Eat The Acid Posted July 25 Posted July 25 Ok So I'm 99% on the left side. However, there's a duty for a leader of a country or one campaigning to be president or prime minister. Country flags are sacred - across all nations. Condemning the burning of your countries' flag is common sense - a leader should be patriotic and defensive of their country and what it represents. Condemning disrespect for the country is normal - any prime minister or leader would do so, even progressive ones. However, I can't see the correlation with Harris denying peoples first amendment rights. I do sometimes feel like there's a purity check that's impossible to pass. Kamala is not the perfect candidate, she has assisted moderate democrats more than she's helped progressive dems - however - she's taken a stake in this election, she's doing it well and she's started her campaign at least supporting progressive policies. Enough of the purity tests - if the pass rate is 99% - then we all fail. 10
MAKSIM Posted July 25 Posted July 25 Anyone arguing that Trump and Harris are the same on Israel after that speech is acting in bad faith. 12 1
Eat The Acid Posted July 25 Posted July 25 9 minutes ago, Blade said: I'm glad she's being more vocal than Joseph Zionist Biden. This at least shows she's the best candidate for Palestine - which automatically qualifies her imo. I endorse Kamala 4
19SLAYty9 Posted July 25 Posted July 25 Just now, MAKSIM said: Anyone arguing that Trump and Harris are the same on Israel after that speech is acting in bad faith. This 5
Eat The Acid Posted July 25 Posted July 25 1 minute ago, MAKSIM said: Anyone arguing that Trump and Harris are the same on Israel after that speech is acting in bad faith. I think leftists were eager to support her because they know she's not. also I appreciate Communions post because leftists do have to put pressure on candidates. I just hope bad faith purity tests don't start to distinguish themselves from well meaning critique. 1
Communion Posted July 25 Posted July 25 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Blade said: Yes, leftists are partly to thank for initial enthusiasm behind Kamala. She should not abandon them by steering as far right as Hillary did in 2016 and to a lesser extent (but still significant level) that Biden did in 2020. But I guess where we're coming from is : The statement doesn't cater to the right nor does it abandon leftists. If leftists were and are willing to support Kamala even despite being vehemently ACAB which was the main reason she was despised by leftists in 2020 (for good reason) then I would like to give us the benefit of the doubt that the statement isn't the reason to jump ship. The issue is that leftists - despite claims otherwise - largely already have accepted or understand there can be little movement Kamala herself can do. People who vote already accept that the guard-rails are up in terms of the America's greater institutions and you won't get someone who is both left-wing in tone and actions on war. Either you're harsh in language but a secret dove in actions, or you're more sympathetic in tone while policy stays the same. Most leftists already assumed it'd be the the latter with her. But that the tonal difference compared to Biden's genocidal endorsement and denying of death tolls would at least be some kind of step left. If she feels it's necessary to virtue signal to centrists and condemn flag burning... then the microscope is going to just even be further on her to deliver tangibles for Palestinians on foreign policy. But then if she can't actually deliver tangibles and enact a policy change, then the harsh language is ultimately seen as left-punching and reactionary. If you can't be pro-peace in action, and are harsh to the left in tone, you're just back to the same place Biden was. It's "you can't get everything you want" but then that applies to the politician, not the voter. If her hands are tied, her tongue should not be a weapon used against the left. Edited July 25 by Communion 2 2
Blade Posted July 25 Posted July 25 The speech was good. I give it an 8.5/10. She spent way more time talking about Palestinian suffering than the hostage stuff. The ceasefire deal is on the table. Either Netanyahu takes it or he doesn't. 6 1
justin. Posted July 25 Posted July 25 The speech wasn't perfect, but I appreciate it more than anything Genocidal Joe ever said. 3 1
Blade Posted July 25 Posted July 25 I think what was missing from the speech was direct criticism of the failures of Netanyahu. What did you think ofthe speech @Communion
Bears01 Posted July 25 Posted July 25 Back to poll watching and discussing the actual merits of this race: this is basically the same margin of 2020, with Harris about a point behind the margin Biden won it by. This is a good pollster. Shows that she definitely has brought democrats back to life after being all but dead with Biden at the top of the ticket. Now, she needs to run a good campaign, and have good debate performances. She has room to grow, but also room to fall. And, people like the good Sis @Communion need to be courted and welcomed into her campaign, because progressives will always be needed, and deserve to be heard. That means not picking a Zionist like Shapiro, or an anti union Democrat like Mark Kelly as her running mate. Walz, Beshear, cooper would all be good/great choices 7 1
