasonable. They aren't.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good for the community, too. It takes a village to get rid of that astroturf group.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago

On god dude. Adults w/o kids should consider investing in the next generation, especially when your investment is actually just you weighing in on governance.

You’re gonna be an old fart with lots of needs very soon and the grand majority (maybe not, idk how close things are after boomer pop resides) are gonna be younger and your decisions, like it or not, made them in some part who they are

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Sure is. Better for the kids even

[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They sure seemed like it. They were caught quoting Hitler in one of their "liberty" newsletters and then couldn't believe anyone had an issue with it. If you are quoting the leader of the Nazi party you might be Nazis...

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Meanwhile in my hometown one of their supporters got elected the other day

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago

This group answers the question: "what if a bunch of total Karens pined for the ability to form a death squad"?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

https://www.livevoterturnout.com/ENR/lehighpaenr/6/en/Index_6.html

I was looking through the winners and was wondering what DAR meant?

We have to make sure we vote locally, because that's how the GOP are trying to pass their agenda, especially for judges , DA and so on.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think it might be Democrat and republican. According this article, at least one of them won both parties nominations. And it only shows up when there's a single candidate.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That's Gavin Holihan, he won both party's primaries somehow.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago

That's right Repubs be scared of Mom's (for Liberty) taint lol

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

Finally my district makes the news for a good reason. Fully expect there are going to be some corruption revelations in the coming weeks with the board flipping.

Our superintendent was given a new contract weeks before the election, that made him the highest paid super in the state.

The contract stipulates that if he's fired he's still owed his whole salary. He was very buddy buddy with the local Moms for Hilter branch.

The previous Republican board also hired a conservative law firm to issue a report against the ACLU threatening to sure the district over their behavior.

They spent at least $50,000 without a public vote, which is a blatant violation of state law. Then they spent a further $1.4 million on that law firm.

We're still probably going to get sued and lose.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (5 children)

IANAA, are they rabid Trump fans?

[–] [email protected] 72 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Moms for Liberty, a heavily funded astroturf organization linked to GOP leadership, wasn't especially subtle in its strategies, pinpointing a handful of swing districts in purple states, like Virginia and Pennsylvania, and targeting school board elections, which are usually low turnout and easy to win. Once installed, Moms for Liberty members started banning books and Pride flags, as well as protesting that teachers were "grooming" kids with "smut," which usually meant either a history book or acclaimed, age-appropriate fiction. The idea was to create moral panics around sex and race that could tip national elections towards Republicans.

From the article.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I read that too, but still wasn't sure... though I guess there's a ton of belief overlap that makes it obvious

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago

Pretty much. They came to Rio Rancho and were cussed out for even showing up. Something similar happened in Albuquerque as well. Except they weren't considered a far right extremist organization by the southern poverty law center at the he time.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moms_for_Liberty

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago

They’re more about banning books and rewriting history. I’m sure there’s overlap with being a Trump fan but I don’t think Trump is necessarily what it’s about. They’re trying to brainwash kids to think slavery is good and gays don’t exist and nonsense like that

[–] Socsa 5 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

They're openly Hitler fans.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

You and me both honey.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

some Republican candidates wanted the group to keep its distance, fearful of the taint.

LOL