The double standard for Harris and Trump has reached a breaking point | One candidate can rant about gibberish while the other has to be perfect.
The double standard for Harris and Trump has reached a breaking point | One candidate can rant about gibberish while the other has to be perfect.
Something is wrong with this split-screen picture. On one side, former president Donald Trump rants about mass deportations and claims to have stopped "wars with France," after being described by his longest-serving White House chief of staff as a literal fascist. On the other side, commentators debate whether Vice President Kamala Harris performed well enough at a CNN town hall to "close the deal."
...
Let’s review: First, Harris was criticized for not doing enough interviews — so she did multiple interviews, including with nontraditional media. She was criticized for not doing hostile interviews — so she went toe to toe with Bret Baier of Fox News. She was criticized as being comfortable only at scripted rallies — so she did unscripted events, such as the town hall on Wednesday. Along the way, she wiped the floor with Trump during their one televised debate.
Trump, meanwhile, stands before his MAGA crowds and spews nonstop lies, ominous threats, impossible promises and utter gibberish. His rhetoric is dismissed, or looked past, without first being interrogated.
because most major media supports trump.
You mean the ones whos mega-rich owners are being promised massive tax cuts by trump? Those very same ones?
I'm shocked to my core. I'm glad I was sitting down when I read your comment.
But but but there's no direct physical evidence of these major media owners handing giant round bags of cash with big dollar signs on them to trump personally while they twirl their moustaches!!!
Don't you see - we can't know if they support him or not!
/s obvs christ some people on here are russian trolls or steadfastly refuse to understand a goddamned thing
And the few sources that may not be owned by Trump-backing Nazis still have to have their horse race. They want to make it seem close to get clicks and sell ads.
Trump is the best thing to happen for News Media since 9/11.
And they would do anything to have another 4 years of people obsessively watching/viewing/clicking all day every day to see what insane thing hes done to the country next.
Weird 34 is their headline-grabbing fat cash cow.
"Moo for us! Cha ching! Yeah!"
The truth is not better but there's some nuance. Major media do not usually care about being for or against fascism. They care about clicks, and following "journalistic ethics" that boil down to Enlightened Centrism™ and bothsidesism.
Their billionaire owners don't even have to interfere (most of the time). The system self-selects to make money through a shared set of beliefs in what constitutes "proper journalism". This makes journalists, as a profession, ontologically incapable of fighting against fascists. They truly, honestly, firmly believe that "Fascist about to win US Presidency" is not a statement of fact.
It's the same ideological pitfalls that makes Serious Media pit science against whichever anti-science fad is trendy right now. Vaccines, "climatic skepticism", etc. anything goes and the journalists in charge truly genuinely from their heart believe that is a fair and balanced approach.
Not to say there aren't actual conspiracies from time to time of course, but even actual independent traditional journalism has generally failed to accurately report on the rise of fascism.
Fucking propaganda machines.
...but the magabrained keep telling us that the corporate media is all liberal! Their proof? Supposed polls of the help at those MNCs. I'd like to know in what universe the help determine the direction of a MNC.
I'll take the downvotes, but a large part of this is because she's a woman. "One candidate (a man) can rant about gibberish while the other (a woman) has to be perfect." doesn't just apply to politics, this sounds like every office I've ever worked in.
a large part of this is because she’s a woman.
the slogan I've seen on some shirts, "Good thing we are only looking for equality and not revenge" comes to mind.
As a straight white man, I wouldn't mind wearing a shirt that says "Good thing they only want equality and not revenge" and let people guess who it is referring to.
the slogan I’ve seen on some shirts, “good thing we are only looking for equality and not revenge” comes to mind.
Jesus Christ, I love that so much.
For sure.
It does not help that her town hall tone was very.. very .. I don't know.. pleading/worrying/low energy. I almost had Hillary feelings at some points.
She had fire, spirit.. her campaign has toned down a lot since the DNC... Which is unfortunate.
Edit! For the Down voters, I never said trump good.. he's horrible. I was merely pointing out that her messaging changed, probably under the directions of the DNC. Cookie cutter plain answers.. everything focus grouped.
This is the most 🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅comment I've read all day.
Keep it weird, US
It’s obvious that there is a double standard but it’s too late to point it out.
Time is up.
If people are “undecided” they aren’t going to even consider media fairness or maybe even logic at this point.
