249
Kamala Harris Holds Emergency Call With Dem Donors
(www.rollingstone.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
249 points (90.6% liked)
News
36384 readers
801 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Assuming the Republicans still hold the House, they would ABSOLUTELY LOVE THIS!
Sure, President Harris would still be a Democrat and control the Executive branch, but her new VP would be voted in by the House of Representatives. They'd try to put Trump in as VP. Having Trump (even as the junior in the Executive Branch) would give him access and power to spoil President Harris's agenda.
"Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress." - source is The Constitution of the United States specifically the 25th Amendment
Alternatively, again assuming Republicans keep the house, they could make Trump the Speaker of the House.
"The Constitution does not explicitly require the speaker to be an incumbent member of the House of Representatives, although every speaker thus far has been, and as a member the speaker also represents their district and retains the right to vote." source
I hate these two possible scenarios of VP or Speaker.
It's so wild to me that one of your two political parties is actively trying to dismantle your democracy and everyone continues on as if it's normal.
You seem to think the other hasn't been working towards the same goal for the past 50 years at the best of corporations, just less obvious about it. The current Dems are fiscally conservative, and socially liberal. That's why all the Republicans fight about is usually social issues, they're both working towards whatever corporations want done with the money most of the time.
Dude, Biden tried to forgive like $140 billion in student loans and invested like a trillion dollars into infrastructure and energy programs with the IRA
You're not entirely wrong that the DNC is heavily influenced by wealthy corporations/donors, but c'mon man. Get a grip! You sound ridiculous with that both sides nonsense
Doing good things a few times doesn't make up for all the other neoliberal corporate bullshit you seem to want to ignore happened.
Looks like providing a carrot once in a while works well at making people forget.
Are you trying to suggest not voting for one of the only two political parties? Third party candidates can't win in the US
If you are, how old are you and how long have you been paying attention to American politics? I'm genuinely curious
I never even got close to suggesting that. I just pointed out the DNC has been steering the party in the same direction as the Republicans for the past 50 years. Shifting the entire political spectrum of the US so far to the right that we're literally looking at half of the country outright endorsing an overt a Fascist Authoritarian takeover.
They've allowed this shift while claiming that because they're socially liberal that they aren't actually helping shift us towards the situation we're in now. They don't actually do anything to change when they lose elections because they know the electoral system inevitably results in 2 parties and their corporate donors don't really care either, since both parties are in their pocket. The only real difference between the two is social policies and the occasional carrot given to "prove" they care so the citizens don't actually revolt against the party and replace them all.
Our system is fucked, but it's what we have to work within, this election options are pretty clear cut unless you're a fucking idiot. It's either maintaining at minimum the current poor status quo, or an overt Fascist Authoritarian takeover. And the DNC knows that, it's why they have pushed through whoever the fuck they want for the past several elections, regardless of what initial primaries looked like. As soon as Hilary announced her candidacy the DNC did everything in their power to ensure she was the nominee, trying to make it superficially look like the people actually had a choice while standing in the way of every other candidate. Dem leadership relies on voters falling in line because the alternative is clear Fascism, but they keep showing that they don't actually care once elected.
Don't get me wrong, there are a few Dems that seem to actually care and try to work the way the system is intended, but they never make it anywhere in the party, and when they begin to get a following, leadership gets in the way to prevent them actually accomplishing anything truly worthwhile.
The DNC is probably worse than the RNC because of it, at least the Republicans are clear about their shitty intentions and rally behind that. Instead, the Dems attack and undermine each other as if the Republicans and their fascist threat didn't exist.
I'm with you 1000% on pretty much everything except your last paragraph. But, let's slow down.
This started with someone saying, 'choosing who to vote for shouldn't be a difficult decision.' You replied saying, 'actually Dems/the DNC sucks.' Can you see how in the context of that conversation, it might seem like you're trying to respond and even refute what the previous commenter said (i.e. it actually should, or could, legitimately be a difficult decision)? Cmiiw, but I think you were just trying to hijack/insert your point into the conversation and that's totally fine! But you need to have work it in somehow or else you're just being disrespectful of them and ultimately others in the forum. Gotta have a bit of rizz, you know. Even saying something like, 'I totally agree, but tbf Biden sucks and...' or 'while I dont disagree...' would help.
Now, to address this. You say this like Rs/the RNC is honest to their voters. Trump is literally lying to them in nearly every sentence he makes. You really need to take a step back and try to see the nuance (literally always in everything).
Middle America has absolutely been shafted by both parties for decades while investments in infrastructure and whatnot have obviously been focused on cities. This makes sense, they literally don't like cities. Still, they're struggling and we, as a nation, have abandoned them. This video honestly breaks my heart. It shows how each president has made promises they either knew or should've known they couldn't keep.
Where does that leave us? Well, you might say no one really has a choice because both parties suck. I'd say, well, before the tea party, Republicans weren't so crazy. They legit took over the party that most aligned with theirs. Can you say we've done the same? If I'm honest, I won't even register as a Dem because I'm kinda with you. But surely we see how that's a bit of a problem if we want to force the DNC to take us seriously and to ultimately bend to our will.
Alright this got too long. Basically, there's lots of unhappy Americans being lied to. And some are dumber than others. One party is clearly lying more and unfortunately it's paying off bigly.
You guys need to get over this knee jerk reaction that any criticism of the "moderate" party is an existential threat that will move the needle over to the "death" party. The person you're replying to didn't say anything remotely like what you're suggesting.
Yes your republicans are materially worse when they're in power, and you should do whatever you can to keep them out (I'm no accelerationist) including voting for their opposition.
But I honestly think that yes both sides do in part contribute to this fall into fascism. Obviously I'm not saying that there are no progressive elements among the democrats, but y'all need to be able to have these conversations about what to do about the chuds in the democratic party, in addition to voting.
Did you see my last response to them? It addresses what you're saying, I think
I don't disagree with you or then. However, within the context of what's being said what are they trying to do? At best, they're hijacking the convo when it's not really relevant
(P.S. basing this on memory of the convo, didn't go back and reread everything)
I see what you're saying. Yeah we're all three on the same page, but bad actors out there trying to get people not to vote muddy the waters.
No no. House doesn't get to nominate/choose the VP. Harris would choose a VP then the House would have to vote to approve them or not, like the Senate does with SCOTUS nominees. So the worst a Repub-controlled House could do (and they would) is prevent her from filling the VP slot at all.
That's why: 1) very important Dems get the House back in this election. Biden may not hand it over immediately but it could happen at any time during the term. 2) It's probably better to make her the nominee now so she can choose a VP to run with and avoid that issue.
Realistically, if Biden were re-elected then Democrats would almost certainly win the handful of seats needed to control the House.
I think a Trump VP is inconceivable - if it came down to that Harris would likely just continuously nominate random democrats and leave the position vacant.
At which point political assassination becomes a real concern as the next in line is Mike Johnson.
Or she could use the presidential immunity and make sure that Trump can't be nominated in that position 🤷
It would take Harris to Nominate him as vice, it would instead be a deadlock of never a vice, and whatever.