199
Petty? Absolutely. Vindictive? Without question.
Fucking hilarious? 100%.
Unfortunate that he is a former aide so Harris can't fire him.
Such shenanigans would hurt the anti Trump cause (if it exists) by trivializing the elections and making it appear as just a game to Harris.
It's not petty it's self ridiculing.
Also relies on Republicans not making the case that next in line should be Trump because he won already
Performative bullshit and really insulting to VP Harris and Women in general
Maybe she shouldn't have sucked so hard that she lost to trump lmao 🤷♀️
I think she should do it to fuck with Trump since all his 47 branded merch would then be worthless.
Then he just gets to sell a whole new batch of 48 merch and get even more money... That would really show him?
This is dumb, petty and counterproductive.
But a lot of conservatives were complaining that Harris had to know that Biden wasn't capable of the job and she should have activated the 25th amendment. But she didn't do that and when he did step aside to let her be the candidate these same people that were all about her kicking him out of office were now saying that this was a bloodless coup even though she was only running for pres instead of actually being president. Basically they were irked because she didn't do what they wanted and would have been upset if she did what they wanted. Damned if she did and damned if she didn't.
So if he steps down and she becomes president they get to be unhappy about it and claim the high ground both ways.
Really wish we had adults running things instead of transparently partisan idiots who don't hold any consistent core belief system.
Simmons argued that this move would keep Harris from having to oversee "her own defeat" when the presidential election is certified in the Senate
If Gore can do it, so can Harris
Why waste the time?
To get the first female president and show that a woman wouldn't press the nuclear button within 30 seconds of taking office.
Because it's so much better for women if the first female president ends up with a shorter term than Liz Truss, and only as a consolation prize. That'll definitely help the case of the next female candidate.
I don't think it really counts unless she's voted in or there's no choice. For the other... All of the sane people already know that, right?
Sounds like the perfect plan to have Trump change the law so no woman can hold a high office ever again. It'll blend in nicely with their proposal to not let women vote ever again.
Sounds like you’ve been rejected by women your entire life.
Both elections he's won have been against women. I think he will not ban women from office because he sees them as statistically weaker opponents against his successors.
Maybe they think she'll try to do all the things Biden won't do. Things like pack the court or somehow codify Roe v Wade, even if it's far fetched. Show everyone what they missed out on, even if it gets reversed a month later.
Unless that's the plan, it would be a complete waste of time.
Fucking move on already.
Trump hasn't even moved on from 2020.
And so we’re supposed to do absolutely valueless stupid shit like this?
What did kamala harris ever do that she deserves a favor?
Good luck, Jack!
this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
199 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19096 readers
2859 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS