Author Topic: USA Politics Thread |OT| Son of a bitch!  (Read 317696 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
http://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1376649057775587332

Fuck Arkansas. This is not only abhorrent, it's a waste of tax dollars, because this shit will get them litigated all the way to SCOTUS, and even they won't sit for this.
The tweet is deliberately misleading, Arkansas is not banning "health care" as in resetting broken bones or suturing of wounds, it is banning genital reassignment surgeries on those under 18. While we maybe can quibble about the age it's entirely defensible as children cannot consent to what is a permanently life-altering and scarring procedure that can wait a couple years until they're an adult. I'm pretty sure this 6-3 Supreme Court is not going to rule that states can't outlaw this for children.

Except transgendered youths will have a more effective transition if they’re able to start before their default hormones make their usual changes. Disallowing them the personal choice of starting when they like damages their ability to pass. It’s also disregarding the concept of gender reassignment surgery as “health care,” just as laws against same sex intercourse deligitimize LGBTQA rights.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
http://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1376649057775587332

Fuck Arkansas. This is not only abhorrent, it's a waste of tax dollars, because this shit will get them litigated all the way to SCOTUS, and even they won't sit for this.
The tweet is deliberately misleading, Arkansas is not banning "health care" as in resetting broken bones or suturing of wounds, it is banning genital reassignment surgeries on those under 18. While we maybe can quibble about the age it's entirely defensible as children cannot consent to what is a permanently life-altering and scarring procedure that can wait a couple years until they're an adult. I'm pretty sure this 6-3 Supreme Court is not going to rule that states can't outlaw this for children.

Except transgendered youths will have a more effective transition if they’re able to start before their default hormones make their usual changes. Disallowing them the personal choice of starting when they like damages their ability to pass. It’s also disregarding the concept of gender reassignment surgery as “health care,” just as laws against same sex intercourse deligitimize LGBTQA rights.

Gender dysphoria was declassified as a disorder - and correspondingly being automatically covered by things like health insurance, or having diagnostic criteria - as a result of activists fighting in favour of self certification and equating it to an attempt at relitigating homosexuality as a psychological disorder, and labelling those who consider it a primarily medical condition with a known treatment "truscum".

I would suggest the underlying issue here is semantic; someone with severe gender dysphoria should not be denied treatment, but they are also not in the same position as a 40 year old man with a wife and kids who just 'realised' they're actually trans now and want to opt into being a member of a protected class based on self identification as such, and having no symptoms (or even desire) for any treatment or alteration.

e: if I'm honest, the entire concept of being able to 'opt in' into a proected class makes a mockery of the entire concept of protected classes, because the reason protected classes exist is that people in them would happily not be in them if they had the choice, which they do not.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
People should just be able to do what they want with their bodies. If you want to be orange, plastic 60 year old action man or an obese bus driver wearing a jump suit more power to you  :maduro
🤴

Transhuman

  • youtu.be/KCVCmGPgJS0
  • Senior Member
http://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1376649057775587332

Fuck Arkansas. This is not only abhorrent, it's a waste of tax dollars, because this shit will get them litigated all the way to SCOTUS, and even they won't sit for this.
The tweet is deliberately misleading, Arkansas is not banning "health care" as in resetting broken bones or suturing of wounds, it is banning genital reassignment surgeries on those under 18. While we maybe can quibble about the age it's entirely defensible as children cannot consent to what is a permanently life-altering and scarring procedure that can wait a couple years until they're an adult. I'm pretty sure this 6-3 Supreme Court is not going to rule that states can't outlaw this for children.

Having my cock sliced off wouldn't be that life-altering.

 :fbm

And yeah the tweet is misleading but only to a layperson. Anyone who follows ACLU on twitter probably knew what they actually meant.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2021, 12:24:53 PM by Transhuman »

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Except transgendered youths will have a more effective transition if they’re able to start before their default hormones make their usual changes. Disallowing them the personal choice of starting when they like damages their ability to pass. It’s also disregarding the concept of gender reassignment surgery as “health care,” just as laws against same sex intercourse deligitimize LGBTQA rights.

