257

Kamala Harris is running as the prosecutor taking on Trump (www.motherjones.com)

submitted 3 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] PythagreousTitties@lemm.ee 42 points 3 months ago

Fuck. As long as someone starts calling the orange conman out. It's only taken eight years.

[-] DmMacniel@feddit.org 26 points 3 months ago

This Saturday on Wrestlemania, The Prosecutor VS Orange Man.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Joe Rogan announcing?

[-] Beetschnapps@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

Why? Who gives a fuck about that moron? Like seriously who is so desperate to think about him?

Who could be so dumb that they give two shits about someone as stupid as Joe Rogan?

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 months ago

It baffles me how many otherwise fairly intelligent people I’ve come across who are strangely enamored with Rogan.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago

I have a coworker who is in her 50s, very liberal hippie type. Walk past her cube and see her listening to Joe Rogan podcast, ask her what that is about? Maybe I missed some really important interview he got or something. Nope she just said she listens to it everyday, because he asks good questions.

I walked away baffled, questioning the existence of the universe and life itself...

[-] DmMacniel@feddit.org 3 points 3 months ago

You betcha

[-] snownyte@kbin.run 11 points 3 months ago

Get a better VP. Otherwise, don't fuck up. If this was Clinton, we would've guaranteed been fucked.

[-] RadicalCandour@startrek.website 7 points 3 months ago

I’ll never forget the instant fear pitted to my stomach when they announced her veep pick. The feeling was instant and it shook me for a hot second. I brushed the feeling off right away. I think it was me having a premonition of the outcome. I have no idea but come on, Tim Kaine?

[-] 0x01@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 months ago

Man I think focusing on the opposition is the wrong play, we saw how far that brought clinton.

It would be better to focus on policy and the future, people will focus on whatever you draw their attention to

[-] boydster@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 months ago

I thought her speech did a good job outlining some important parts of her vision for the future and her policy initiatives. She spoke about making strides to protect women's rights (and keeping government out of doctors' offices), she spoke in favor of supporting union efforts, all while still making a point to point out Trump's deficiencies as a candidate without focusing on him longer than needed. There was a lot of inclusive language, just look at how much she used words like "we" and "us".

I'm working off an admittedly not-amazing memory here but I recall a very inclusive, welcoming speech that mentioned Trump mostly by contrast and to state the obvious in regards to him being the opponent and and bad option. She called for universal health care, for crying out loud. In explicit words, she said we all deserve it. She didn't focus on policy or the future? What?

this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024

257 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19107 readers

2865 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News