If you live in Pennsylvania then for the love of all that is good in this world, vote to retain the state supreme court. (That's YES, not no.)
Republicans are targeting left-leaning judges in PA because the state courts are getting in the way of all the evil shit they want to do, including eventually rigging the swing state's votes in future senate and presidential elections. They're doing so, in part, by targeting liberal voters with misleading mailers implying that forcing an election to replace these judges is "protecting democracy" and that the judges in question either are or support sexual abusers. They're deliberately making it look like "no" is the left-wing position and hoping people don't do their research.
Don't fall for it.
Do your research. Don't just trust a tumblr post — read through the material provided by your area, read through ballotpedia, look up your local newspapers to see what the opinions there are.
I'm not saying this post was wrong — I have no idea — but you should get info from reliable sources.
This is actually a very important point, especially given the tactics I just described above. (It was negligent of me to not include sources in the original post.) Please do look things up for yourself. Ballotpedia is a great resource, and local newspapers often have information about issues and candidates that aren't available anywhere else. If you can't access your local paper online (due to paywalls, for instance) your local library might have a subscription. You can also check the official websites of local candidates or parties to confirm their official stances on various issues.
Here's the official PA Dems website. You can see that the focus is on retaining these three specific judges, though others are also on the ballot; that's another detail I should have included in the original post.
Here's general information about the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, its current members and their party affiliations, and how retention elections work.
Here's more information on this specific election.
It's still good to look these things up independently, and you should always doublecheck a linked source to make sure it's the real thing.
On the subject of reliable sources: please, please, please avoid using any LLM AI (like chatGPT for instance) to obtain information on any subject, but especially ones that people are deeply invested in and/or willing to spend a lot of money on. Not only are LLM AIs prone to "hallucinations" (because they generate statistically probable sentences, which is not the same thing as looking up real information), they can be gamed by bad actors with sufficient resources to affect the data they're sampling. Likewise, although wikipedia is a wonderful website with a meaningful mission, it can be edited by anyone at any time, including both malicious and ignorant individuals. You should also check who owns your local paper, and be especially aware of the potential biases of larger, national news sources. That's not to say you can't still use a source with a potential bias or conflict of interest in some areas, but it's good to know when to be more skeptical.
Thanks @ryanthedemiboy. I'm glad you brought that up.