It’s Donald Fuckin Trump. Rapist. Fascist. Liar. Cheat. Insert hundreds of other negatives and reasons why he should not have power and be in jail.
It’s voting time. That’s all that’s left. He won the media and the narrative enough to make it a race at all. Pointing it out now is fruitless - he got away with that shit for his purposes.
It has been pointed out for as long as Trump is running against any candidate but it didn't change a thing. If anything, the double standard only got worse over the years.
I was hopeful when media figures started to ask themselves how to better cover Trump after 2016. NPR and On The Media had some decent journalism panels where they dug into the problems with obeying long-standing rules/norms to cover a candidate that weaponizes them. I saw a possibility for real reflection and maybe a significant course correction. That door slammed shut like 2 fucking years ago, and they've played EXACTLY the same game over this campaign. I knew we were fucked when a reporter came on after the Biden-Trump debate to say, essentially, "...and some of Trump's supporters have claimed, without evidence, that Joe Biden has died."
That's it. That was the end of her coverage. They can't even bring themselves to open their eyes long enough to observe unequivocally THAT THE PRESIDENT IS NOT DEAD. If the American experiment fails, a shitload of blame will lay at the feet of the media, who have long since abandoned their pursuit of "T"ruth in favor of the toxoplasma of rage.
It's weird that there's a person that you can call a liar, rapist and con man and not be afraid of being sued for libel or slander, and lots of people think he'll be great at running a country.
It’s obvious that there is a double standard but it’s too late to point it out.
For this election, sure, but there is still a good reason to acknowledge the double standard that has been ongoing for decades now that it is comically blatant. It might be acknowledged by low information idiots in the future.
Looking at the fivethiryeight predictions pages, Trump already has a lock or lean right on 262 votes, and Harris is at 226. Harris has to take Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan or its over, and her voters are in disarray and are half hearted while trumps always vote stronger than polling indicates. It looks to be effectively over unless Harris makes some big changes to energize her base. She's sure as hell not going to get anything by pissing off even more people by digging rightward, but I'd bet real money that thats what she will try.
If she'd pledge to stop the weapons flow on day 1 she'd have the race, but she wont do that, for whatever reason.
I think she’ll take Michigan.
A lot of people are answering undecided on polls in protest over Harris support for the Israeli genocide but intend to actually vote for her due to the significantly worse threat posed by Trump. She could massively improve her polling numbers by just committing to stopping arms shipments to Israel and imposing sanctions on them.
This is highly unlikely to cause a statistically significant difference in the polls. Having this strong of a view point on the matter is largely isolated to a specific demographic of younger, progressive voters, who are notoriously difficult to reach and accurately account for via traditional polling methods.
It registers as the 15th most important issue via a Gallup poll, and that doesn't account for which "side" the individuals polled support.
Of the 30% of the population saying it is an "extremely important issue," it gives no indication of what their desired resolution is.
On the extreme end of the spectrum, consider that 30% of our nation is in a death cult that believes Israel plays a role in their eventual salvation, not to mention how many people are blatantly racist and view anyone with darker skin as a terrorist.
I am registered, politically active, not difficult to locate and have had the same phone number for 20 years, yet, I MIGHT have been polled once in that time!
This isn't to say there aren't those who are doing as they say, but it is not likely to move polls one way or another.
You getting downvoted for your suggestion with no replies as to why shows that this place has a lot of hasbara operating in it. They are actively destroying the democratc party, and the US as a whole, and they couldnt care less about that.
One side must bring peace to the middle east, the other side is allowed to tell Israel to kill Palestinians faster.
And before someone comes defending their stance not to vote for either genocidal enabler, why aren't you trying to save as many people as possible? Are you ok with more people dying because of your ideals? Enjoy living with that choice if he wins.
It's not only about Palestine. Americans should now focus on the things they can actually change. Harris is the best candidate overall, because, well, her adversary is Donald F. Trump, but when it comes to Israel and Palestine both candidates are abysmal.
I'm not even American but this voter-shaming is both frustrating to read and fucking stupid. Nobody—and I repeat, nobody—is going to vote because they were blamed by a random guy on the internet who refuses to acknowledge their very real concern that voting for Harris would be voting for genocide.
Opposition to genocide isn't an option on the ballot, you can't vote for it, especially not for president. And not voting sends a very clear message whether you intend it or not: "I don't care".
Do you value minimizing harm? If you care most about genocide, Harris seems to be the least-worst option. But if you care more about ideological purity than harm reduction, you can vote for a non-serious candidate like Stein, or none at all. Nobody will ever solve this kind of problem at the ballot box, that isn't how democracies work, but if letting things happen instead of exerting what little power you have eases your conscience, that's your right. Doing so does mean a greater risk of a Trump presidency, especially if you live in a swing state.
I would rather minimize harm, so I'm voting for Harris, and encourage others to do the same.
One side expects their candidates to hold some standards, the other side doesn't care. It's like watching a sporting event with a homer who only sees the world based on how it effects their team winning or losing. Fairness doesn't come into play, the other side is always cheating and getting favored media exposure.
She passed the bar exam and operated as a lawyer for years independently defending special assault victims and others victims. She never went bankrupt and has been successful
Trump boasted you need to be "quite" smart to win golf club championships during the debate with Biden, he went bankrupt multiple times and raped women. He can't even hang onto lawyers
Yet Republicans are now calling kamala incompetent
Well of course Kamala is incompetent to them, their goal is to destroy America and only Trump can deliver that.
He doesn't even need to be president to do that. He's succeeding regardless.
So might as well vote kamala if that's the reason
The misogyny is thick.
Don't forget the racism too!
Weird that this has to be explained this late into the game but…
Trump is running on the promise of enacting fascism and using state power to mete out retribution to the ‘undesirables’ that his voters blame for their lack of power. To this end there is nothing he can say or do that will make them not vote for him. He is promising power and as long as he wins his promise is kept.
Kamala is running on a platform of ‘not fascism’ and to that end she does need to provide a coherent alternate worldview to mindless retribution. It’s not enough for her to walk the middle of the road and say as little as possible. She needs to give people a diametrically opposed worldview. She needs to be capable of explaining why fascist retribution isn’t good or helpful. She can not just be a diet Republican. She needs to have coherent answers to their obvious bullshit.
Hope this helps. Horrifying that the people who are a decade into Trumpism and ostensibly responsible for stopping it don’t seem to have the slightest clue what motivates it or how to counter it.
She has been talking about a different way of doing things though, I got the feeling she talked about many policies in the debate that people have ignored.
Non American here, but it really feels like there is nothing she can do to shake the non-trump thing. Lemmy is full of "Trump bad", but I'm missing the "Kamala good". Its as though no one wants to say it, and it feels like it always comes back to Israel. That is understandable too, however she is not a one policy candidate, however it feels like that is how its reduced.
Honestly I get the feeling that its either:
- People being very opposed to one policy enough that its blinding them
- Literal trolls trying to make enough noise to make it a trump vs. Non-trump to disenfranchise the voters
I want to see the "Kamala stands good on policy X" posts here. They should exist but where are they?
No I dont condone the Israel shit, but there has to be more to it. That's too simple.
Is she?
She just got on national TV and refused to support trans rights. Democrats ran to the right of fascists on militarizing the border. She is pro imperialism. She isn’t committed to climate change. She’s not going to meaningfully redistribute wealth. Looking at how desperate Americans are right now do you really think that coming out with a plan to raise the top marginal tax rate from 30 to 35 percent or whatever is some massive rallying cry that’s going to make people re-evaluate their worldviews? She’s not even that strong on abortion rights.
It sounds like you’re coming at this from the perspective that Trump voters like Trump because his fascist talk makes them feel like he’ll wield Presidential power to “fight the evils of the people at the top of society”, but I disagree. I think for a lot of Trump voters it boils down to at least one of a few feelings:
a) abortion is murder, I’ll vote against the side that clearly supports abortion more
b) Immigrants and LGBTQ+ people are the devil
c) I want to afford the stuff I wish I had, and Trump will help me do that.
d) Every left-leaning person of power of any kind is a demon and should get what’s coming to them
IMO only the MAGA voters care about d). The average non-MAGA-but-still-Trump voter doesn’t care really care about “shadowy figures” “getting what’s coming to them”, they just want better lives for themselves as in c).
To sway those people, she doesn’t have to provide a “diametrically opposed worldview” to fascism - that makes it sound like what you think she needs is to run on creating a completely different way of living. It just means appealing to those in the camp of a), b) and/or c). Swaying believers of a) or b) without actually appealing to anti-abortion, anti-immigrant, or anti-LGBTQ+ reform is tricky, and tackling c) comes down to her positioning herself as the better candidate economically, but people in that camp have varied ideas on what’s best for the economy, so that’s tricky too.
But regardless, everyone who cares about the election and isn’t already in any of those camps isn’t gonna vote for Trump anyway, no matter how Harris campaigns.
does need to provide a coherent alternate worldview to mindless retribution
Talking about a border wall is hardly coherent with rejecting mindless retribution. Harris and Waltz aren't at all blaming the elites for working people hardship, but they do blame the immigrants as well, more indirectly but still.
Yeah, because they need to convince people in the middle to vote for them, and people in the middle are stupid and racist.
Yes, that's the advantage of leading a cult.
I'm seeing ads on TV that are like "Harris is for they/them, Trump is for you"
I'd like to see an ad that says "Harris is for freedom, Trump is for Hitler"
Is it too much to ask her to go on a 10 minute rant about someone she showered with had the best vagina and every single lady that showered with her spoke highly of how great her vagina is?
I had thought the same thing
"liberal media" outlets are either actually run by conservatives or so obsessed with trying to appear balanced, they end up downplaying Trump and highlighting Harris issues. Combine that with the pure propoganda from conservative media, and the whole industry has a strong conservative slant...
- Real news: Trump praises Hitler
- "liberal media": Trump praises WW2 leader, Harris eats pizza with a fork
- Conservative media: FORK GATE 2024!!! Harris campaign in shambles!
I had a thought about this; fascism exists because there are evil but effective ways of swaying people. By scapegoating immigrants and providing propaganda, he's doing exactly what other fascists have done (including Hitler) to great success.
It's like any other good vs evil things, the good guys always have extra hurdles to deal with, like a super hero who has to save civilians and can't just sucker punch the baddies. Too bad this is reality, and the good guys aren't guaranteed to win...
it also shows how complicit media is in fascism and how any law that would enforce factual reporting by bringing conduct before a jury to decide whether intentional lying occurred by a celebrity or media platform would undermine fascistic lies.
Except half the jury would be comprised of people who either support those lies, even knowing they're lies, or don't care enough to form an opinion.
You would need a population that is both concerned with the rule of law and break from political teams enough to fairly examine arguments for bad faith.
We do not have that population. Any jury would be split or worse.
To me it seems like less of a double standard and more of a representation of the divide between Americans.
Trump gets plenty of criticism from all around. Including from the same people that are also criticizing Harris. But his voter base is in full support of the stuff he's spewing, and will believe anything he says wholesale. Even if it's crazy, or unsubstantiated, or demonstrable lies.
The people who make legitimate criticisms of Harris are not supportive of trump. But them criticizing Trump will not change Trump. He already has unwavering support from a large number of people. Why would he do anything to gain the support of someone who is willing to call him out on his bullshit and hold him to an actual standard? And it's not going to change the minds of any of his cult-like voters. However they do have hope that by criticizing Harris they might see her actually make changes towards becoming a candidate they wholesale fully support. Not a candidate that they are forced to choose because of the alternative. But a candidate that they actively want to be elected. These criticisms might also be persuasive to other Harris supporters and call them to be vocal and advocate for her to change as well.
So it's less of individuals having double standards and treating the candidates differently, but the two polar opposite standards that the voter bases have.
Problem with that is, she's getting the pull from both sides, the far left and the disTrumpled right. She can't do enough of what either wants without losing the other, and she needs both to pull off a strong enough win to save democracy. So she's walking a tightthread while dodging spitballs.
Meanwhile Trump is splashing about in his pigsty, slinging mud and shit, which his people gleefully eat and smear all over.
the media often bandwagons along these things so end up with bizarre and insane juxtapositions of like Kamala Harris' actual proposed housing policies being being compared with like speculation on how mass deportations and military invasions of cities will affect housing prices or something.
Someone who gets it. The reason he gets so much play time in the media is because clicks. You are contributing to the problem. Not being part of the solution. Ignoring a problem in the public is how you stop them. The reason they keep doing it is because it works.
I'd love nothing more than to see her just spend an hour straight laying into Trump and Vance with f-bomb strewn attacks and continuous heavy-handed insults. I think she'd probably convert some Republicans if she did that.
Can we stop putting up articles stuck behind paywalls please?
They just want the headline anyways
Centrists look on Trump's base and wonder why they can't have a mindless cult too.
Micheal Bloomberg hates Donald Trump because he ain't Donald Trump.
Doesn't anyone feel like this has been the case for a long time with anyone versus Trump?
Actually, let me back that up, this seems to be a major Republican thing actually.
Democrats will follow the rules and try out an exemplary candidate up for President (most of the time).
Republicans will skirt the legality of everything possible to win with a candidate who embodies the worst human instincts and activity.
Maybe I'm the only one who feels that?
It's been true since he started the whole Birtherism bullshit with Obama, which was totally a lie and specifically racist. Bill Adair who started Politifact just started to advertise the reality of how bad the Republicans lie with his new book. Some info about it at https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/republicans-democrats-lies-bill-adair-fact-check-politifact-trump-b2631493.html
One side's supporters partook in the education system while the other went to church?
They're accustomed to gibberish...
This is a feature not a bug in a slaver's system.
It's the image that each candidate has crafted. Harris is running as an ultra-competent bureaucrat who will follow all the rules. Trump is running as an angry old fart who will break them.
Fascists in the media lionize Trump because they love the idea of a Rebel Billionaire breaking all the rules to MAGA.
And because so much of the media is owned and operated by fascists, you get a stark Trump bias.
But what are Dems going to do about it? Break up these mega-corp news conglomerates? Prosecute flagrant violations of election law by billionaire media magnets? Threaten these oligarchs in any conceivable way?
No. They're just going to get strung around by the nose, then complain that The Low Information Voter didn't see through the bullshit filling up their screens and airwaves.
Laughing out loud bruh... A next level one liner burn... ʘ‿ʘ
I hate to be a downer, but "it's not fair" doesn't really matter at this point. Trump continues to gain, and he's babbling incoherently most days and being quite clear that he plans to be a fascist from day one. Whether it's fair or not, there's is a huge double standard. If Harris does anything wrong she loses support. Trump daily explains gleefully how he's going to take away civil rights, begin mass deportations, purge the federal government and fill it with loyalists, and on, and on, and on, and on, and he's been slowly but steadily gaining support for a month.
Is there a huge, glaring double standard? Yes, absolutely. Does it matter for the blunt reality of the upcoming election? No, not at all.
And yet you spineless fucking cowards didn't endorse, so your words mean nothing
Ended wars with France? Like when we deserted Afghanistan and left them in the mess we created?
It's not as if it was a beacon of prosperity and joy before the US came in. I'm not sure it arguably got better/worse during the time... It was different for the US occupation, and now it's back where it started. Lives lost, people traumatized, money thrown away, but at least some corpos got rich and PMC's had their babtism of fire... Onto the next one.
Just one more year of occupation bro. I promise bro just one more year and it'll fix everything bro. Bro. Just one more year. Please just one more. One more year and we can fix this whole problem bro. Bro cmon just give me one more year I promise bro. Bro please I just need one more year.
Liberals oppose war challenge level: impossible.
Trump is targeting mostly far-right evangelicals who have a common vision on what they want the country to look like. He has a lot of energy when doing so, and because of how similar their interests are he could get away with all sorts of stuff and they would still vote for him.
Harris (and Democrats in general) is the only alternative mainstream candidate that everyone else has, and that "everyone else" consists of all sorts of people with conflicting interests: liberals, neoliberals, centrists, progressives, leftists, different religious groups or cultures, varying economic demographics, racial minorities, LGBTQ, and immigrants for instance. They're trying to appeal to all of them at once, but because they don't have a shared vision, nobody is happy and they get more scrutinized. To make at least some of them happy, they need to focus on certain groups and deprioritize the interests of other groups. However, once they do that then the groups they deprioritize get angry since they no longer have representation, and the groups that are still there remain skeptical because of the history of not working for their interests in the past.
The advantage that third parties like PSL have is that from the start, they're trying to appeal to a specific group of people with a common vision like Trump is instead of trying to play both sides with conflicting groups and making nobody happy. The problem (aside from the election duopoly bought out by corporations) is that they are a very small political minority so they have no real chance of winning the election without winning over people from other groups which is a challenge, especially when there are many more unknowns when it comes to progressing than there are when it comes to reverting to a previous state so there is more fragmentation due to those sort of disagreements.
First rule of resisting tyranny:
Don’t obey in advance!!
This is the piece Robinson's fuming about, and he's absolutely fucking right. It was the most insane example of journalist circlejerking I've ever seen. Bunch of navel-gazing morons.
It's not about being perfect. It's about not regressing to a 2004 republican. That doesn't appealt to Republicans who have moved further right and not to the left who refuse to budge.
It's willful ignorance to complain that she needs to be perfect when the people complaining are often specific about the things they care about that are being ignored.
And if those are being ignored you can be shocked they won't vote for her and you must admit she's clearly not courting those voters either.
This is either a non-issue cause she is going for exactly the voters she wants or she's willingly creating a flaw by deciding to court votes that won't be enough to win.
I don't get how this is still an argument. It's happening exactly as participants are making it happen.Affirmative action for morons
The problem isn't having a high standards for Harris. She is running for the most powerful position in probably the world, so she has to be able to do this. The problem is there is no standard for Trump at all. His supporters are fine with his low quality for lots of reasons, none that are helpful to the nation. The GOP is fine because of the votes he brings by being himself and saying things they think but couldn't say out loud. And the rest, like the media and the left and other country leaders are soft on calling a spade a spade because somehow pointing out the Emperor has no clothes and is shitting all over the furniture is not playing fair or isn't respectful or something.
It's been like this for nearly as long as I can remember.
Democrats credentials for presidency - they are not Trump.
Edit - In any other election cycle this is a legitimate question.
What are you bringing to the table? What is your policy position?
For both the parties.
Just because this election only party is eligible to represent doesnt mean that the questions shouldn't be asked. Browbeating undecided voters for the questions is wrong and might give the result no one wants.
they are not... a sexist, traitorous sellout and that's scratching the surface
In a two party system this is always true. But what do you mean by "Trump". What does it mean to not be like him?
What does it mean to not be like him?
That is the rhetoric that is prevalent on lemmy.
The position is to acknowledge results of an election. That should be enough. For more information there is a ton of resources like Harris' website.
What else should the media do about it? It's not like Trump can be shamed into changing his behavior. It's not like Republicans won't completely dismiss anything he says. Even if they did wall to wall coverage about how he's a fascist, the third of the country that elects the president won't change their minds.
What else should the media do about it?
All they need to do is fact-check his bullshit like we saw in the debate. A simple "reporters here at XYZ network could not substantiate the claims made by the ex-president, and found no evidence supporting them" would do nicely.
Its the same with actual actions to. I just got done pasting a part of an article someone linked where the comment was about how under biden there is more drilling on federal land than trump but the salient part is he fought this but was blocked by a lawsuit from republican states. I have seen the same with his work with student loans. Its not enough. Its like dudes. Is half a loaf what we want. no. but its better than no loaf while wheat fields are ordered burned and salted. Maybe we should not vote for the guys trying to put the fire out because they are not putting them out fast enough vs how quickly they spread and should instead let the guys starting fires win and these other guys who have never put out a fire say if we vote for them they will put them out sooooo much better.
I hope nobody tells Trump about Pol Pot,..
Can any of you honestly say you have chosen which of the two is better based on how they speak? I think most are voting based on what they expect them to do.
Are we still reading Washington Post?
"I dont vote for right wingers on the right or the left" is the closest I can get to a single standard to apply to all candidates.
But its more nuanced than that, isnt it-- as much as you'd like to pretend otherwise. You're either pretending not to understand, in which case you're just a troll, or you're too limited in your cognitive empathy to understand, in which case, you arent worth anyones time to talk to.
"You criticized her for not being good at X so she did X a bunch!"
Yeah but she's bad at it and it went really poorly for her and hurt her numbers.
These people are fucking idiots.
Seriously? Even Fox News admitted that she handed them their own ass.
I have a hard time believing that but I don't know anything about it. I saw clips of the CNN town hall and she was horrendous.
nearly perfect anyway
Oh then what if we had more than two parties ?
Oh, they all get called traitors.
What a lazy take.
"Lazy" is too generous
First you have to fix the electoral college and FPTP voting. Because until those are removed, you’re always going to end up with effectively a two party system. And if one of those parties is pledging to replace the system with fascism, well, then you’ve only got one democratic option to vote for, no matter their platform.
Once you can rank your options? THEN multiple candidates makes sense.
I can only speak for myself, as a Leftist I dont expect perfection but I have a few quite simple things that I would want from a presidency that I dont think are unreasonable. I want an end to the funding of genocide, an end to US imperalism, an end to the military (at least offensive military), an end to fossil fuels, an improved immigration system, decreased taxes for the workers, less inflation, ranked choice voting, enforced civil rights for women and trans people, a better healthcare system, no corporate bailouts or funding. Kamala might support some or none of those things and I wouldn't know because she doesn't make her policy positions clear. I think that if she was just transparent and honest then more people would vote for her, as of now her campaign website contains only a few very vague positions.
We're fucked and will probably all starve to death. At least vote for Kamala so we don't devolve into fascism this fast.
I voted for Kamala in early voting, it was the most painful thing I have done so far
the 60% of Americans that are paycheck to paycheck will starve to death, and the 39% who have savings will get poorer. The top 1% will get richer either way and none of this matters to them. Its just a matter of how fast their wealth increases.
They probably would be fine if half of us starved, as long as we dont block the higjways with our bodies, and dont stink up the place.
Washington Post - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Washington Post:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/24/harris-trump-cnn-town-hall/
For the first time in decades, The Washington Post will not endorse a candidate in this year’s presidential election, the newspaper’s publisher announced Friday, a decision that sparked widespread outrage among the paper’s staffers.
“The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election,” Post publisher Will Lewis said in a statement. “We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.”
The Post reported the decision not to endorse was made by the newspaper’s billionaire owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, citing two sources briefed on the matter.
-- CNN
Media Bias Fact Check is a right-wing propaganda tool to repeat the laughable lie that the media has a left-wing bias.
She lacks momentum and a charisma that gets people to follow you. So random critics can shout from the bleachers and say how they think she's doing it wrong. So they tell her to jump and she jumps. They tell her to move this way and she does. It's always wrong. Because they don't know what she needs to do either.
They know yelling at Trump is useless. They don't have any power over him. He'll do what he wants and says what he wants and we can try to call him out and he doesn't care and his followers don't either. In all his ignorance, he has confidence. Arguably because of his ignorance.
In all her intelligence, she's not sure what to do. But neither do the spectators. I'm not sure what she needs to do, but it probably has to come from somewhere inside herself and proclaim it without apology.
There's a lot of smart people in that room. I'm not sure there's much wisdom.
Kamala isn't really standing for anything, is trying to be too safe, and I don't think it's going too work to well
[What the fuck are you talking about?] (https://kamalaharris.com/issues)
This is exactly the issue that the post is about
Vice President Harris grew up in a middle class home as the daughter of a working mom. She believes that when the middle class is strong, America is strong. That’s why as President, Kamala Harris will create an Opportunity Economy where everyone has a chance to compete and a chance to succeed — whether they live in a rural area, small town, or big city.
Vice President Kamala Harris has made clear that building up the middle class will be a defining goal of her presidency. That’s why she will make it a top priority to bring down costs and increase economic security for all Americans. As President, she will fight to cut taxes for more than 100 million working and middle class Americans while lowering the costs of everyday needs like health care, housing, and groceries. She will bring together organized labor and workers, small business owners, entrepreneurs, and American companies to create good paying jobs, grow the economy, and ensure that America continues to lead the world.
There is not a single policy included in this two paragraph long statement.
It's the most transparent Politician Speak, saying an earful while telling you absolutely nothing.
And what doesTrump stands for? Let's see. Revenge against anyone who he doesn't like, threatens political opponents with military action, across the board tariffs that will result in retaliation from other countries, more tax cuts for the rich,.... Oh and Lots of fear mongering.
He is dangerous.
I don't think he is going to work too well.
Right but it's not about him. You can't point out how the sociopath with cult of sycophants is a problem cause that is obvious to those of us that care.
To those that don't it's just mud slinging that doesn't answer the fact they don't like her policies.
It won't work to just not be the other, you got to be preferable. I thought this was learned in 2016 but I see a lot this repeating itself.When someone brings up they don't like Harris' policies it's not enough to shout back the other guy is obviously worse. It doesn't answer the point. And people are not that rational.
She stands for a lot of things, this exact kind of meaningless bullshit is the fucking problem
