What rhetoric is that? He's a felon. He questioned Harris' racial identity during the campaign. He claimed at numerous rallies that boys would come home from school as girls without their parents knowledge.
It is rhetoric that tries to paint the picture that his supporters must be racist and transphobic, or at the very least tries to create a chilling effect where people are afraid to come out in his support for fear of being labelled as such.
> He questioned Harris' racial identity during the campaign.
It was an obvious jab at the identity politics of the democratic party. Besides - regardless of how stupid it is - questioning someone's racial identity does not make one a racist.
> He claimed at numerous rallies that boys would come home from school as girls without their parents knowledge.
I'm sure he means that literally and there's clearly no explanation for wanting to ban the promotion of sex-reassignment to children other than being transphobic.
Look, I don't like the man either and I'm nowhere near what he represents politically, but these attacks are ridiculously transparent to me and anyone who isn't so overjoyed to swallow them as truth they've become completely blind. It's fooling nobody but the already fooled. To everyone else it's actively off-putting.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/president-trumps-plan-...
I agree that you can’t generalise, since there are many voters who are simply not aware of positions / policy like the above. Having said that there are plenty who are, and they love to troll by saying the bad part out loud then dissembling through hand waving or claims of irony or victimhood.
Off-topic rant… I’ve seen identity politics mentioned over and over again the past 24 hrs. I don’t know what the definition is, but promising to dismantle the legal and medical apparatus surrounding an entire identity sure looks like identity politics to me. And personally, the only time I am exposed to any form of identity politics is when I see conservatives screeching about the topic whilst espousing heavily political opinions on why they don’t like certain identities.
That policy clearly and specifically targets children from a medical perspective, not an "entire identity".
You could say arguing the government will only recognise two genders or ban people born men from womens sports is transphobic, but it seems a weak position. The policy doesn't do anything to adult trans people that I can see, beyond the sports element.
The summary appears to be "adults can make these decisions, not kids", which a few years ago was seen as a fairly moderate position.
It is fine to say: "I think his policy is transphobic.". Do not say or imply: "If you support Trump, you must be fine with his transphobia."
Not only is the latter a disrespectful way to have a political discussion, it's also likely to backfire once people are in the voting booth. It is especially likely to backfire if people take the time to actually look at his position and find it to be moderate.
Logically those groups are racist transphobic and misogynistic support Trump. It's factual because it's logical.
In fact, I would much rather prefer conservatives go back to saying slurs. I'd much rather hear 'whore' or 'slut' than having policies to chase women out of state for getting a legal abortion.
I'd much rather hear 'fa*got' than have PrEP coverage revoked causing another HIV epidemic.
I'd much rather hear 'tr*ny' than have even more transgender people kill themselves.
Conservatives desire an ideal argumentative perspective where they can actively harm others and claim they didn't cause the consequences. It doesn't work that way. If you support an action and are aware of the consequences, you support the consequences.
MLK was arrested and convicted many times. Mandela spend decades is jail. Navalny was convicted and ultimately killed in jail.
When the government is after you for your political activity, such convictions don't count for much.
> He questioned Harris' racial identity during the campaign
When a candidate was selected for the office for belonging to certain race and gender [0], and bases political messaging on racial identity [1], I think it makes it quite valid for questioning.
[0]: https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/28/politics/joe-biden-potential-...
[1]: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/turning-page-...
The "actual truth" of the matter does not matter today -- the perception is truly that he is a god-like hero, come to save the masses from the oppression of the elite.