Gender dysphoria was declassified as a disorder - and correspondingly being automatically covered by things like health insurance, or having diagnostic criteria - as a result of activists fighting in favour of self certification and equating it to an attempt at relitigating homosexuality as a psychological disorder, and labelling those who consider it a primarily medical condition with a known treatment "truscum".

I would suggest the underlying issue here is semantic; someone with severe gender dysphoria should not be denied treatment, but they are also not in the same position as a 40 year old man with a wife and kids who just 'realised' they're actually trans now and want to opt into being a member of a protected class based on self identification as such, and having no symptoms (or even desire) for any treatment or alteration.
Who cares what consenting adults want to do? "It's for the freakin' children" doesn't mean much when it's adults wanting to stunt the growth of and inflict permanent wounds on children.

If they want to still do it when they become of age, who gives a shit, have fun. You can't do it to kids on the whim of adults though. The "actual underlying issue" is a fundamental disagreement as to whether or not it helps the children to do any of this to them when they're still young.

For the record further, social transitioning is not made illegal by the bill, only medical barbarism.

Transhuman

  • youtu.be/KCVCmGPgJS0
  • Senior Member
Pretty sure it's the kids wanting it done

BIONIC

  • Virgo. Live Music. The Office. Tacos. Fur mom. True crime junkie. INTJ.
  • Senior Member
Pretty sure it's the kids wanting it done

Kids are dumb tho

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Adults are also dumb  :morans
[close]
Margs

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
I wanted LEGO and video games as a kid they want *checks notes* gender reassignment surgery. Times change :trumps
🤴

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Who cares what consenting adults want to do? "It's for the freakin' children" doesn't mean much when it's adults wanting to stunt the growth of and inflict permanent wounds on children.

If they want to still do it when they become of age, who gives a shit, have fun. You can't do it to kids on the whim of adults though. The "actual underlying issue" is a fundamental disagreement as to whether or not it helps the children to do any of this to them when they're still young.

For the record further, social transitioning is not made illegal by the bill, only medical barbarism.

You're right, but as its adults who are doing the lobbying and making the laws, and the arguments on both sides of the issues are being made by adults, often pursuing their own agendas as to what they think is right or wrong, I think being clear about definitions and what is being discussed is a necessary first step to at least bring some objectivity to the debate.
The fact that the debate is so politicised that there is a chilling effect on research being done does not help things either.

Age of consent in general is a clumsy barometer of individual readiness as it is; people develop at different rates, physically and psychologically. Its a highly nuanced topic, and while I can believe there are teenagers who are fully aware of their own identity and do in fact suffer some harm by legislation being made that arbitrarily makes them wait to become what they already are, there are also teenagers who just do not know and are generally confused and can be pushed into ultimately harmful and if not completely irreversible more difficult to reverse medical procedures as a result of various pressures, which is why I personally feel erring on the side of caution is probably the route of least harm.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
legislation being made that arbitrarily makes them wait to become what they already are
🤴

BIONIC

  • Virgo. Live Music. The Office. Tacos. Fur mom. True crime junkie. INTJ.
  • Senior Member
Major side eye at all the sus Harry Potter fans in this topic  :social2
Margs

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Harry Potter :nope
🤴


Skullfuckers Anonymous

  • Will hunt bullies for fruit baskets. PM for details.
  • Senior Member

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Expecto patronum ;)

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
While I suspect Arkansas is just trying to fuck with people, permanent life and body altering surgery before adulthood is probably not a good idea.

There are cases where trans people who had surgery as adults went back to living as their original gender. If the choice is that difficult for adults, then children should probably wait.

I used to work with someone where this happened: they had transitioned to being a woman and a few years later decided to transition back to being a man.  I imagine it must’ve been quite a difficult experience.

I know there are kids that know absolutely what they want and how they feel, but I also know there are plenty that aren’t sure of anything in their lives or how they feel about themselves, and that thought has always given me concern about letting children begin transitioning, especially if ideologically driven parents were to be involved (probably not common but I’m sure there are those types out there).

