Ice Cream Ice Queen 2,861 Posted July 30 Kamal Harris Speaking On Reproductive Rights But why not do it now? Kamala is currently in the branch responsible for writing and passing laws, and once (and if) she’s president she won’t be. Joe Biden has already said he’s in favor of this so why the wait? Seems to me like this is less about reproductive rights and more about manipulating people into voting for her. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NikoGo 60,670 Posted July 30 6 minutes ago, baddisease said: Do you blame Clinton's loss on Jill Stein's voters? There are a lot of other reasons why she lost imo. The problem is Clinton was a terrible choice to go against Trump. She was the most qualified person to run for office in YEARS but she’s been so engrained in politics that the common person sees her as the head of the government snake. I personally feel Kamala has that Obama ‘outsider’ vibe. Yes, I know she’s VP and therefore not an outsider by any means, BUT she doesn’t feel like an insider. 4 Quote "Don’t forget me" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NikoGo 60,670 Posted July 30 Just now, Ice Cream Ice Queen said: Kamal Harris Speaking On Reproductive Rights But why not do it now? Kamala is currently in the branch responsible for writing and passing laws, and once (and if) she’s president she won’t be. Joe Biden has already said he’s in favor of this so why the wait? Seems to me like this is less about reproductive rights and more about manipulating people into voting for her. Not one person can actually do any of these big promises. With how the branches of government are yes, she could try and write into law reproductive rights, but with the current republicans in office it’s bound to fail. It’s (dark but just) a game 0 Quote "Don’t forget me" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baddisease 17,786 Posted July 30 5 minutes ago, Dark Angel said: what i believe he's saying is that if enough people who voted for jill stein would've voted for hillary clinton instead, she would've won instead of trump that's true but i feel like the kind of person to vote Stein would never have voted Clinton. IMO, Clinton lost bc of her name and the fact she was absolutely nowhere near charismatic as Trump. And she wasn't very good at campaigning or marketing herself. 5 minutes ago, NikoGo said: The problem is Clinton was a terrible choice to go against Trump. She was the most qualified person to run for office in YEARS but she’s been so engrained in politics that the common person sees her as the head of the government snake. I personally feel Kamala has that Obama ‘outsider’ vibe. Yes, I know she’s VP and therefore not an outsider by any means, BUT she doesn’t feel like an insider. I agree. Kamala has the potential to beat Trump but they can't repeat the 2016 mistakes. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sympathyisaknife 15,973 Posted July 30 Why even bother voicing your opinion when you aren't even going to vote? Like if you don't vote then your opinion in the election is immediately invalid. 3 Quote sitting on his lap sippin diet pepsi Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baddisease 17,786 Posted July 30 3 minutes ago, sempervirens said: Why even bother voicing your opinion when you aren't even going to vote? Like if you don't vote then your opinion in the election is immediately invalid. everyone has the right to voice their opinion. i hate myself for it but i probably will vote. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
That Venice Bitch 27,998 Posted July 30 10 minutes ago, Dark Angel said: what i believe he's saying is that if enough people who voted for jill stein would've voted for hillary clinton instead, she would've won instead of trump I just have to point out that this is factually incorrect In Michigan 2020, Jill Stein received 0.25% of the vote. Hillary lost by 3.35%. Jill Stein was not on the ballot in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin. These three states put Trump over the edge. Your point also assumes that the people who voted for Jill Stein would’ve automatically voted for Hillary otherwise, which is not possible to estimate and probably not true anyway. 4 Quote .・゜゜・ ⋆·˚ ༘ * GIVE PEACE A CHANCE ˚ ༘ ⋆｡˚ ・゜゜・． Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ice Cream Ice Queen 2,861 Posted July 30 14 minutes ago, NikoGo said: It’s (dark but just) a game Oh how I hate politics 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baddisease 17,786 Posted July 30 2 minutes ago, That Venice Bitch said: I just have to point out that this is factually incorrect In Michigan 2020, Jill Stein received 0.25% of the vote. Hillary lost by 3.35%. Jill Stein was not on the ballot in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin. These three states put Trump over the edge. Your point also assumes that the people who voted for Jill Stein would’ve automatically voted for Hillary otherwise, which is not possible to estimate and probably not true anyway. re bold: bingo. also I feel like nonvoters and third party voters should have the right to voice their opinion no matter how they vote or if they vote. 2 minutes ago, Ice Cream Ice Queen said: Oh how I hate politics Vote me for Queen for Life and I'll end all politics. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mer 61,411 Posted July 30 20 minutes ago, Ice Cream Ice Queen said: Kamal Harris Speaking On Reproductive Rights But why not do it now? Kamala is currently in the branch responsible for writing and passing laws, and once (and if) she’s president she won’t be. Joe Biden has already said he’s in favor of this so why the wait? Seems to me like this is less about reproductive rights and more about manipulating people into voting for her. she’s simplifying it. She will “sign a law” but she needs to get a majority in Congress and the Senate to do so. She’s campaigning on the fact that she can help the ticket all the way down go blue. So far, Senate Republicans have blocked such a law (60 votes are needed, Dems only have 51 seats). Whether Harris can push enough people to vote Blue to gain a supermajority is unlikely. 