Communion Posted July 25 Posted July 25 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Rotunda said: Let's not make assumptions on what I do or don't know. I didn't make an assumption. I said your observation that I was intentionally misconstruing her words is no less an assumption on your part than if I were to assume that your different interpretation of her words came from a bias for liberal over progressive politics. I wouldn't say such as a fact, of course. I don't know the operation of your mind or how you feel. But the point is to ultimately reiterate that whatever biases or lack of objectivity you may think I have is both true for me, yourself, and anyone else. Let alone how truthful to reality something is - whatever that could mean - ultimately does not change if said issue impacts or not a candidate's ability to win. Edited July 25 by Communion
NausAllien Posted July 25 Posted July 25 It was a good speech. I really like that she emphasized the importance of ending the suffering of all the civilians once and for all. My only question is whether something will be done if Netanyahu refuses to sign the peace deal. Words have to be accompanied by actions. Otherwise, they're just words... while so many people are still suffering. 1
GhostBox Posted July 25 Posted July 25 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Blade said: I think what was missing from the speech was direct criticism of the failures of Netanyahu. What did you think ofthe speech @Communion She is still the VP to Biden. She has a line to walk that doesnt seem like she isn't stepping on what Biden wants the message to be. what we have seen and heard is she is far more critical of Bibi and the horrible things he had a done. Which is great. Edited July 25 by GhostBox
TrymeB Posted July 25 Posted July 25 What's happening in Gaza is truly awful (as was what happened on Oct 7th 2023 in Israel) but if you are a democrat who will vote for anyone other than Harris in Nov you need to ask yourself if Trump will truly be the better option for Palestine. Young people (my age or 18+) that are thinking Palestine is THE biggest voting issue in this US election truly baffle me. Open your eyes. Chances are your freedoms are at risk while you think it's cool to abstain or worse, go vote third party/green party or heaven forbid, vote for Trump. 11
Communion Posted July 25 Posted July 25 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Blade said: I think what was missing from the speech was direct criticism of the failures of Netanyahu. What did you think ofthe speech @Communion 12 minutes ago, Bears01 said: Back to poll watching and discussing the actual merits of this race: this is basically the same margin of 2020, with Harris about a point behind the margin Biden won it by. This is a good pollster. Shows that she definitely has brought democrats back to life after being all but dead with Biden at the top of the ticket. Now, she needs to run a good campaign, and have good debate performances. She has room to grow, but also room to fall. And, people like the good Sis @Communion need to be courted and welcomed into her campaign, because progressives will always be needed, and deserve to be heard. That means not picking a Zionist like Shapiro, or an anti union Democrat like Mark Kelly as her running mate. Walz, Beshear, cooper would all be good/great choices I think this is the general sentiment on what progressives will take away (hearing her reiterate Israel must remain Jewish made me cringe though): As I said before, people are expecting her to be tonally different with little policy movement. Progressives are working themselves up to be okay with this bare minimum and set it as a bar that Kamala will hopefully easily achieve, in large part due to how bad Biden was. And if she can meet that, I get why and agree if people applaud her. But then that's why any incidents of being needlessly harsh feel like unforced errors ultimately led by a bad set of advisors. I'm just not convinced "say your heart is breaking for Palestinians but then say you're disgusted by leftist thuggish protestors aka the only people protesting for them to stop being killed" will prove an ultimately effective strategy - if that's what ends up happening, as we still have to wait and see what her position will be - but I'm just always going to hold the view that giving into Republican narratives is both morally wrong and electorally ineffective. I hate Republicans, thus will never like their talking points, no matter who says them, even if it be Sanders of all people, for example. Edited July 25 by Communion 3 1
Armani? Posted July 25 Posted July 25 I think the 2019 one was better, but this is fine I guess, straight to the point. I don't think young people are the target demographic for this. 2 1
GraceRandolph Posted July 25 Posted July 25 8 hours ago, Vermillion said: Several schools of thought which again I don't have the energy to unpack And I'll have to post this too The idea that "infighting" will make Kamala a worse candidate is so odd to me. Kamala herself questioned Biden during the debates in 2020 and nobody died. This whole idea that coronating Kamala is the best way to go is so bizarre. Democrats should select the nominee in the most DEMOCRATIC way at this juncture, which is an open convention. 2
Recommended Posts