Kamala Harris' first stop on the "107 Days" book tour was interrupted multiple times Wednesday night by protesters denouncing Israel’s war in Gaza, but the former vice president pressed on with calm.
She basically ran a republican campaign from the dem side. Talked about her gun. war hawked racist immoral wars. palled around with a cheney. Ignored her voters. Talked about praying twice a day. The only thing missing would be talking about how she was a young republican “goldwater girl” like hillary tried to do. Both of them tried to pretend to be crypto republicans ,constantly winking at right wingers to try to fit in, so they could gain enough republican votes to ignore the left. Both of them failed at that epicly. That should be a lesson to future Dem candidates. You exist in a coalition, so get your shit together and act like it. Or lose.
If people rejected the least-worse option for Gaza because she was only the least-worse option for Gaza, then blame rests in the hands of a bunch of people who lack the reasoning power god gave a gnat.
(Edit – so many downvoters against harm reduction. Hockey helmets and seat belts are a good thing)
Do you ever wrestle with the moral implications of this?
If the “least-worse” option that your system produces is aiding and abetting a genocide, then the only moral option is to destroy the system.
If this is truly the reality of the American system, that genocide is unavoidable, then almost everything is justified. If the Greatest Generation were alive today there would be fascist blood in the streets.
Nah, she’s was a genuinely terrible candidate. Her polling was bad enough in the lead up to the 2020 primaries that she dropped out before any of the initial votes came in. Even had Biden not tried to run again and the DNC had hosted primaries in 2024 i’m certain other candidates would have gotten more support.
Why argue that she still deserved everyone’s votes because she’s “the least worse?” Why not make an argument for why you think she made the right decision supporting a genocide? You’re framing this as if she were forced into this position and we should have accepted that, which is completely ludicrous.
They’re fine that POTUS “supports babies being mass murdered abroad”, their problem is that from the two “baby mass murdering in another land supporting” candidates, the one who won is the one that in the US does not do what they would rather they do.
It’s not at all a Moral stand, it’s a What’s Best For Me stand sleazily being spinned as a Moral stand.
She could have been if she didn’t fuck up the Gaza situation…
Anyone who didn’t vote out of protest did far more to “fuck up the Gaza situation” than she did.
While I think “protest not voting” is bad (considering the alternatives), so is giving even more weapons to a genocidal state.
This is just patently false but way to pin the blame for her actions on random individuals with no power to change anything.
https://www.npr.org/2025/06/26/nx-s1-5447450/trump-2024-election-non-voters-coalition
You can’t win electrons by running on a pro-genocide platform. You have to listen to your voters to win elections.
Unless you’re a Republican, of course, then it becomes a necessity.
The solution isn’t to become a republican. Though democrats seem to think it is.
Depends, is the goal to make America better, or just to have power? Republicans have proven that being evil is the easiest way to get power.
She basically ran a republican campaign from the dem side. Talked about her gun. war hawked racist immoral wars. palled around with a cheney. Ignored her voters. Talked about praying twice a day. The only thing missing would be talking about how she was a young republican “goldwater girl” like hillary tried to do. Both of them tried to pretend to be crypto republicans ,constantly winking at right wingers to try to fit in, so they could gain enough republican votes to ignore the left. Both of them failed at that epicly. That should be a lesson to future Dem candidates. You exist in a coalition, so get your shit together and act like it. Or lose.
Fuk it. Lets watch the world burn
If people rejected the least-worse option for Gaza because she was only the least-worse option for Gaza, then blame rests in the hands of a bunch of people who lack the reasoning power god gave a gnat.
(Edit – so many downvoters against harm reduction. Hockey helmets and seat belts are a good thing)
Do you ever wrestle with the moral implications of this?
If the “least-worse” option that your system produces is aiding and abetting a genocide, then the only moral option is to destroy the system.
If this is truly the reality of the American system, that genocide is unavoidable, then almost everything is justified. If the Greatest Generation were alive today there would be fascist blood in the streets.
Kamala Harris could have been the president today if she had not run on a pro-genocide platform. She miscalculated, and lost the election as a result.
Nah, she’s was a genuinely terrible candidate. Her polling was bad enough in the lead up to the 2020 primaries that she dropped out before any of the initial votes came in. Even had Biden not tried to run again and the DNC had hosted primaries in 2024 i’m certain other candidates would have gotten more support.
Why argue that she still deserved everyone’s votes because she’s “the least worse?” Why not make an argument for why you think she made the right decision supporting a genocide? You’re framing this as if she were forced into this position and we should have accepted that, which is completely ludicrous.
Because they want no better.
They’re fine that POTUS “supports babies being mass murdered abroad”, their problem is that from the two “baby mass murdering in another land supporting” candidates, the one who won is the one that in the US does not do what they would rather they do.
It’s not at all a Moral stand, it’s a What’s Best For Me stand sleazily being spinned as a Moral stand.
There was no least worse. Both parties are giving billions to israel to continue the war of extermination and lied about the cease fire talks