Obama had to be polite, intelligent, and well-spoke, or else he’d be considered too “hood” for the White House, Trump has had no such requirement.
If Obama or Harris had shown up with their five kids from three different marriages, it would be the ultimate proof that the “Lessers are breeding like crazy!” and they would be condemned by the bigots on Right and the “I’m not racist, but…” on the Left|
When Trump did it, he was just seen as a family man.
-Hosts dinner
-Cold shitty McDonald’s
I would’ve ordered some pizza and left that bullshit
Hey, we don’t know they’re sexist. Perhaps they’re racist.
Lil Column “A”, Lil Column “B”
Lotta
Bigoted fits.
Lil Column 5
Seriously?
Por que no los dos.
is there supposed to be a “no” in that sentence or did i imagine that?
Yeah, I made it a sarcastic statement but it’s still broken without no.
Not to defend “them”, but I really do believe that very little of this has anything to do with the fact that she’s a woman. It’s a red versus blue thing, democracy versus fascism. At this point, it doesn’t really matter who runs for president, wrt gender or even race. Trump has attacked her race far more than mentioning anything about her gender. Nonetheless, Trump just sees the dems as “the enemy“, and has convinced all of his cultists to view things in the same terms.
Any other Republican of this current generation would probably attack her on her gender as much as her race, but for some reason, Trump only attacks things he doesn’t understand such as biraciality (biracialness? Biracitude?).
They’ve attacked the fact she’s a childless woman plenty. Like if it mattered for her policies. I doubt they’ll straight up attack her for just being a woman much because they still want the conservative woman vote but they’ll sure as shit attack her for woman things.
Hey, that lady hasn’t had kids. I haven’t had kids, but that’s ok because I’m a man. Fuck that bitch, she doesn’t have kids, she can’t be an american. /s
I think what he is saying is sexism is at play much less than tribalism.
I dont think any sane person can say that sexism is not at play at all.
That’s fair enough. Really it’s a travesty at all that we have to rank what’s being attacked, especially when it has nothing to do with policy.
They’ve attacked her because she doesn’t have any biological children, not because she’s a woman. Although they may be related, the attacks were very specifically against her, not having any biological children.
Because they talk about men not having kids all the time…
They certainly make it as difficult as possible for game to adopt children.
Stop trying to make this simple and black-and-white as they want you to think it is. They’re playing into their bullshit.
What?
Nobody has ever called out a male politician for not having kids. Attacking her for not having kids is literally exclusively about gender.
Nobody has ever called out a male politician for not having kids.
You don’t know that. And if you’re claiming that’s a fact, then prove it.
When you have to invent things just to make your point, you can’t have a very good point.
Prove a negative!
…
Trump and his reich frequently attack her for being a step mother, accuse her of using sex for professional gain, and call her a cat lady. What the fuck are you talking about?
If you have been suddenly struck with amnesia, I suggest you read my comment again. The answer to your incredibly insulting question is there. If it was so shocking and unacceptable to you that you suffered sudden amnesia as a result of reading my comment, that’s on you.
Removed by mod
lol
Maybe if you complain some more, the world will be exactly the way you want.
The sense of entitlement from you…
You’re awfully belligerent and condescending for someone with nothing to say.
Removed by mod
I’m sure it has much nuance, but all things being equal. If she were a 45 year old white man, I believe it would be a lot less close.
I’ve heard people openly talking about this election being “whether a woman gets to be president or not”.
I think what he is saying is sexism is at play much less than tribalism.
I dont think any sane person can say that sexism is not at play at all.
I’m not disagreeing, just saying sexism is playing a much bigger part than I anticipated.
Were they saying it like it was a good thing or bad thing?
They were saying it the misogynistic way.
While I agree that at its heart it’s a red vs blue issue, I’ve seen more than enough explicitly sexist commentary from Trump supporters, most commonly suggesting that Kamala has attained her status via sexual favors rather than years of public service.
Trump supporters
Ahem…
I believe that a lot of it has to do with her being a non-white woman.
Obviously, something like 30-40% of people had already picked a side and were going to vote either Trump or whoever was not Trump on the other ticket. But, there are still plenty of people in the middle. Given how extreme the US is, the “middle” isn’t reasonable, thoughtful people. They’re all voting for the democrats. It’s racists who don’t think abortion should be banned. It’s sexists who are concerned with corruption. It’s people who are in the alt-right bubble and think that George Soros and Bill Gates are using mosquitoes to infect people with 5G… but who think Trump is a Freemason, so you can’t vote for him.
