176
The Case for Kamala Harris
(www.theatlantic.com)
Won't destroy democracy: Check.
✅ Also has some good ideas
Which unfortunately will never get anywhere because the Republicans are almost guaranteed to win back the Senate...
It really sucks. Either Trump wins and gets the trifecta of control letting the fascists at the heritage foundation run rampant or Kamala wins but still loses the Senate and we get nothing but the statue quo for at least 2 more years... But if anything the Republicans will gain seats in the next cycle because they can point to the previous 2 years of nothing (caused by them) as evidence that Democrats suck...
Big sad. :(
I mean, at least she used to, before she started hanging out with Biden and dropped Medicare For All. Anyway, won't destroy democracy.
I prefer she doesn't promise shit congress will never pass
I prefer she show support for things she would pass if congress were willing. It doesn't have to be a promise.
This is why I support Vermin Supreme. Free ponies for everyone!
.
I want Medicare For All and you think I could be a Trump supporter? You're not as clever as you think, we are nothing alike.
load more comments
(3 replies)
It's called being realistic about what president can do with their powers. She absolutely should encourage Congress to pass legislation as that is much more permanent and effective than executive orders
.
Then I should move to a country with single payer.
Why would I stay here if the United States will never end medical debt? Seems like a bad place to raise a family - especially when Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc exist
It is a bad place to raise a family and you should move
Dropped livable wages and a slew of other items
One wants to be a dictator, the other doesn't. They're the same! \s
The installed candidate won't destroy democracy?
Nope. Biden even gave up his chance at a second term as soon as the polls suggested Americans would not re-elect him. The complete opposite of what Trump would do (did) in that situation.
This is all pretty basic stuff really if you're not a lunatic like Trump.
Polls had zero impact on that decision. It was 100% threats of campaign money stopping from the donor class that made the call.
Yes, it's true that donors sometimes prefer giving money to candidates who have an actual chance of winning.
Notice how none of these Democrats or donors seem be saying "hmm, why don't we just steal it again like in 2020 and save our money!", whereas for Trump stealing tge election seems to be the only thing he ever put actual genuine effort into while in office.
“Installed”? Bro the very idea of a “primary” is pretty rare in the world so yea, the party chose a candidate to represent them in the election. Plus she’s currently the VP and so was, in part, already elected to a very similar job which is a pretty good endorsement.
Also if you voted for the Biden/Harris ticket four years ago, given Biden's age you were voting for VP to replace him too.
I see a comprehension of U.S. political party operations was not installed in your head.
Straight to ad hom? You must be full of fallacies
I'm not a 5th grade teacher, it's not my responsibility to explain these concepts. A person making comments about election operations should have a clue about those operations.
Not a Nazi.
USian police = Nazi
.
If you’re a progressive who thinks the Democratic Party is a tool of corporate America, talk to someone who still can’t forgive themselves for voting for Ralph Nader in 2000—then ask yourself which candidate, Harris or Trump, would give you any leverage to push for policies you care about.
This is contradicted by this:
Like you, we wish for the return of the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, a party animated by actual ideas. We believe that American politics are healthiest when vibrant conservative and liberal parties fight it out on matters of policy.
I don't want a return to party of Bush. I want the American people to have the highest standard of living in the world - not the people of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
If you're saying that Kamala will restore the GOP, then it seems that the American people will never be prioritized. In which case, we should all leave and emigrate to Scandinavia where their people are treated like human beings rather than servants
.
Bush lied about Iraq having WMDs and oversaw the patriot act, Guantanamo Bay waterboarding, and Abu Ghraib. He stole the election in 2000 in Bush v Gore. He was a fascist and damaged the US worse than Trump
If the US won't ever have single payer then we should emigrate to Denmark. Why would I want to live here?
.
What was McCains stance on all of the above?
Pining for the party of Bush is pining for evil and diminished living standards
.
You're saying Kamala will help restore the GOP to the party of Bush and McCain. That is a terrible thing to admit. The neoconservatives are monsters who harmed the country, to say nothing of the innocents abroad who were tortured and murdered
.
So you agree with me and disagree with the article?
.
Where the eff is this BS from? They clearly said if you cut off the toxic poisoned head spewing hate and venom, the Republican Party can rebuild around ideas, policy, maybe even around morality (doubt). If you’re a conservative, that ought to be a good thing. If you’re pro-democracy, the renewal of two sane choices battling for ideas ought to be a good thing.
I’m sure I also would disagree with those ideas, but I welcome the competition, I welcome the possibility of respecting g our national leaders.
All I can say is that when Mitt Romney talks family values, he means actual family values. When Ronald Reagan said he’d trickle down on you, you could smell the urine. When Ross Perot talked about corporatism, he meant it
If you’re pro-democracy, the renewal of two sane choices battling for ideas ought to be a good thing.
I’m sure I also would disagree with those ideas, but I welcome the competition, I welcome the possibility of respecting g our national leaders.
If you're pro democracy then the restoration of the pre Trump GOP is a terrible thing. They were always this bad on policy, if not worse re: Iraq. It's just now Trump has taken the mask off.
It is in the interest of the American people for the GOP to permanently stay Trumpist, or get even more extreme. They can't win national elections when they are like this. Whereas the neocons and the Bushes are capable of winning. And they're drastically more effective and competent and harmful than Trump
If Kamala does anything to restore the GOP then she is a fool. Liz Cheney is competent which makes her more dangerous than Trump
"Welcoming the competition" is insanely out of touch. This isn't a game. This isn't a show. This is about power and how the American people are treated. We have terrible standards of living for a first world country. The GOP would make it even worse. Doing anything to strengthen them needs to be opposed. Otherwise we will never have the quality of life of Denmark. And if thats the case then every American with a brain should just emigrate to Scandinavia now
Otherwise we will never have the quality of life of Denmark
Eff that defeatist attitude. We should settle for nothing less, and it’s right there just ahead where we can almost see it. It is achievable, yes in the US. We need to prioritize it, vote for it, demand it.
Do I need to throw some tea in the harbor to get everyone’s attention?
load more comments
(3 replies)
They’re pining for the party of Bush because it was grounded in truth and ideas.
It was WHAT!?
.
The poster above you didn't put the entire article. Their post was merely the snippet from the end of it.
Earlier on, the article stated:
The Atlantic is a heterodox place, staffed by freethinkers, and for some of us, Kamala Harris’s policy views are too centrist, while for others they’re too liberal.
In other words, this endorsement is the decision of more than one person. It isn't contradictory for different people to want different things. The whole point was that multiple people have found multiple reasons to come to the same conclusion.
But the article isn't behind a paywall, and the link is right there. In the search to make sense of an extracted quote, the original source is a good place to start.
How does that help? If it's plausible that she'll restore the GOP then that's very bad
she's not a raging lunatic who sundowns at every rally?
There is only one sane choice. People who abstain are choosing insanity the same way that those who abstained in 2016 allowed insanity to prevail.
Having said that, I think voters would be pretty excited to get out and support a candidate that they had actually chosen in the primaries after seeing them go through some campaigning and debates. None of us chose Kamala, and Biden's late dropout was not ideal. I am hoping that America can have this opportunity back in the next election.
Atlantic - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Atlantic:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/11/kamala-harris-atlantic-endorsement/679944/?gift=otEsSHbRYKNfFYMngVFweK1wiMTka1bmsJdbYAWF7Uc
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
176 points (100.0% liked)
politics
20365 readers
2750 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS