He’s old and moldy.

It’s worth actually diving into the details. The reporting is burying key details that are often not quoted, making Kamala sound worse than she is.

I’ll say this: people are complicated. Reasonable people are capable of change within themselves.

A lot of people suggest that past actions are indicative of future behaviours. People who assert this are flat out wrong. Look at what Trump promised prior to his election in 2016, then compare it to what he actually did. The same is true of anyone else. What someone did, or didn’t do, in the past doesn’t exactly prescribe what they will do in future.

People are complicated, and reasonable people are capable of change.

I’ve read into the Kamala Harris denying surgery for a trans prisoner story a bit. It’s worth noting that her role as the attorney general at the time is supposed to represent the state, and is not able to pick and choose battles, irrespective of her beliefs.

She took full responsibility for her actions [out.com article cited above]. Trump has never done this, as far as I can tell.

What is not being quoted above, an omission that makes Kamala look bad on trans issues, is that she actually worked with the relevant departments to change the rules [https://www.washingtonblade.com/2019/01/21/harris-takes-full-responsibility-for-briefs-against-surgery-for-trans-inmates/].

Sure, she might have a spotty record though look at her more recent actions. She co-sponsored the Equality Act when she was elected to the U.S Senate.

Even if she was ‘against’ trans rights, those actions above suggest there’s not an ‘against’ slant now.

Don’t take my word for it. Dig out as many articles as you can find, or even transcripts of her debates and speeches.

People are complicated. You can help shape their views. Get involved. Vote. Read deeper into the news, don’t take news at face value. It is often spun, and misquoted, to portray a particular point of view whether right or wrong.

(For what it’s worth, I’m a gay trans person though I have no horse in the U.S Presidential election as I don’t live in the U.S. That said, having witnessed how awful the media have twisted issues and facts in my own country, especially over LGBT issues, I wanted to point out that this whole ‘she’s spotty on trans rights’ is not the whole picture. It’s not your fault though, we’re constantly fed bullshit to try sway narratives, or to convince people to stay home, which is disastrous in a first-past-the-post voting system).

Not remotely as spotty as her critics have made it seem.

The past is always a predecessor to the future. I wouldn’t trust her with my rights anymore than I would trust Trump

In high school I thought homosexuality was a sin, and was occasionally a little shit about it. But I had been raised to be kind and empathetic, even towards people I thought were going against God’s will (because my faith growing up was very careful to drive home that literally everyone is a sinner and we should not judge one another), and that kindness and empathy eventually led to me getting to know LGBTQ people and learning more about them, feeling for their struggles, which among other things helped reshape the views I had in my younger years to my current extremely allied stance.

People change. Especially when given new information and perspectives. Especially over time. I am not the person I was then, and I am thoroughly grateful to the people who didn’t just discard me because I held views that disagreed with theirs.

She also supported the Respect for Marriage Act, which will throw LGBTQ+ and interracial marriages back under the bus if SCOTUS strikes down Loving and/or Obergefell.

I’m extremely confused by what you mean here. The RFMA specifically codifies parts of the decisions in Loving and Obergefell. Even if those decisions were overturned, we now have Federal laws on the subject. Whereas before the RFMA, if Obergefell were overturned, then DOMA would be law again and gay marriage wouldn’t be federally recognized nor required to be recognized by the states. It was brought into law because of the threat to Obergefell after Row was overturned.

How would RFMA “throw LGBTQ+ and interracial marriages back under the bus”?