822
submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The former president and first lady threw their weight behind the presumptive Democratic nominee

Barack and Michelle Obama have endorsed Kamala Harris for the Democratic nomination for president, sharing the news in a joint phone call.

A video released by the campaign suggests the former president and first lady called Harris on Thursday while the vice president was in Houston, where she addressed the American Federation of Teachers and received a briefing on recovery efforts following Hurricane Beryl. 

“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office,” Barack Obama is heard telling Harris in a 55-second video of the call. 

“This is going to be historic,” Michelle Obama tells Harris.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Steve@communick.news 1 points 2 years ago

Yah. I don't know why anyone thought he was a good option either.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago

And yet he won despite you not knowing why.

[-] Steve@communick.news 4 points 2 years ago

Is winning the only hurdle? That's so depressing.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago

When it comes to stopping Project 2025? Yes, that is the only hurdle. Work on the rest after that.

[-] Steve@communick.news 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That's not something we'll ever "stop". That's an ongoing eternal fight. And you don't win by only playing defense. You need to try to score also.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

We will never stop a specific agenda that has been laid out in great detail in a plan Americans are souring to the more they hear about it?

The sounds like what some people told me about Biden in 2020. Why vote for him? He's the same as Trump.

Except he isn't. By most measures.

[-] Steve@communick.news 1 points 2 years ago

Who said that? Did I? I never said any of that. Read my previous comment again.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Your previous comment:

That’s not something we’ll ever “stop”. That’s an ongoing eternal fight.

My response:

We will never stop a specific agenda that has been laid out in great detail in a plan Americans are souring to the more they hear about it?

Then I told you a different claim that your comment sounded like.

So yes, you did say that it is not something that we will never stop.

[-] Steve@communick.news 1 points 2 years ago

Did the agenda get stopped? Project 2025 exists. So the right wing religous agenda is ongoing, is it not?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

What a strange question. The agenda didn't get stopped because the election hasn't happened yet. Which is why they need to be beaten first so it can be stopped.

You do understand that it's called "Project 2025" because they want to implement it in 2025, right?

[-] Steve@communick.news 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Project 2025 exists because electing Biden didnt stop anything. P25 is simply the latest label for the same agenda that's been going on since forever. That's what never ends.

The conservative religious right has waxed and waned for millennia. But it never stops.

You're missing the forest to the trees.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Okay, well then I guess we should give up. You're right, don't vote for Harris. She doesn't pass the purity test. Let Trump win.

[-] Steve@communick.news 1 points 2 years ago

I never had a chance to vote for her. I was never offered any other options. That's what my first comment was all about.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Did you canvass for anyone else to challenge Biden in a primary?

[-] Steve@communick.news 2 points 2 years ago

Would there have been a debate if I had?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Possibly. But you clearly didn't canvass. If you're not going to put in the work to canvass for another candidate, it's pretty silly to complain that you weren't given a choice.

Candidates don't get on ballots by magic. It takes work.

[-] Steve@communick.news 3 points 2 years ago

No they wouldn't. The party leaders were all in on Biden until 3 weeks ago. The last thing they want is for the public to choose "their" candate.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

That's a great excuse for never trying, isn't it? "They don't want us to do it."

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

This is a lot of work to justify doing and contributing nothing.

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It is very depressing, yes. But a candidate that is 10/10 on every possible good measure that loses to Trump due to Democratic infighting, will be a worse outcome to someone that is mediocre in some respects but can win. It is the most important hurdle, and at the very least I can say the Democrats have some semblance of a strategy now that they didn't have before, and that's reason for hope.

[-] Steve@communick.news 2 points 2 years ago
[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

I'd be happy

I'll believe it when I see it.

[-] Steve@communick.news 1 points 2 years ago

Yah. That's fair.

I'm not sure I've even been truly happy since I was a child who didn't know anything.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Not an attack - but it definitely shows.

I hope things get better for you.

[-] Shawdow194@kbin.run 4 points 2 years ago
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

They've been asked to name such a candidate and admitted they can't. And also that they didn't canvass for anyone. So basically they want an imaginary person to magically pop into our reality and be the nominee. But not Kamala Harris.

this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
822 points (100.0% liked)

News

36043 readers
2864 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


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. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


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