Not that I think they shouldn’t have the option to do so, but it has been one of those thoughts that’s stuck in my mind for a long time.

james

  • Donate to the JAMES FUND
  • Senior Member
Major side eye at all the sus Harry Potter fans in this topic  :social2

How did you get ahead of the news?

Who do you know and when did you know it
:O

team filler

  • filler
  • filler
qanon intel heard gaetz and mixed it up with gates  :info
*****

james

  • Donate to the JAMES FUND
  • Senior Member
I think this is real but cant actually tell

https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/1378510006190895105
:O

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
I think this is real but cant actually tell
Quote
“For years the Radical Left Democrats have played dirty by boycotting products when anything from that company is done or stated in any way that offends them. Now they are going big time with the WOKE CANCEL CULTURE and our sacred elections,” Trump said in a statement on Saturday released by Save America PAC.

He then called for Republicans to "fight back" alleging that "we have more people than they do,"and urged  conservatives to boycott specific companies including Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines and Citigroup.

“It is finally time for Republicans and Conservatives to fight back— we have more people than they do— by far! Boycott Major League Baseball, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, JPMorgan Chase, ViacomCBS, Citigroup, Cisco, UPS and Merck. Don’t go back to their products until they relent. We can play a better game than them,” he said. 

He then repeated unproven claims that the 2020 election had been ‘rigged’ against him.

"They rigged and stole our 2020 Presidential Election, which we won by a landslide, and then, on top of that, boycott and scare companies into submission. Never submit, never give up! The Radical Left will destroy our Country if we let them. We will not become a Socialist Nation. Happy Easter!" the former president wrote.
WOKE CANCEL CULTURE
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Happy Easter!
[close]

Transhuman

  • youtu.be/KCVCmGPgJS0
  • Senior Member

BIONIC

  • Virgo. Live Music. The Office. Tacos. Fur mom. True crime junkie. INTJ.
  • Senior Member
Major side eye at all the sus Harry Potter fans in this topic  :social2

How did you get ahead of the news?

Who do you know and when did you know it

LIKE this post and SUBSCRIBE to team filler’s newsletter to find out!
Margs

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Dr Pepper still supports America :salute
©@©™

Thirty-Ought-Six

  • Junior Member
Pretty sure it's the kids wanting it done


In this case, almost by definition they can't give informed consent.

Many of the potential effects are impossible to understand as a kid. If you get early puberty blocking drugs, there is no way you can truly understand the risk of reduced or eliminated sexual function 15 years later. For a natal boy, the drugs can prevent genital growth, which is doubly dangerous because it means there isn't enough tissue for the most effective surgeries if that ended up being the plan, and also means reduced or eliminated sexual function if you decide against surgery. And indeed, many trans adults don't want surgery on their functional genitals at all; it shouldn't be assumed they will.

Similarly, it is hard to argue that kids can truly understand the implications of sterilization when that is part of a procedure.

There is also very little research on how the drugs affect the brain.

Although the effects of the hormones are permanent, the claim is always that puberty blockers are reversible. This is the biggest thing that makes me skeptical, because it is clearly a lie. There isn't enough research to come anywhere near saying it is reversible as it is used in these circumstances (the research is on younger children given blockers, not on how it affects people through their teens physically and mentally). Moreover, once you start with puberty blockers, you are virtually guaranteed to continue to the permanent hormones, so the "reversible" claim is disingenuous. On the contrary, it could easily be argued that the puberty blockers put you into a suspended state where you never obtain the ability to give informed consent, because you never learn what you would be risking.

Given that the blatant lie about "reversibility" is present everywhere I look on this subject, it makes it seem likely that kids are also lied to when they are considering starting the procedure.

That said, the argument on the other side is that the benefits (such as potentially preventing suicide, and the effect on adult appearance) are so overwhelming that they outweigh informed consent and all the risks, and that can't be dismissed. It is an impossible dilemma especially with the lack of research.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
What is needed is better education on the pro's and cons of such endeavors.

