1558
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 65 points 7 months ago

My money is still on Harris to be the final candidate. Get ready.

[-] Corigan@lemm.ee 41 points 7 months ago

I am all for a women president, but Harris is just a Hilary repeat ... Please dont.

AOC would be amazing but I know shes "too progressive"for the boomers... What ever the fuck that means

[-] Omega_Man@lemmy.world 28 points 7 months ago
[-] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago

The thought is that her years as a prosecutor will come back to bite her. Plus a lot of people seem to have a problem with her personality.

I haven't watched her enough to form an opinion but those are the takes I've heard most often.

[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

A prosecutor who is anti marijuana and anti minority.

[-] The_Terrible_Humbaba@slrpnk.net 35 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I don't know much about her, but directly from the wiki:

The rate at which Harris's office prosecuted marijuana crimes was higher than the rate under Hallinan, but the number of defendants sentenced to state prison for such offenses was substantially lower.[76] Prosecutions for low-level marijuana offenses were rare under Harris, and her office had a policy of not pursuing jail time for marijuana possession offenses.[76]

It sounds like her position on weed is not exactly what people are painting it as. At least these comments make it seem much worse than it is according to the wiki.

EDIT:

According to this, she even supported a bill in 2019 to legalize marijuana at a federal level, tax it, and use that money to (according to this):

Create a community reinvestment fund to reinvest in communities most impacted by the failed War on Drugs and allow those funds to be invested in the following programs:

Job training;

Reentry services;

Expenses related to the expungement of convictions;

Public libraries;

Community centers;

Programs and opportunities dedicated to youth; and

Health education

I don't know if it's on purpose, but you are definitely spreading misinformation.

[-] Omega_Man@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Hmmm.. crickets

[-] vxx@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

If that's the spin republicans will take on her, they'll alienate their own voters and push them democratic.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 4 points 7 months ago

She's a democrat so the average voter is totally incapable of identifying that they could be anything but pro minority and soft on crime.

It's like pointing out that republicans keep crashing the economy, doesn't matter, they're branding is still 'good for business'

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 28 points 7 months ago

Because that is the talking point that the foreign propaganda machine has been pumping out for the last few months. You'll notice there were no comparisons to Hillary a year ago. Now it's all "Harris is a cop," and "Harris is Hillary 2.0". Ignore all of that bullshit. It's foreign trolls doing their job and muddying the waters.

[-] Redecco@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I feel like I heard that stuff during the 2020 primaries as well, but the spotlight has definitely shifted back on her so we'll be hearing all sorts of things.

[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Exactly. If it were a real issue, it would be important enough to talk about all the time. When it only comes up if she is in the spotlight, it's a disinformation campaign.

[-] enbyecho@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

Why is she Hillary repeat?

They don't know. Watch... they won't have specific factual reasons, only vague generalizations. Betcha.

[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

Piece of shit cop that ruined people's lives for the crime of minding their own damn business. Not progressive, at all, and very far right as Democrats go.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago

cop

And just like that the concern trolls have aligned on a new attack line.

[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

I'm voting for anyone not Trump, but she has a very public record of incarcerating non-violent offenders.

[-] CliveRosfield@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

Speaking, presentation, likability.

[-] Omega_Man@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

So well spoken female that people just don't like for some reason?

[-] CliveRosfield@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)
  1. Chosen because of her gender before her merit. Evidence: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/15/biden-woman-vice-president-131309

  2. She ran for president previously and lost terribly because people didn’t like her. She is not well spoken because clearly people didn’t resonate with her, women included.

  3. When she loses, and I assure you she will, it’s not because she’s a woman. It all comes down to her track record and how charismatic she is, both which are bad.

  4. Let’s not forget she backs Biden so things that the left is against, such as her and Biden sending bombs to Israel will hurt her terribly.

  5. I’m probably voting for her, but it leaves a disgusting taste in my mouth stomaching it. I’m able to accept that I won’t have a perfect candidate but most Americans aren’t these days so it’s a loss for her, yeah.

