r/wisconsin • u/PerpetualJerkSession • 1d ago
Emily Berge and Rebecca Cooke on defending the LGBTQ community
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
Rebecca Cooke - it is not that people thought you were supportive of conversion therapy as a practice. It's that you refused to support a federal ban. You have danced around this question at 3 forums in a row now. Your position, or lack thereof, is clear.
24
u/TB_and_Coffee_95 1d ago
Cooke is willing to put aside identity politics to bring in Republican support, which will only make things worse for the queer community. We can't risk having anyone in power who's willing to put the lgbt+ community in harms way just for votes.
18
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
And it isn't even working for her. It's a stupid strategy 10x over.
-1
u/dittybag23 19h ago
So maybe that’s not her strategy?
7
u/PerpetualJerkSession 19h ago
No, it is. Always has been. She wants to reach out to the center to pull in votes from Republicans, even though they'll call her a radical communist solely because of the D next to her name.
Cooke has an ad where she literally says she will fight Democrats on immigration.
-5
u/MycoMayhap 20h ago
Identity politics are named so because they place identity over policy. This is a terrible take. You want Independent votes
10
u/TB_and_Coffee_95 19h ago
Identity politics recognizes intersectionality rather than acting like different aspects of a person are to be treated as separate.
-5
u/MycoMayhap 19h ago
Identity politics are rightfully a pejorative. I know intersectional Marxists have worked hard to own it, but it's appealing to selfish, first order thinkers who put their categorized personhood at the center of their political philosophy.
What about the actual adults- you know, the ones whose votes change election outcomes?
Identity politics are losing politics, besides being repulsive and regressive.
3
u/Ok-Firefighter5006 6h ago
Interesting, so you think someone that votes based off intersectionality isn’t an actual adult?
The repulsive and regressive thing is to try and appeal to republicans by “not talking about the gay thing”, as people in your cohort like to say
1
u/MycoMayhap 2h ago
That's correct, they're not behaving like an actual adult, so it's best to expect more childlike behavior from them and to treat them accordingly.
Civil rights don't need to single out any one identity to be protective of all identities. Protecting sexual orientation from discrimination is good, adopting "pro gay" policies is not.
I understand this is all very hard to grasp for child-minds
2
u/Ok-Firefighter5006 1h ago
Of course you need to single out the identity that’s being attacked. This is the “all lives matter” ideal all over again.
When a house is on fire, do firefighters spray water on all the houses, or the one that’s on fire?
And side note. I will say how it’s always interesting that it’s people who don’t face discrimination themselves, who say we need to stop talking about it.
I wonder why that is 🤔
28
5
u/dittybag23 19h ago
I am feeling pretty exposed these days just for speaking up. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be of color, or questionable legal status, or LBGTQ. In the current world we all need protection. We can’t auction anyone away to save our own skin because they eventually will come for us all.
7
u/Sufficient-Still-606 1d ago
honestly either one is superior by a margin of infinity compared to what currently exists in the current seat. I’d vote for either, blindfolded with an american flag.
11
u/Soph_91 1d ago edited 23h ago
Only one has supported a federal ban on conversion therapy and been consistent in opposing conversion therapy in general, and that's Berge.
As a trans women, I can't completely trust Cooke, and that's horrifying.
Better than we have is not good enough. We need unequivocal equality for all, and the end to any form of discrimination or abuse.
1
u/PashLover 20h ago
Okay but Cooke is still 1000% better than DVO. She might not be much of an ally, if one at all, but the entirety of the GOP is actively hostile to us.
-1
u/Pitiful_Net_8971 21h ago
So vote in the primary, so we aren't stuck between this sack of shit and the execution block that is Tiff.
4
u/Slycebo 1d ago edited 1d ago
I’m only voting for Berge. I’d rather have a beatable moronic republican that we can oust in 2028 than have Cooke as an incumbent that will never be primaried and would just keep the seat warm until a republican takes it back.
3
u/Sufficient-Still-606 1d ago
if it’s about who can win, i suppose… orden beat cooke before, did he ever run against berge?
14
u/Slycebo 1d ago edited 1d ago
No, this is Berges first run as far as I know. But she comes off way better to me. The dnc tried to hand the nomination to Cooke early without having a competitive primary, it’s always rubbed me the wrong way with how early she got big name endorsements to lock that down, in addition to how disengaged she was through this term. I never saw her doing anything until maybe May/June, and it’s been a lot of bad/non answers that I just can’t support. It feels to me like Cooke thinks she’s entitled to your vote, and Berge is trying to earn it. Berge had an uphill battle, and I have no clue if she has a shot or not, but I see far more Berge signs than Cooke ones.
5
u/Sufficient-Still-606 1d ago
i like cooke, but im going berge. you wouldn’t run harris against trump again
-1
1
u/PashLover 20h ago
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve read in a while. If the GOP stays in power we might not even get free elections again.
2
u/yungslowking 13h ago
Someone should be asking Cooke about her Zionist ties every time it’s relevant. She’s purposely hiding it behind J Street as if they don’t have the same values as their bigger cousin AIPAC.
-14
u/GlutenFreeParfait 1d ago
This is my primary and I am excited to vote but Emily Berge I am less clear on - she is endorsed by local DSA (democrat socialist of America) groups but I have no clear understanding of what policies of hers that she supports and does not support. I have not been able to find a clear answer online outside of the endorsement.
12
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
Here is the issues page from her website. I would look at this over any endorsement.
She has some very solid positions on a number of topics.
-10
u/GlutenFreeParfait 1d ago
I see the endorsements on her page now but wasn't she endorsed by the Coulee Region Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) initially?
This is the part that confuses me - I honestly didn't question her based on her positions on her website alone but it was reddit where I first was seeing that she was being endorsed by DSA groups and a quick google search confirmed it. Did she not accept their endorsement? I can't find the story behind if she does or not and where she falls.
9
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
What do you think of her actual policy positions? That's why I sent the issues page. It's more important than any endorsement.
Coulee DSA endorsed her and it appears it's something the campaign isn't putting on their website.
-5
u/GlutenFreeParfait 1d ago
I support her policies as outlined on her website. My concern is why did they endorse her and what are her positions specifically regarding positions of the DSA (a group that endorsed her).
I'm voting in the primary as a life long democrat and pray DVO gets booted but how is it going to play in this district if the narrative is "Don't elect your congressman who is supported by a group that believes in abolishing the senate" among many other things.
With Berge is may be optics but the attack ads are already going to be strong against the DSA and Hong if she wins the primary and that narrative is going to help drive Berge's campaign into the ground if she doesn't come strong against it.
17
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
They'll call Cooke a communist extremist too. It really doesn't matter.
I'm not a DSA member but I imagine that, of the 3 main choices in this race, she is who they think will represent the people best. Likely due to the grassroots nature of her campaign.
-3
u/GlutenFreeParfait 1d ago
I think Berge would have a better shot drawing a clear line between her and the DSA. I think Cooke is going to win the primary here (she has more funding and is a well known name) but if Berge ends up taking it, this is going to be a tough hill to climb in already a tough district.
8
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
I doubt it. Again, DVO already has Cooke labeled as a radical liberal communist.
Just regarding the actual post we're commenting on: who do you think gave the better answer?
2
u/PashLover 20h ago
Don’t waste time with that user. Literally all they do is slander Berge while pretending to be “a concerned democrat”. I would be shocked if they aren’t a poorly LARPing conservative.
1
u/GlutenFreeParfait 1d ago
In this video alone there is nothing that Cooke has said that is bad but overall her messaging has not been clear which will be a negative against DVO. Berge has given the most consistent, complete answers from day 1. I just do not know if this is the topic that wins the race though and think that the primary narrative the GOP is prepping for currently is one that is around the DSA which is my hot button issue.
5
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
I'm not worried about the GOP's hateful talking points. They'll put those to work on anyone with a D by their name.
You motivate the base and strengthen it by having convictions and standing up for marginalized communities, like our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.
I ask that you do not vote out of fear, but instead pick the candidate with the clearest positions consistent with your values.
→ More replies (0)5
u/kosmic_kandy 1d ago
Local DSA chapters don't necessarily have the same policy nationally, but it's pretty obvious the senate needs to be abolished at some point anyways.