But because those advocating for gender fluidity are pushing for this to become 'normal' and see any form of criticism as a threat and those pushing against it will use the bad outcomes for their own agenda, neither side is going to do that.
🤴

Skullfuckers Anonymous

  • Will hunt bullies for fruit baskets. PM for details.
  • Senior Member
Sure we might have a vaccine rollout plan and our country is no longer a laughing stock, but this is far too big of a cost.

https://mobile.twitter.com/EARTH3R/status/1378109499513348096


Transhuman

  • youtu.be/KCVCmGPgJS0
  • Senior Member
Pretty sure it's the kids wanting it done


In this case, almost by definition they can't give informed consent.

Many of the potential effects are impossible to understand as a kid. If you get early puberty blocking drugs, there is no way you can truly understand the risk of reduced or eliminated sexual function 15 years later. For a natal boy, the drugs can prevent genital growth, which is doubly dangerous because it means there isn't enough tissue for the most effective surgeries if that ended up being the plan, and also means reduced or eliminated sexual function if you decide against surgery. And indeed, many trans adults don't want surgery on their functional genitals at all; it shouldn't be assumed they will.

Similarly, it is hard to argue that kids can truly understand the implications of sterilization when that is part of a procedure.

There is also very little research on how the drugs affect the brain.

Although the effects of the hormones are permanent, the claim is always that puberty blockers are reversible. This is the biggest thing that makes me skeptical, because it is clearly a lie. There isn't enough research to come anywhere near saying it is reversible as it is used in these circumstances (the research is on younger children given blockers, not on how it affects people through their teens physically and mentally). Moreover, once you start with puberty blockers, you are virtually guaranteed to continue to the permanent hormones, so the "reversible" claim is disingenuous. On the contrary, it could easily be argued that the puberty blockers put you into a suspended state where you never obtain the ability to give informed consent, because you never learn what you would be risking.

Given that the blatant lie about "reversibility" is present everywhere I look on this subject, it makes it seem likely that kids are also lied to when they are considering starting the procedure.

That said, the argument on the other side is that the benefits (such as potentially preventing suicide, and the effect on adult appearance) are so overwhelming that they outweigh informed consent and all the risks, and that can't be dismissed. It is an impossible dilemma especially with the lack of research.

At the end of the day it comes down to whether a person views the surgery as necessary or not, and if 2% regret it that still leaves 98% who don't.

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
And comes down to a decision between the people affected and their doctors and not people on the internet talking about mutilations or anti-LGBTQ politicians using the issue as a faultline.  It's one of those things that if you just let the issue be the community will figure out the answer themselves and in a decade or two people will forget this was ever a thing.   

Thirty-Ought-Six

  • Junior Member
At the end of the day it comes down to whether a person views the surgery as necessary or not, and if 2% regret it that still leaves 98% who don't.

"Regret" doesn't cover everything here. A 12 year old can't really understand how to feel about their sexual function or fertility 20 years down the line, and they won't ever know any alternative. Nor will they ever know an alternative between starting treatment at, say, 11 compared to 14. And there is little research on the long term, or on children starting treatment very early and continuing for years. But I do agree that, given the current state of knowledge, low rates of regret are a strong argument against laws like in Arkansas.


And comes down to a decision between the people affected and their doctors and not people on the internet talking about mutilations or anti-LGBTQ politicians using the issue as a faultline.  It's one of those things that if you just let the issue be the community will figure out the answer themselves and in a decade or two people will forget this was ever a thing.


That's why I think the biggest thing to avoid is a chilling effect, which comes from the anti-LGBTQ politicians, but also from those who consider anything but uncritical support to be an enemy.

Studies have found that the kids themselves are doubtful about whether they can understand the long term ramifications of their choice, even though they agree on the necessity of the treatment's availability.

They don't need uncritical support for a given procedure, they need it to be looked at scientifically, with an eye toward both the risks and the benefits, so they can be given the best possible answers. Obviously, this is not going to come from anti-LGBTQ politicians and laws like this one. It's a bad law. But some of the concerns expressed are legitimate, and some are shared by the kids themselves.

