politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
she needs to specifically call out every single bullshit thing he's ever done, starting from trump "university" all the way up to the catastrophic covid response, the ukraine phone calls, the stolen documents, and on and on.
she needs to dial it up to 11 and keep it there. it's time to throw out this "let's take the high road" attitude that's accomplished exactly jack fucking shit over the last too many decades
There isn't enough hours left until election day to list all of it.
Also, maybe she should try another tactic than the one that BARELY worked for her predecessor the last time around playing on the much easier "people are experiencing how awful Trump is as president RIGHT NOW" difficulty level.
If she wants to win and win big (which is the only outcome that isn't humiliating and dangerous for democracy), she needs more than "Trump bad". She's going to need some "Kamala good" to energize the base.
I'm all for it. Give me something to look forward to, not something to run from, for once this decade
Fear drives people to the polls though. It's kinda sad but true. So there needs to be a mix.
HOPE worked pretty well for Obama
obama didn't win because of "obama good" messaging, he won because people hated bush enough that the got off their ass to vote. similarly, it wasn't "biden good" messaging that made him win.
when more people vote, dems win. that's why republicans are desperately trying to disenfranchise, gerrymander, and otherwise suppress all the votes they can.
"kamala good" campaigning will accomplish nothing. she needs to make the people who are sitting on their ass angry enough to get up and vote. not FOR her, but AGAINST trump
Either your knowledge of history is bogus, or you're too young to have experienced the 08 election between Obama and McCain. Obama didn't win 'because people hated bush', he won because he ran on the (now obviously bogus and intentionally vague) message of hope and change.
Obama literally won based on his messaging, so I hope no one listens to you on this matter.
Well that and he's an incredibly charismatic person, exceptionally well spoken and handled himself well in almost all public engagements.
Change from what?
What did people want to change?
What was wrong that we all wanted to change..... Away.... From?
Yeah it was deliberately vague bullshit, but I was there. We wanted to change away from Bush and war and bigotry and callous disregard for our fellow citizens.
Obama's genius was retorical, not substantial. This country doesn't know what it wants because we have vastly different ideas about what would be best even inside the Democratic party, let alone independents and Republicans. Laying out specific policy goals is mostly a trap. Because whoever you piss off cares a lot more about that than whoever you please.
Trump does the same thing by vomiting so much bullshit that voters can imagine he will give them whatever their hearts desire is because he said he would at some point. He won't, but his voters are mostly already praying to a sky angel so they have a lot of experience projecting love and benevolence for them onto a distant figure that doesn't care about them at all.
Obama had a huge advantage on McCain because McCain seemed comparatively old, feeble, and not nearly as well-spoken. Then McCain picked Sarah Palin as a running mate and America heard her try to form sentences in real time.
GW was on his way out. The choice was McCain's version of conservatism plus whatever the crazy cat lady was going to say along the way, or Obama's promise of hope and change, with a very well-understood Biden at his side.
Mcain's primary win was a rebuke of Bush. McCain lost to Bush in the 2000 primary. He ran again in 08 and that time he got it because he represented a different "maverick" path from Bush's Neoconservatism.
McCain was also a neoconservative, but his brand was a straight shooting veteran with principles.
But the voting base wanted more change than that. McCain was still a Republican. The people wanted the Opposite of Bush, as seen in the down ballot races giving Dems a supermajority. People were predicting the end of the Republican party in 2009.
We all know how that turned out. But at the time it seemed transformational.
Though Palin kind of twisted it right back to W-ism, but even more so.
It was a terrible decision, but only in hindsight. She was a popular governor and a political outsider, even by Alaska standards.
But she let the proto tea party get to her and just ran with her worst instincts.
People voted for Obama because they believed in change. Democrats can't just win by making people hate their opponents. Democrats would have no agenda if all it took was making people hate their opponents.
You just described the Republican party.
you're talking like this is a normal election. republicans are trying to turn this country into a theocratic dictatorship, and if you think there won't be violence (again) if/when they lose, then honestly you're either not paying attention, or are deluding yourself.
everyone's absolute top priority from now on should be keeping trump out of the white house. that means getting everyone out to vote. "agenda" or no
People know Trump is a bad guy. If that is your own message it isn't going to win the voters you want it to.
Obama is maybe the best example of making a campaign about you and giving people a reason to believe in you.
Not everyone cannot pull it off like he can though and Kamala is no Obama.
Every fucking time he opens his mouth, she should interrupt him with "prove it". Like, he says the sky is blue? Fucking prove it.
She got off to a good start already.
"Biden may have accidentally called Zelenskyy Putin. At an open meeting, but Trump likely calls Putin 'boss' in hidden ones"
I think you meant "daddy."
I doubt she wants to spend 12 hours listing off Trump's shitty behavior and crimes. Ain't nobody got time for that.
And anyone who doesn't know about what a piece of shit he is by now probably won't listen to it anyways.
New filibuster strategy just dropped.
Naw, she'll just rattle it off like a summary of charges: "115 counts of lying directly to the public, 14 counts of ignoring the CDC during a pandemic, ..." Short, pithy, with all the bite of a courtroom prosecution.
I'm waiting for the "abortions after birth" challenge to the lying coward treasonous pedophile rapist.
Sometimes Biden's mental decline wasn't capable of challenging
There's no low road here. That dude's in a submarine.
Pity it's not the Titan
Hell yeah. I like to say that when they go low, kick them while they're down there!
She needs all 8 years just to finish the list.
And let’s jump to the debate. I want to watch her turn him upside down and use his head as a mop.
The problem there is that there are so bloody many valid things to call him out on that it just turns into white noise if you just hit on every single one of them, and the message just becomes "Trump is a shitty person and a shitty president," which has been said a million times already. Focusing in on high-profile offenses is a good way to fix specific examples in the public consciousness.
I'd also suggest something like "The Daily Trump ScumLog." A video series where every day a new example of Trump being shitty gets called out in however much detail the medium allows. Every week, the spiciest gets edited for time and made into a commercial for wider broadcast. This would make it easier to focus in on specific examples, while still emphasizing that the list is Vast.
i dont' listen to podcasts or watch vid series or any of that, but i would subscribe and donate to that one in a heartbeat
It’s just impossible. It would take a small army of staff to compile his catalogue of lies, and Harris doesn’t have the time to recite it. What she needs to do is grab him by the pussy. Drive home that he is a felon, a rapist, and that he himself is willingly raped by Putin, that he is owned by bitches and he is a bitch. She needs to leverage her biography as a black woman to utterly humiliate him. To deeply wound him. To haunt him with the eventuality of his incarceration and inevitable end as a failure.