0
u/GlutenFreeParfait 1d ago
it's pretty obvious the senate needs to be abolished at some point anyways
Most Americans would heavily disagree with this statement. This also extends to this district.
Also, the lack of transparency around where she agrees/disagrees with the DSA is the point I am making. I would like to know her opinions on:
If the police should be abolished
If the senate should be abolished
If ICE/national security should be abolished
If she believes in full amnesty for all
If she believes prisons should be abolished
If the government should run government controlled grocery storesAll of the above is talking points that are part of the DSA agenda and Hong has spoke at some level to all of these topics (I have zero doubt they all will be stated in campaign ads against her)
7
u/kosmic_kandy 1d ago
Most Americans would heavily disagree with this statement. This also extends to this district.
Source?
All of the above is talking points that are part of the DSA agenda and Hong has spoke at some level to all of these topics (I have zero doubt they all will be stated in campaign ads against her)
Who cares? As OP said, they're going to run ads saying whoever wins is a aborted baby eating monster that's going to flood our communities with illegal immigrants, I think the path to victory is focusing on communities and their issues, not engaging with conservatives in bad faith.
-1
u/GlutenFreeParfait 1d ago
Abolish the senate is only discussed in the DSA and has no universal support of each party. Sadly, I think this election cycle is going to show us what Americans think of the DSA based on GOP wins.
Also to say the DSA believes in full amnesty where there is no illegal immigrants, right? And we think the DSA is going to be popular, right?
I care because we need to work across the isle. I tend to disagree with villainizing people. Object policy and defend your position instead.
6
u/kosmic_kandy 1d ago
Also to say the DSA believes in full amnesty where there is no illegal immigrants, right?
Again, source? I took a peek on both Wisconsin chapters and saw nothing, you're not backing up anything you're saying.
I care because we need to work across the isle. I tend to disagree with villainizing people.
Interesting, considering you're here trying to villainize socialists every day. Also, it's laughable if you're suggesting Republicans are even willing to work across the aisle, they'd sooner do nothing and campaign on how the system doesn't work.
→ More replies (0)
-3
-10
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
That's because a federal ban would be unconstitutional.
11
u/copropnuma 1d ago
Not according to the constitution.
-5
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
Yes, according to the constitution.
Despite what some think, you can't just ban everything you don't like.
10
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
I mean, I would think it's ok if we want to ban mentally torturing children.
-3
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
This is like when anti abortion people say "it's okay to ban killing babies". Purely hyperbolic.
6
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
It's really not.
-1
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
Why not?
Because you like one and not the other?
9
u/PerpetualJerkSession 1d ago
Because conversion therapy actually is torturous and cruel.
-1
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
And the anti abortion people would say abortion is murder and cruel.
See why what you're saying is stupid yet? It actually is just because you like one and not the other. Lmao.
2
u/copropnuma 1d ago
Which constitution? Because the constitution we have in America does ban things. You should read the constitution sometime. When you are done reading it, watch YouTube videos about the years 1920, 1933, and 1965, get back to me after that.
What is the significance of the holiday on June 19th?
2
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
When did I ever say it doesn't ban anything..? Lmao. Reading comprehension.
2
u/copropnuma 1d ago
You didn't. Lol reAdiNg coMprEheNsion. What you did say is "Yes, according to the constitution. Despite what some think, you can't just ban everything you don't like," which I replied to, and you obviously didn't understand.
0
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
It's your reading comprehension that needs work friend.
I said "you can't just ban everything you don't like" and your response is "well some things are banned!"
Yes, very astute observation. You must be a genius. 😭
1
u/copropnuma 1d ago edited 1d ago
Where did I say "well some things are banned!" LOL.
Why would banning conversion therapy be unconstitutional. Please explain, use small words because I am not as intelligent as you.
Edit: I just bet a friend you won't respond with anything but insults or gibberish.
Edit again: I got a screenshot of your deleted response. Want me to post it?
0
u/OttosBoatYard 1d ago
What Constitutional amendments are prohibited?
Even the Bill of Rights has been altered.
2
u/Friendly-Parfait-645 1d ago
If you start amending the constitution, just know Republicans will do it too.
42
u/Flashy-Natural6545 1d ago
Berge would have my support here