[-] oyo@lemm.ee 11 points 7 months ago

Have you actually listened to her on the issues or do you just know what the media has been spouting? I was surprised to hear her very articulate and reasonable stances from her directly rather than through a progressive media filter. There's a mismatch.

[-] 5redie8@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

To each their own, but when I watched her in the debate years back I only remember her as one of the people I explicitly didn't like lol. Whatever, there's some good points in this thread and I dearly hope they're right.

[-] Kroxx@lemm.ee 9 points 7 months ago

I do not like Hillary and I do not like Harris. I don't however agree with harris being a Hilary repeat, I think she has a way better shot than Biden did

[-] logos@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

AOC is legally too young to run still.

[-] confusedbytheBasics@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago

She'll be old enough by January 20th so she can run.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago

Actually old enough before the election. I was under that misapprehension, as well.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Dont understand how this myth still persists, since it is immediately corrected every time I've seen someone claim it.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

I see this bullshit literally every day. Read up.

[-] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Intentional misinformation spread because they fear her

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

Too progressive = union busting?

[-] Psionicsickness@reddthat.com 25 points 7 months ago

She’ll get absolutely demoed by Trump. I can’t wait for Dems to have to vote for a racist cop though, peak irony.

[-] felbane@lemmy.world 43 points 7 months ago

One of the things Harris really has going for her is the fact that she would absolutely demolish Trump in a debate. She would not let him off the hook for his lies and would be able to counter his BS with reality.

Which is why Trump will never agree to debate her.

If Harris does become first name on the ticket, they better put Jesus Himself Christ as her running mate.

[-] Organichedgehog@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago

I don't like Harris at all, but I'd love to see her in a debate with trump.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

If Harris does become first name on the ticket, they better put Jesus Himself Christ as her running mate.

GOP: Holy shit, why didn't we think of that?

[-] mashbooq@infosec.pub 10 points 7 months ago

They probably did think of it but then rejected it when they found out how progressive Jesus is

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago

Put a woke commie pacifist on the ticket? Hah! Now, Supply-Side Jesus, that's a candidate.

[-] MaXimus421@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

You cannot be serious. She's as bad at public speaking as Biden during the last debate. She absolutely would not stand a chance in a debate with Trump.

[-] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

What makes you think she could do that? Honest question. The few speeches I heard from her she performed poorly.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

She was a prosecutor. Trump is a rambling tank of lies. She is smart enough to predict his bullshit and have responses in the can. I would love to see someone call Trump a liar to his face constantly for an hour.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 months ago

She's great on attack, she just gets tongue tied on defense sometimes. Before the primary (where she had some good attacks), she was most known for questioning people in the senate.

[-] Today@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

I wondered what the H was for

[-] AlbertSpangler@lemmings.world 6 points 7 months ago

Anyone will get demoed (?) by drumpf and the GOP.

They'll probably claim whoever gets the nomination wasn't born in the US, is part of a satanic paedophilic cabal, etc etc etc.

So that bit doesn't matter. Get someone who ideally inspires the swing states and hesitant voters.

Then there'll be a violent uprising with the support of the supreme court, but again there's nothing you can do to prevent that now.

[-] Lemminary@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Having the first US woman president would be cool and have a ~~first~~ woman vice-president as well, why not?

E: Whoops, you already had a first vp, Sorry, Americans.

[-] jorp@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago

yeah it would be cool but we're talking about the American voter

[-] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago
[-] Tagger@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

Haven't you just had the first woman vice-president?

[-] Lemminary@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Oh yeah, I forgot the US did that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Running a woman for president is risky because of boomers, but the majority of them are voting Trump anyway. Running two women on the ticket I think would be a mistake. There are a lot of progressives that are still misogynist. As much as I'd love to see Harris/AOC I think they need to pick a man for VP.

[-] fxt_ryknow@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

They kind have to... IMO... You know, the whole DEI thing.

this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2024
1558 points (100.0% liked)

News

25189 readers
3771 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS