A remarkable scientific breakthrough is sweeping the Democratic Party.
With Election Day just weeks away, some of its candidates have suddenly discovered that boys and girls are in fact biologically different.
The timing, of course, is hardly coincidental.
For years, progressives dismissed objections to biological males competing in girls’ sports as bigotry. Now, with control of Congress at stake, Democratic candidates in competitive races are scrambling to convince voters that they believe in protecting girls’ sports.
Consider Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio.
In a recent campaign ad, the longtime Democratic congresswoman declares that “boys should not play in girls’ sports.” She also says she voted with Republicans to keep “transgender ideology” out of schools.
This sounds convincing—until you examine her record.
In 2023 and again in 2025, Kaptur voted against the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, legislation intended to keep biological males from competing on federally funded girls’ and women’s teams. In 2023, not a single Democrat supported the bill. In 2025, only two did, and Kaptur was not among them.
The vote she cites about working with Republicans involved a separate parental-consent measure on names, pronouns, and facilities in schools—not the sports bills. She has also repeatedly co-sponsored the Equality Act, which critics warn could undermine sex-based protections in women’s sports.
Apparently, the difference between boys and girls becomes easier to admit when a congressional seat is at stake.
Ohio isn’t the only place where Democrats have discovered the political advantages of biological reality.
Sarah Trone Garriott, the Democratic congressional candidate challenging Republican Rep. Zach Nunn in Iowa, says in a campaign ad that she opposes “letting men in women’s locker rooms.”
Yet as a state senator, she voted against a 2022 bill requiring students to compete on sports teams based on their biological sex, as well as a 2023 measure requiring them to use school bathrooms and locker rooms corresponding to their sex at birth.
Trone Garriott insists that Republicans are distorting her record. If that’s true, she should explain why she voted the way she did.
Iowa Democratic gubernatorial candidate Rob Sand has likewise broken with his party’s progressive wing, saying “girls’ sports are for girls” and expressing agreement with Republicans on restricting male participation in female sports.
But not everyone in the Democratic Party is pleased with this sudden shift in rhetoric heading into the midterms. Local Democrats in Ohio denounced Kaptur’s advertisement. Equality PAC, the political arm of congressional Democrats’ LGBTQ caucus, said it would not support her campaign.
But the Democrats already received a costly lesson about this issue in 2024.
In that year’s presidential race, the Trump campaign hammered Kamala Harris with an ad declaring, “Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.” The spots ran heavily in swing states and during major sporting events; even Democrats later acknowledged the message had been effective.
The public’s views on the issue help explain why.
Gallup’s 2025 Values and Beliefs survey found that 69% of Americans believe transgender athletes should play on teams matching their sex at birth. Pew Research Center data from 2025 also showed that 73% of Americans were uncomfortable with transgender athletes playing on teams that do not match their birth sex.
That included 55% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters.
This is not some obscure issue that matters only to conservative activists. It is a question of fairness that resonates with voters across party lines, including many Democrats who otherwise support their party’s agenda.
Yet despite these numbers, congressional Democrats have overwhelmingly opposed legislation intended to restrict male participation in girls’ sports.
The question is whether these candidates have now genuinely reconsidered their positions or are simply telling voters what they want to hear.
If Kaptur, Trone Garriott, and other Democrats now believe that girls’ sports and private spaces deserve protection, they owe voters more than a slick campaign advertisement. They owe them an explanation for their previous votes and a commitment to act differently if elected.
After all, campaign commercials can be rewritten overnight. Voting records cannot.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.
Continue reading...
[ H/T The Daily Signal ]
