832
The Obamas Endorse Harris: 'This Is Going to Be Historic'
(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 26 Jul 2024
832 points (98.0% liked)
News
23259 readers
1563 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
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.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
She isn’t on death’s door, she doesn’t want to jail people for pronouns, she supports a woman’s right to choose, the list goes on. The election is months away and it’s likely her vs trump.
Consider rolling up your sleeves and working on social and political causes to help see people and policies you like make it to the top. I have personally found it very fulfilling to volunteer at the local and state level in particular.
Love her or hate her, she is better than Trump in literally every way. The decision is obvious and complaining won’t put someone you like more on the ballot.
Is that really the best we can hope for? Or ask for? Someone who's better than Trump?
Got any actual suggestions, or are you only here to complain that any candidate isn't a 100% perfect match for everything you want in the world?
I'd be thrilled for someone who isn't an obvious self centered opertunist. Someone with principals that aren't power for its own sake. I thought that was Obama. Honestly I still believe he has that in him. I know it's Bernie, and Yang. I'm sure there are more out there. But our system itself keeps them from getting to the top.
So, no.
Feel free to fund an entirely new party or even a new constitution, in the meantime you just need to take 2 hours off your massive, world changing project and vote for Kamala Harris.
If people are only ever given the choice between a terrible option and a mediocre option, they will start to question the system which gives them these choices.
Apparently not.
I've been donating monthly to the Forward Party since it started. I could work on a new constitution.
Great, please do.
I hear you, but it's also fun to see how excited Democrats are right now. It's partly shock and relief at Biden dropping out, but I think there's also real excitement in the mix!
My wife and I have never been the biggest fans of Harris. We said the night Biden stepped down that she was the natural pick, but not the best pick.
She and her team have changed our minds. Harris actually attacking Trump and the right, embracing a younger crowd, along with some policies that she has mentioned, have us on board. Give her some time to lay out HER platform, not just Biden 2.0, and I think she's going to surprise a lot of people. I am one of those excited.
If anything, it will be stuff from California that she has to worry about. Always been clouds around her but nothing specific i can recall.
That's true. Even I've felt a couple times.
I'm skeptical but giving her a chance. Apparently her voting record in the Senate wasnt that far off from Bernies general position (although not "statistically closest to Bernie" like this circulated meme was saying)
At least she seems like she's got some good energy and getting people engaged to vote and participate.
In July, of an election year, in the US? Yes, that's the best you get.
Make a time machine, convince Biden to drop out 8-12 months ago, then you can have your open primary season.
That's a plan, I can get behind.
But I would go to 5 years ago.
Why go 5 years when you could go back and ensure the convicted felon loses to Hilary.
That's a good point. And a better plan.
I thought you were going to say:
"Is that really the best we can hope for? 'Working on social and political causes to help see people and policies you like make it to the top'?"
And I was like "yeah, it is the best we can hope for".
That is what I'm asking for. Everyone else seems content with backing a "winner".
I don't know if you understand. People are donating and volunteering, for Kamala Harris. You don't want more participation, You just want people to support your personally chosen candidate (who remains nameless).
I haven't seen one I like this cycle. Neither major party has nominated one I really liked in 40 years. The Dems came close a couple times.
Not one person? Really? You want people to satisfy you with a good candidate this November and you can’t even name one you like?
This is why people ready to vote blue this November get annoyed at these conversations. You aren’t serious people.
This sentiment is really impractical in a functional democracy of over 300 million people, if you can't find anyone in 20 candidates that have run over the past 40 years from the two major parties you were willing to vote for.
Your perfect candidate that you hold out for isn't going to be the perfect candidate for a lot of people. Part of the whole give and take is building consensus around most broadly acceptable candidates, rather than just taking your ball and going home when none of the viable candidates perfectly suite you.
Oh I voted in every election since I could. Just never for someone I believed in. It was only ever hope.
No one alive is probably fit to do the job, it’s an impossible task. Those who may come close, would probably never actually want it. And of those who remain who do want it ( which already might make them not worthy for the position) are probably not electable due to the forces of capitalism preventing such a candidate from getting elected.
So what is left is simply a pragmatic choice of the lesser evil. Many people are acutely aware of this and have gotten over it. I suggest until you manage to enact some sort of drastic systemic change you get it over it as well.
I'm working on it.
The drastic systemic change part.
I absolutely agree with your assessment of the problem. I've often thought of dividing The Executive Branch into at least two leadership roles. One of foreign responsibility, one of domestic. Though it may make sense to keep the roll as a single office, where teams of self determined size can divide responsibilities however they choose. Then it starts looks something like a parliamentary system. But I imagine the membership would be fixed somehow. I don't know. Still working on it.
Ah, well that's reasonable sounding. Perhaps the burden of understanding nuance of candidates is that you'll always be disappointed when it comes time to reconcile with millions of others.
It really is amazing how poor our choices are. There are many competent humans out there, but it's not obvious from our options. Seems like a direct result of the 2 party winner-takes-all political system.
I don't expect the human world to meet my moral standards. That might sound sad, but it preserves my sanity.
It is sad, and it makes me depressed.
My moral standards are special because I hold myself to them, regardless of whether anyone else cares.
Honestly, it looks like it.