👍 in my country I’m in the middle, but by US-American standards I’m far left (or more left than the democrats at least).
Pretty much, I used to think Hillary was just THAT unpopular, and that Trump could never win a fair election with someone competent, capable, and without baggage.
I really hope I wasn’t wrong…
They are new to politics, and are using the only model they find applicable:
Sports spectating, ala pro-wrestling or college football.
To add to that, calling them sexist further entrenches them. A big part of that movement is a reaction to being called sexist, racist, etc… All you’re doing is playing into their own propaganda. That’s why the “weird” moniker was so much more effective.
At the level orangie is polling, sexist would be generous. A flaming dumpster fire probably more accurate.
bold of you to assume they don’t love him because he attempted a coup on live tv
Chalk it up to Citizens United and corporate media - the partnership to end democracy.
I just want universal healthcare FOR FUCKS SAKE
Yeah! How dare you! /s
She is not competent at all.
She passed the bar exam which is known for being an incredibly difficult exam. And defended victims (including sexual assault) by herself in courts for years.
The Don on the other hand boasted you need to be quite smart to win golf championships and didn’t realize you can’t inject the same stuff you disinfect with to cure COVID (which is common sense).
His own ex staff calls him dangerous and stupid including Mike Pence. Kamala has the support of her staff and a huge amount of Donald’s too.
The only one calling Kamala stupid is Trump…
Wouldn’t you want someone who has comprehensive knowledge of the law running the country, instead of a rapist who is leaking classified documents to everyone he can?
Well she’s not a competent con artist, but that’s not what it’s supposed to be about.
It is not a scandal but SF … the place she left with no scandals … is a husk of its former self with billionaires calling for “grey shirts” to murder the homeless because the police don’t do it enough.
That is the long term social reality of what Harris and the CA governor did in SF.
FYI
She left the office of SF DA in 2011.
She left the office of CA AG in 2017.
Explain to me how she caused the problems the city is facing today. There are significant levels of crime, poverty, homeless and substance abuse going on in all major US cities, including red states. Do you also blame TX governor Greg Abbott and TX AG Ken Paxton for the elevated levels of crime, substance abuse, and homelessness Austin TX has been facing in recent years?
Yeah, that’s like blaming Obama for the country’s rise in more visible and more obvious racism. Just because something happened when someone was in charge doesn’t mean that they caused it.
This screams of someone from a small town who went to SF on vacation and saw some icky homeless people and went home aghast and needed someone to blame it on.
No, the douchebag techbros would have done all that anyway.
I went to SF looking for hippies and found the world’s largest open-plan office. It’s so gross.
Was he actually convicted of that though?
It wasn’t a criminal proceeding, but he was found at fault or whatever the civil court equivalent is
The civil court equivalent is being adjudged liable.
My experience whit those folks is that you can’t extrapolate observations to make conclusions about the past.
So basically they throw away any inductive reasoning that would be detrimental to their pet belief.
Only a civil case, not a criminal conviction.
It means a judge found that enough evidence existed to conclude he more likely than not raped as opposed to beyond a shadow of a doubt same standard of proof as If I did it OJ
Most competent and qualified genocider #girlboss 💕. Her form of genocide is much more elegant than her opponent’s.
Cool so I assume you’re voting for Harris then? She obviously is the candidate who would cause less harm to the people of Gaza and Palestinians in general.
So it’d be pretty dumb to say something like that and then not try to do what you can as an individual to help (by voting for Harris).
You assume correctly! Like you, I am simp-pathetic to upholding the genocidal status quo.
It’d be pretty dumb not to blame anyone except those that nominated Harris, the best and only possible candidate to beat Trump.
It would be outright dimwitted to believe any other course of action exists besides voting to show one’s undying loyalty to career politicians who uphold the beautiful and completely non-toxic American status quo.
Feel free to take a break from the endless sarcasm and let us know what course of action you think people should be taking and what would get them to take it.
Circling back to the content of this post, which supposes that Harris has no faults, I suggest and support critical thinking.
This meme comes from a narrow frame of mind that imagines great differences between foreign policy (where none actually exist) between “sides” and mindlessly upholds a corrupt two party doctrine.
The idea that democrats are entitled to certain votes emboldened Biden to proclaim African Americans aren’t “black”.
Take a break from mindlessly accepting a toxic status quo. Stop showing establishment Dems that they are entitled to votes no matter how far right they are on policy.
This is what I asked you:
Feel free to take a break from the endless sarcasm and let us know what course of action you think people should be taking and what would get them to take it.
You have answered neither of those things. You just told me how you expected people to think. That was not the question. You brought up actions earlier, not thoughts.
You don’t actually have any actions for people to take, do you?
You demand hand holding and spoon feeding.
You would never be a useful ally, but I’m sure you will serve the status quo establishment well.
You are correct. Contrarianism does not require allies.
Allies are needed for people who have plans of action, something you lack.
Firat of all, your claim that the original post says that Harris is perfect/faultless, is obviously false. The original post does not make that claim, it doesn’t even imply it. So that’s a strawman.
Second, your tone of communication strongly indicates a contrarian “holier-than-though” mindset that is typical for teenagers but also people who never grow out of mental self-indulgence. The lack of any sort of substantive argumentation doesn’t help your case either.
The original post doesn’t idealistically describe Harris??
Your patronizing tone of hypocrisy speaks to an un-loved childhood.
Your inability to recognize a substantive argument is both a personal failing and a projection of your own “contribution” to this discussion.
Obviously people are thinking a lot harder than you. Why do you think you are the first person to realize that the democratic left is actually the rest of the world’s far right? Everyone figured that out when they were fucking twelve, so stop believing you are some enlightened philosophical or some shit.
While we here, everyone else has also already realized that third party votes accomplish nothing in the current state of politics. Throw your vote wherever you want, but no party besides rep and dem is getting an electoral so thanks for wasting it. Unless we are all willing to get up, and force the hand of change, that is the reality we all have to live in. Well maybe if you caught up with everyone else you would know that.
No one should argue for change unless it’s popular to do so.
Wow, so this has been the basis of human progress so far?
Anyone who participates in society would be a hypocrite to make such criticisms right?
Strange how you only complain about her regarding this issue, when drump would 1000 time worse for the Palestinians.
“Her form of genocide is much more elegant than her opponent’s.” I’m not sure where you’re getting that?
Strange how a woman could complain about her abusive partner, when there exists another man who is “1000 times” more abusive. What a selfish and dumb woman.
Have you heard of FPTP
The famously least democratic voting system? I am aware.
Google:
First Past the Post (FPTP) is widely regarded as a minimally democratic system. Here are some key reasons:
Lack of Proportionality: FPTP fails to accurately represent the popular vote, often resulting in a mismatch between the number of seats won and the percentage of votes received. This leads to a concentration of power among the largest parties, marginalizing smaller parties and independent candidates. Wasted Votes: In FPTP systems, many votes are wasted as they do not contribute to the outcome of the election. In the 2024 UK general election, for example, 74% of votes were wasted, meaning that only one in four votes had a decisive impact. Tactical Voting: FPTP encourages strategic voting, where voters choose a candidate not because they genuinely support them, but because they think they have a better chance of winning. This undermines the principle of democratic choice and leads to a lack of accountability among elected representatives. Limited Representation: FPTP systems often result in a small number of dominant parties, limiting the representation of diverse voices and perspectives. This can exacerbate existing social and economic inequalities. Comparative Ranking: According to the Citizen Network’s Global Ranking of Electoral Systems, FPTP is not used by most countries, and even among those that do use it, it is often criticized for its limitations. Many countries have adopted more democratic alternatives, such as Proportional Representation (PR) systems.In conclusion, while FPTP may seem simple and intuitive, it is widely regarded as a least democratic system due to its lack of proportionality, wasted votes, tactical voting, limited representation, and comparative ranking among electoral systems.
Obviously you don’t seem to understand that it means that either bad is winning or way way worse is winning.
Your idea of “winning” is maintaining a status quo of state sponsored genocide with exponentially growing homelessnes.
Those that suffer the most in America will barely register a difference in their lives either way. Meanwhile you pretend a major distinction exists in a corporate duopoly.
Winning the election obviously 🤦
I didnt infer that and you know it. Strange how you don’t post anything else about being pro-Palestine or raise any other of the myriad of issues they are facing.
So the only valid criticisms can come from whoever passes your vaguely defined litmus test of “posting about being pro-Palestine”?
I hope people like you are the first people put in the camps if the other one wins because of you.
Imagine hoping for people you disagree with to “be put in camps” while thinking you’re different and better than fascists.
I hope people like you are the first people put in the camps
Removed by mod
Good to know the military has failed to screen out individuals who support concentration camps.
Enjoy what little time you still have before the election.
You sound like a threat to others.
You sound like a potentially radicalized domestic terrorist and an agent of America’s adversaries acting against our national interests, and a threat to national security. Your rhetoric and concepts are indicative of potential compromise by FSB and CCP psychological operations, something which may concern the Federal Bureau of Investigation (if American) or the Central Intelligence Agency (if a foreign national).
Go ahead and make a report to the CIA that someone criticized your “dear leader” you cult Kool aid drinker.
Removed by mod
Clearly, you’d prefer someone who would attack his own nation’s people. Because obviously, that’s preferable. /s
Attacking friendlies is bad, except when Israel does it?
reported Israeli military attacks against US military and UN peacekeepers:
October 11, 2024: Israeli military fired on UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, injuring two Sri Lankan soldiers and one Indonesian soldier. The Israeli military acknowledged responsibility for the incident. October 10, 2024: Israeli military fired on UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, injuring two members of the peacekeeping force. The UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) reported that Israeli tanks had deliberately fired at and disabled monitoring cameras prior to the attack. October 11, 2024: Israeli military struck a UN peacekeeper position in southern Lebanon, wounding two peacekeepers. The UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres condemned the attack, calling it a “grave violation of international humanitarian law.” October 13, 2024: Israeli tanks forced entry into a UNIFIL position in southern Lebanon, according to the UN. The UNIFIL reported that Israeli forces had destroyed the position’s main gate and forcibly entered the position. October 14, 2024: Israeli military attacked a Christian town in northern Lebanon, killing at least 21 people, including civilians and UN peacekeepers. The UN Secretary-General condemned the attack, calling it a “grave violation of international humanitarian law.”No?
Ok
Are you, though?
What’s your awareness level on toxic positivity and the childlike assumption that life must be enjoyable at all times?
I think you’ve disabused all of us of the latter notion.
No scandals other than the genocide thing.
Because Trump is so Pro-Palestine. /s
So, it’s only bad when a Republican does it? Wow.
Funny, I thought the president was in charge of foreign policy. Good to know it was actually the VP’s job all along.
I’m assuming you’ve never seen her debates, or statements about the issue. If you had, you’d know that she pledged to continue supporting Isreal.
The issue is spreading negativity right before an election, it’s best to wait until after for these comments.
Will be interesting to see the floodgates that open on November 6th.
It’s very funny to imagine all the libs on here suddenly doing an about face as soon as the election’s over, but it’s not going to happen. It’s just a way to shut down criticism and they’ll find another way to shut down criticism after the election, guaranteed.
Yeah those, checks notes, victims of genocide can wait obviously.
Not like I can do anything about it except vote.
You could not make statements that insinuate the plight of genocide victims takes a back seat to US elections because it’s distracting or harmful to those poor presidential candidates. This has been going on for over a year, this isn’t some new issue that popped up before an election.
Other way. If a Republican does it, then it’s not bad for the Democrat to do it. /s
She’s not president. What is she single-handedly supposed to do? Hilarious that people blame her, not Biden.
Like, we have a felon, racist, con-artist, homophobic, sexist, xenophobic, asshat who is running and has actively embodied wanting to be the next Hitler, disparages fallen soldiers, taken obvious bribes, lied to citizens faces, started an attempt to overthrow our government, put children in cages, taken money from corrupt countries, will actively attempt to bring back concentration camps, ban women from having bodily autonomy, ban schools from talking about slavery or risk losing funding, make it illegal to be gay/trans, and laugh in your damn face about it all.
But no, the Black lady said some mean things and so therefore she’s not qualified and so I’ll just not do anything so the white guy wins.
I understand that we are stuck with these 2 candidates. But is it not still valid to complain that we have to pick between full throttle genocide and a slightly more palatable “restrained” genocide?
I’m not advocating for people not to vote for Harris. But to boil everything down to “said some mean things” is completely reductive. And you’re correct that she is not the president yet. But the only indication of what her actions will be when and if she is elected, are the things that she is saying now. And right now we are not seeing much if any pushback against what Israel is doing. She keeps saying that Israel has a right to defend itself. But what Israel is doing right now is going far above and beyond simple self defense. It is a genocide.
One way that people have the power to convince her to change her policy is by being vocal about their dissatisfaction. Presidents need to have personal convictions. They can’t just be completely wishy washy. But their role is to be an advocate and representative of the people’s interests. This is why they get elected. Because people feel that the candidate they are voting for is in line with their beliefs, and policies and changes they wish to see. So when people are vocal about their dissatisfaction with the policies she is putting forth, it gives her an indication that it is time to take a second look at what people are criticizing her about. To actually listen to what people are saying and potentially change her views. Especially if she wants their votes.
The people that are criticizing Harris on these issues in particular are by and large people who very obviously would not vote for / do not support Trump. A criticism of Harris is not supporting Trump. It is hoping to convince Harris to become a candidate that they can fully support. Someone they truly believe in and want to become president. Not just somebody they vote for because “well at least it’s not Trump”.
Yeah, because the orange guy is completely scandal-free, am I right? /s
And how does that change the fact that the post says there aren’t any? Last time I checked 1 is more than 0.
If something affects both sides it’s effectively “a wash” and cancel each other out.
Unless you have weird double standards and only apply them when it’s convenient.
If something affects both sides it’s effectively “a wash” and cancel each other out.
It’s called mental gymnastics to think “two wrongs make a right.”
It’s called a strawman to build an argument that was never made and then attack it.
an argument that was never made
It says 0 scandals right there in the post
Just because the other guy also has scandals doesn’t mean she has 0
You didn’t make this absurd claim?:
If something affects both sides it’s effectively “a wash” and cancel each other out.
If you are victimized, you believe you then have the right to also victimize “to cancel it out”?
Context is important, that’s how we continue the conversation.
If Candidate A is a genocidal maniac, and Candidate B is a genocidal maniac. It’s effectively a wash and pointless to say “well Candidate A supports genocide!”
Hope this clarified my meaning.
That doesn’t work in this context, if one person murders someone, and another murders 2 people, both are still murderers, one just is a worse murderer(as in more evil, not as in worse at committing murder)
That doesn’t work in this context
one just is a worse murderer
Seems like it works just fine.
So are you agreeing with what I said about both people being murderers or not? Because of you are then you agree that it isn’t a wash, and if you disagree then you are fucking stupid.
Is two murders worse than one?
Cyka blyat 🤣
People pretending Kamala is competent is almost as funny as people pretending Trump is Christian.
This is going to be Hilary all over again. Absolutely the same clueless “why won’t you vote for me?! I have such good referrals!!” energy.
She’s not even president yet, she passed the bar exam, and yet you’ve figured her out
Have you got your bar licence? Maybe it makes sense to have someone in charge of the US who has comprehensive knowledge of the law… Just a thought
Whereas you posted 8500 comments in the past year alone averaging 15 comments per day since joining last year… Which suggests you’re possibly not even employed…
Removed by mod
Err. Nothing about this post makes it something that should be removed
Removed by mod
Also the implication that a subset of Americans are sexist because they won’t vote for a woman who has expressed unwavering support in continuing a genocide.
More 👏 female 👏 genocide 👏 perpetrators 👏
Netanjahu is openly cheering for trump, knowing that he will have no more breaks on his plan to completely level Gaza and expand on the settler program.
Trump is the one that basically told the Palestinian people that they’ll never have Jerusalem as a capital by moving the embassy there
It’s so obvious how much this is just a bad-faith attempt to discourage people from voting for the clearly better choice if you care about Palestine…
You do realize that if trump wins, there is a very real possibility he’ll nuke Gaza himself? Because I need to know you understand that. Kamala might not be as harsh on bibi as you’d like, but she’ll work towards a ceasefire. Trump has threatened to nuke foreign countries before but was stopped by his staff like his former chief of staff, john kelly, and his former secretary of defense mark milley (both of whom have recently come out and described trump as a fascist btw). And that staff won’t be around this time to stop him. He’s surrounding himself with sycophants who will blindly do his bidding.
Less how sexist ð country as a whole is and more how sexist ð battleground states are.
If it was even just FPTP popular vote, Hariss would be projected for a landslide right now.
Can you explain why you’re just, casually using eths in your post
'cause I feel like it
Theres a yutube called robwords who sells this tshirt
Funny þing, I actually have a whole revised system of writing, which I don’t use online mostly just because people wouldn’t be able to read it wiðout learning it ðemselves, and it only has ð letter Q in it because Robwords’ letter Kwak (which I call Kwik) isn’t in Unicode. Nor would be my preferred alternative of a similar letter but using Ƿ and ƿ instead of W and w wið ð k.
Just so you know, people skip over your posts because of the way you’re writing them.
Most people don’t expect reading forum posts to be a challenge.
The deck is stacked. But when you talk about leveling the playing field - with DC statehood or repel of felony disenfranchisement or just prosecuting a cunt like Elon when he’s caught buying votes in an election - liberals just shrug and insist there’s nothing they can do.
Pure controlled opposition. You begin to question whether they even want to win.
I don’t know why you’re being down voted. Democrat opposition being weak and ineffective is such a recognized fact that it has a name: the ratchet system.