I think it is "better" in some sense to be forthright about the lack of informed consent, the lack of knowledge about psychological effects, the risk to sexual function and effectiveness of transition, etc, even if you strongly believe it is still worthwhile. If nothing else, it just creates a climate for better science.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Kids want Mario one day and Fortnite the next.
Childrens menu's always have one option because decision making is difficult for them.

I say let them be kids until they're old enough to understand. I imagine a childhood of hormone therapy and gender surgery is terrible and a ruined childhood scars you forever.
🤴

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56639088

Google v Oracle: Supreme Court declares Google's code copying fair

Tasty

  • Senior Member
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56639088

Google v Oracle: Supreme Court declares Google's code copying fair

Even if I've become warier of Google lately, this is an absolutely fantastic ruling for every software developer. Get fucked Oracle, you evil empire pieces of shit.

The ruling itself is actually pretty limited in scope and very well-reasoned IMO. About a dozen pages into the ruling PDF right now.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf

MPAA: "This will mean the end of copyright and piracy will increase 10,000%!!!!" Lololololol

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Quote
“If Google’s unprecedented approach to transformation were to become the law, a producer who makes an unauthorized feature film of the hit TV series Game of Thrones (HBO 2011) could claim that the use was new, innovative, and socially valuable, and therefore a transformative fair use—a preposterous legal position.”

- The Motion Picture Association of America

:mindblown :confused :wtf :sabu :dead

Lol get fucked :ufup

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56639088

Google v Oracle: Supreme Court declares Google's code copying fair

Jesus Christ, it only took a fucking decade to get to the final decision that interoperability is not theft

Tasty

  • Senior Member
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56639088

Google v Oracle: Supreme Court declares Google's code copying fair

Jesus Christ, it only took a fucking decade to get to the final decision that interoperability is not theft

I'm convinced Oracle actually bribed someone/the judge at the Circuit Court of Appeals. This was settled by a jury until that ruling reversed everything.

Oddly the Supreme Court seems to take the stance that similar fair use/software copyright cases should be decided by a judge "as a matter of law, not fact," meaning juries shouldn't be the deciders in such cases. :thinking (I believe, if I understand what I'm reading so far.)

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Even if it was painful and drawn out, there's precedential upsides to the Supreme Court being the final deciders in the case.

That said, the outcome of this will likely be increased lobbying on Oracle's part.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
It's one of those things that if you just let the issue be the community will figure out the answer themselves and in a decade or two people will forget this was ever a thing.   
Nah, that's about when the lawsuits will all be hitting.

From the few survivors.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
This reads like a TP parody image yet it's somehow real. :notlikethis
dog

james

  • Donate to the JAMES FUND
  • Senior Member
:O


Tasty

  • Senior Member

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Well about that boycott

https://mobile.twitter.com/DJJudd/status/1379175308256022534
lmao they set up an 'oval office' so he can still be 'President'.

These fucking people  :lol

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I wonder who pretends to be Putin :thinking
[close]
🤴


benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Zodiac Killer trying Castro disguise:

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
BLM MLB

 :thinking
🤴

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56639088

Google v Oracle: Supreme Court declares Google's code copying fair

Jesus Christ, it only took a fucking decade to get to the final decision that interoperability is not theft

I'm convinced Oracle actually bribed someone/the judge at the Circuit Court of Appeals. This was settled by a jury until that ruling reversed everything.

Oddly the Supreme Court seems to take the stance that similar fair use/software copyright cases should be decided by a judge "as a matter of law, not fact," meaning juries shouldn't be the deciders in such cases. :thinking (I believe, if I understand what I'm reading so far.)

In the original jury trial, the presiding judge was a hobbyist programmer, and gave the jury direction on what copyright actually covers as well as being able to answer questions on stuff.
In the appeal it was just a judge, who had no reason to think that things like method names are generally standardised due to function, not just because someone is jacking someones style

Rman

  • Senior Member
kinda weird that the gop is so anti-infrastructure? have you been to bumblefuck america, their main constituency? it's a mess. gop is so anti-progress. it's a caricature as this point.

Cauliflower Of Love

  • I found my bearings, they were in the race
  • Senior Member
kinda weird that the gop is so anti-infrastructure? have you been to bumblefuck america, their main constituency? it's a mess. gop is so anti-progress. it's a caricature as this point.

It's easier to just give corn freebies.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
You know who uses most of that infrastructure? Poors, minorities and demoncrats!

Better to just let everyone pull their own bootstraps, that way only the whites hard-workers will prosper! True meritocracy.

obvious /s

Tasty

  • Senior Member
"The Google platform just got bigger and market power greater — the barriers to entry higher and the ability to compete lower. They stole Java and spent a decade litigating as only a monopolist can. This behavior is exactly why regulatory authorities around the world and in the United States are examining Google's business practices."

- Dorian Daley, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, Oracle

I guess you gotta say something to save face. :dead

All these lawyers are laughing all the way to the bank, though.

Rman

  • Senior Member
You know who uses most of that infrastructure? Poors, minorities and demoncrats!

Better to just let everyone pull their own bootstraps, that way only the whites hard-workers will prosper! True meritocracy.

obvious /s

the gop is saying stuff like water pipes and broadband are not infrastructure. they're still stuck in the agricultural age.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
All this talk about infrastructure makes makes me excited for infrastructure week
:trumps
🤴

tiesto

  • ルカルカ★ナイトフィーバー
  • Senior Member
kinda weird that the gop is so anti-infrastructure? have you been to bumblefuck america, their main constituency? it's a mess. gop is so anti-progress. it's a caricature as this point.

Unless it's a multimillion dollar bridge to nowhere in a GOP rep's district.
^_^

ToxicAdam

  • captain of my capsized ship
  • Senior Member
kinda weird that the gop is so anti-infrastructure? have you been to bumblefuck america, their main constituency? it's a mess. gop is so anti-progress. it's a caricature as this point.

It's not that weird. Infrastructure spending happens where population centers are larger (more efficient use of tax dollars) and the upkeep costs of that can last generations. A new subway line built in NYC is going to have a far greater impact on the lives of the poor/middle class than whatever you do in rural Kansas.

Most rural infrastructure spending revolves around paving roads, more irrigation, making areas more conducive to building new homes. All things that mostly benefit those that already have money in those areas. Many times, improvements to highways means bypassing former towns/villages that relied on that thru traffic. Economically devastating them in the process.


chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
It's more that the GOP is opposed to anything the Dirty Dems support. Trump easily could have passed an infrastructure package with 100% GOP support but he never actually did any work to put one together or gave a shit about it anyway so nothing got done.

It also would have been a 100% pork product. There is no fucking way that it would have benefited anybody other than Trump and his cronies. Then again, most of the money that Bush Junior sent to Iraq pretty much evaporated into thin air as well, so maybe it’s just their groove.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Everybody's running for governor!

Andrew Giuliani, the son of former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and a former aide in the Trump administration, said in interviews Wednesday that he is evaluating a run for governor of New York as a Republican.

Giuliani, 35, who has never held public office, told The New York Times that he was “strongly considering” the idea and looking to make a decision by the end of the month.

He was more emphatic in an interview with the Washington Examiner, saying he planned to run, and “I believe I can win the race.”
Former Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale is helping Caitlyn Jenner as she very seriously explores running for Governor in California, Fox News has learned.

A source familiar told Fox News that Parscale is helping Jenner. The source said the two have been friends since 2017.

The source told Fox News Parscale is helping to connect Jenner to "the best talent in the country" as she considers mounting a gubernatorial campaign.

"She is very, very, very serious," the source said about Jenner’s potential campaign.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1379817241580015616

Quote
It’s a shocking total, one that dwarfs the nearly $728,000 Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY) pulled in during the first three months of 2019
An ungodly sum for a freshman congressman in a 75% R district.