In reality a not insignificant portion of them would probably vote for Trump to "own the libs" honestly.
She has a really checkered record wrt trans stuff altogether. I'm concerned.
She's better than Trump but a significant step down from Biden in terms of most of the things I care about which makes her a concerning pick, combined with the fact that she performs worse in polling (if that was the main concern). I hope I'm wrong but I'm concerned that this basically sealed the Dems' loss.
I was tentatively optimistic about Starmer on some of those fronts after writing him off as a hack but yeah, recently he ranted about how trans women shouldn't be allowed in bathrooms so...the grey area is gone, he just wants his party to be the Tories but painted a different color.
...my guy, Trump wants me fired from my job and then summarily shot. Vote for the guy that doesn't want that if you care, please.
Literally nobody is performing gender-affirming surgery on minors. It's difficult enough to get as an adult lmao
...you realize MLK was talking about people like you that would rather throw your hands up and do nothing than help, right?
If Trump wins, minorities and LGBT folks are in danger. That's on you. In the same way that white moderates are critiqued for sitting around and doing nothing in the civil rights era, people who are sitting around and doing nothing against the rise of fascism in that way because they don't want to take the time to focus on who's in danger are to blame. You are the modern white moderate.
Hey bloodfart, the only reason I can still have a job and access healthcare in a lot of places is because of Biden working to reverse Trump's anti-trans stuff. I get that you feel all high and mighty telling people that folks like me don't matter enough but this shit is kinda important to some of us.
tbqh I kinda like seeing LGBT iconography in public so I'll take the pandering instead of joining conservatives in dunking on it in these cases
I'll concede that I wish plenty of those companies would do more, though.
Sanders' LGBT policy platform was a joke in 2020 compared to everyone else's, even Bloomberg's. He's moved backwards in that area which is kinda distressing.
On a personal level you can deduct it from your income, but only if it passes a certain threshold...but also, it doesn't really count as income before a certain threshold, so realistically, at that quantity, it doesn't matter.
It starts mattering when you start dealing with donation quantities nearing like, $10000, because then you start to run into the standard deduction (the assumed amount that "well everyone just donates this amount, we don't need to keep track of it all before then, we'll just hand that exemption to everyone"). I forget what the gift threshold is in a similar vein, but it's not as low as $100.
Edit: I went through all that and didn't really address the core of the question. If you get paid a large amount of money, say, $20,000 and then donate all of it, ignoring the standard deduction whackery as discussed above (as a corporation would effectively do), yes, your taxes will have you deduct all of the donation from your income (you will not have to count it as revenue, essentially) if the group is registered properly with the IRS. You do not reduce your tax burden further than you would have if you had not received the donation, you essentially get taxed as though you never got the money at all.
Google isn't their employer, it's the contracting company. The contract not being renewed is inherently a business decision between two busines entities, which is probably going to result in the contracting company laying off the workers but that can't be directly tied to Google because...Google didn't hire these people, they hired a company that happened to employ them.
Is it a loophole? Possibly, depending on the structure of the two businesses in question...but it's very unlikely to be suddenly declared illegal, it's been common practice in sectors for a while for basically that reason. Contractors get the shit end of the deal and that needs to be addressed directly instead of pretending they're already protected by laws.
more concerned with systemic inequality and foreign genocide
...what in this prevents them from doing their job and actually forwarding a pretty objectively good bill?
Most Europeans are also not particularly approving of trans folks tbqh. There's a reason we emigrate to blue states across the ocean.
They wanted to kill a minority, but they called her the right pronoun.
Surely this cancels it out.
Only one of those parties wants me dead, but I guess if you view it from the perspective that minorities just don't matter at all, I can see how you'd get confused.
Uhh
Please do not invoke my rights as an excuse to let Trump take away more of my rights. What the fuck.
I figured people would've learned from the elections involving folks like Nader and Stein, but I guess here we go again.
I hear this a lot, but the longer these things take the more likely it is that the government will shift and simply decide "well, the cases haven't gone anywhere so at the beheadst of the Republican president we're shutting it down."
It's good to be thorough, but being so thorough that a conclusion to the charges isn't on the timescale of Trump's political career (or even life tbh) makes the whole process a waste of time and money. There needs to be more initiative being taken or the whole process may be moot.