Politics
For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.
Rule 1: Posts have the following requirements:
▪️ Post articles about the US only
▪️ Title must match the article headline
▪️ Recent (Past 30 Days)
▪️ No Screenshots/links to other social media sites or link shorteners
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. One or two small paragraphs are okay.
Rule 3: Articles based on opinion (unless clearly marked and from a serious publication), misinformation or propaganda will be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Media owners, CEOs and/or board members
view the rest of the comments
Like I said, your agenda is showing.
I started out with an article explaining some Arab points of view as they pertain to American leaders, encompassing a couple of different points of view from "uncommitted but Trump is worse" all the way to "fuck the Democrats I don't care for as long as they're sending weapons." All legit points of view.
You pounced on the opportunity to start whacking the never-Kamala drum as far as you could possibly whack it, recycling a bunch of conveniently-packaged framings that are pretty popular within the right wing, ignoring me directly speaking to what you were saying and asking relevant questions.
I could continue the conversation, asking what happened to my list of very significant left-wing progress Biden accomplished as president, what your reaction to it is, why you're persisting in the framing that what he did was bad and Kamala needs to break away from him. I could explain the difference between Reagan pausing because Israel was bombing our allies the Iraqis while giving them a green light to kill any Arabs at all that weren't our friends, and so on, but I feel like you probably wouldn't respond to it any more directly than you did my previous message. I think you'd just keep whacking the same drum, which you can do without my participation.
Huh? I count exactly two questions (only one of which wasn't rhetorical) and I think I responded to both?
Huh? I never tried to imply that I'm saying people shouldn't vote for Harris. If that's how I sounded like then I see why you're assuming I have an agenda, but that's not my point at all. Harris sucks as a candidate, Trump sucks as a candidate. Both are unelectable and both would lose by a landslide if the opposite side pushed a half-decent candidate. No, both are not the same that's not what I'm saying. This what I was saying and I thought I'd made that clear enough.
Huh? They were bombing Lebanese and Palestinians no?
You said Biden was to the right of Reagan. I brought up some examples which make him, to me, the furthest-left president we've had since LBJ. You ignored that and simply allowed as how he might not be to the right of Reagan, and started talking about what right-wing things he did in the 90s, instead of addressing or talking further about anything I said.
You did answer the question, that part is fair. But, you didn't really address the point, you just found a way to circle it back around to the same conclusion you'd already reached, without a substantive discussion about why to consider him a far-right president or not.
What on earth are you talking about? Harris is the most popular Democrat since Obama. The fact that it's a dead heat has nothing to do with her being bad, it's just that our media is so terrible that a lot of people think either that she's awful, or that Trump is good.
https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/politicians/all
I don't even really have a good idea of Harris's policies. I can talk about Biden's because he has some kind of a track record, which she doesn't have in the same way, but like I said, it basically doesn't even matter. Trump wants to blow up the world, and I don't want that to happen, so I voted for Harris. I'm fine talking with you about aspects of her policy, but it's definitely not relevant to the decision of who to vote for.
This whole framing of her being unpopular, or unelectable, is an absolutely textbook right-wing framing of the election. It's not true, but even that aside, it's just not any kind of relevant analysis. It's just a way to try to hook the groupthink in people's brains to make them think she's not worth voting for without focusing on any kind of policy.
You're completely right.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/10/us/politics/biden-reagan-israel.html
There was a whole separate incident, touched on in that article, where Israel bombed an Iraqi nuclear plant and Reagan delayed the shipment of four F-16s as a response. I didn't know about the second incident with bombing Lebanon and Reagan's reaction.
And, looking at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_casualties_of_war
The big thing that I see is that the pace of the killing has exploded, and of course we haven't done anything about it.
The whole reason that I posted this article, and what I keep saying, is that Biden's enabling of that whole operation is disgusting. He's not doing it, but you can certainly hold him accountable for not stopping it. I just don't think that Kamala Harris is "doing that" in the same way, and of course, it is relevant that Trump is several times worse, as hard as that might be to believe on this one particular issue.
Biden has a good labor record; that's not really up for dispute, so I didn't dispute it. Also I didn't say he was further right than Reagan; I said he was further right than Reagan on some issues. Those, notably, don't include labor rights. Anyway Biden's biggest problem, as I understand it, was that he was simply too far gone. I mean the man had a series of very public cognitive failures, which added to his already well-known and unpopular policies (immigration and Gaza come to mind) and an overall meh administration (with some very real gains in many important areas, tbf) and setting aside how good or bad he was as president he just wasn't gonna beat Trump.
That makes her better than... Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.
Is it? I don't really understand these things so maybe you're right, but that's definitely not what I intended when I called her unelectable. I also explained what I meant twice, I think, so I'm not sure where the confusion is.
She's not "doing that", but all her signaling so far has been that she'll carry over "doing that" when she's president.
Okay I think we're having two different conversation. I never, at any point, talked about who anyone should vote for. Again, this is my second time making that clear. I was taking issue with criticism of the Uncommitted movement's, well, uncommitted campaign because it's both barking up the wrong tree and straight up victim blaming.
You did say he was more to the right on some issues. And then promptly didn't give any examples. Not super helpful when we could see if his position on those stances had changed since 2008 (considering it's been 16 years since....)
I mean in his senate years he was a small government, tough on crime, etc etc senator not unlike pre-Trump republicans. There's a Wikipedia page titled (I think) "Biden's political history" for more details.
The thing about POTUS is that the office's ability to do... Well, most things is limited. He's said about a lot of things "yeah I don't believe this anymore", but then he went full Republican on the border when he felt it would get him more votes (which I don't think it did, but that aside) so you can't really judge his position on, say, police brutality or the war on drugs.