2 Quote ⊹ (:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅[̲̅:♡:]̲̅:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅) ⊹ 𓊔 I took the miracle move on drug 𓊔 ⚕️ The effects were temporary ⚕️ ⊹ (:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅[̲̅:♡:]̲̅:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅) ⊹ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baddisease 17,786 Posted July 30 I've been following the election number crunching and apparently Muslims and pro-Palestinians will not be voting Democrat this year for Biden's lack of adequate action re: Israel. I REALLY hope Kamala puts an un-reserved pro-Palestinian as VP. Otherwise, I'm unsure she'd win that part of the "Blue Wall" 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mer 61,411 Posted July 30 12 minutes ago, That Venice Bitch said: In Michigan 2020, Jill Stein received 0.25% of the vote. Hillary lost by 3.35%. Jill Stein was not on the ballot in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin. These three states put Trump over the edge. I think you’re confusing 2020 (Stein did not run but she was written in by some) with 2016. In 2016, Stein was on the ballot in all three rust belt states (and even spent millions on a recount). From Vox: “The final totals revealed that, in fact, Stein’s total voters exceeded Clinton’s margin of victory. In other words, if every Stein voter had voted for Clinton instead, she could have won Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and the presidency.” https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/11/13576798/jill-stein-third-party-donald-trump-win Altho I agree with your second point and mentioned it was presumptive to assume Stein voters would’ve voted Clinton had she not been an option. 4 Quote ⊹ (:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅[̲̅:♡:]̲̅:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅) ⊹ 𓊔 I took the miracle move on drug 𓊔 ⚕️ The effects were temporary ⚕️ ⊹ (:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅[̲̅:♡:]̲̅:̲̅:̲̅:̲̅) ⊹ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
That Venice Bitch 27,998 Posted July 30 Btw, I think the VP should be Tim Walz. Second choice is Andy Beshear. The others can rot 0 Quote .・゜゜・ ⋆·˚ ༘ * GIVE PEACE A CHANCE ˚ ༘ ⋆｡˚ ・゜゜・． Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baddisease 17,786 Posted July 30 5 minutes ago, That Venice Bitch said: Btw, I think the VP should be Tim Walz. Second choice is Andy Beshear. The others can rot how do they feel about Palestine? Or overseas proxy wars? 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
That Venice Bitch 27,998 Posted July 30 5 minutes ago, Mer said: I think you’re confusing 2020 (Stein did not run but she was written in by some) with 2016. In 2016, Stein was on the ballot in all three rust belt states (and even spent millions on a recount). From Vox: “The final totals revealed that, in fact, Stein’s total voters exceeded Clinton’s margin of victory. In other words, if every Stein voter had voted for Clinton instead, she could have won Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and the presidency.” https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/11/13576798/jill-stein-third-party-donald-trump-win Altho I agree with your second point and mentioned it was presumptive to assume Stein voters would’ve voted Clinton had she not been an option. I am at work and indeed did look up the wrong years - nonetheless that second point still stands! 2 minutes ago, baddisease said: how do they feel about Palestine? Or overseas proxy wars? https://www.businessinsider.com/kamala-harris-vice-president-candidates-positions-israel-gaza-2024-7?amp You can’t get your hopes up, but this is a good rundown of their stances 2 Quote .・゜゜・ ⋆·˚ ༘ * GIVE PEACE A CHANCE ˚ ༘ ⋆｡˚ ・゜゜・． Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baddisease 17,786 Posted July 30 5 minutes ago, That Venice Bitch said: I am at work and indeed did look up the wrong years - nonetheless that second point still stands! https://www.businessinsider.com/kamala-harris-vice-president-candidates-positions-israel-gaza-2024-7?amp You can’t get your hopes up, but this is a good rundown of their stances I don't like any of them. I know it'll never happen but I so want a non-equivocational pro-Palestinian VP candidate. I wish there would be at least ONE among the Democrats. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sympathyisaknife 15,973 Posted July 30 @Mer clearing the floor thank you my favorite fact checker 1 Quote sitting on his lap sippin diet pepsi Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
That Venice Bitch 27,998 Posted July 30 Michigan senator Gary Peters is also in the running for VP Full list of publicly mentioned options for Harris’ VP: - Michigan senator Gary Peters - Arizona senator Mark Kelly - Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro - Minnesota governor Tim Walz - Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker - Kentucky governor Andy Beshear - Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo - Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg 1 Quote .・゜゜・ ⋆·˚ ༘ * GIVE PEACE A CHANCE ˚ ༘ ⋆｡˚ ・゜゜・． Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lana Del Dufrene 10,156 Posted July 30 (edited) 7 minutes ago, That Venice Bitch said: Michigan senator Gary Peters is also in the running for VP Full list of publicly mentioned options for Harris’ VP: - Michigan senator Gary Peters - Arizona senator Mark Kelly - Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro - Minnesota governor Tim Walz - Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker - Kentucky governor Andy Beshear - Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo - Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg I think she should go with California senator Lana Del Rey Edited July 30 by DemonMic2003 7 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quincy 4,244 Posted July 30 2 hours ago, NikoGo said: The problem is Clinton was a terrible choice to go against Trump. She was the most qualified person to run for office in YEARS but she’s been so engrained in politics that the common person sees her as the head of the government snake. I personally feel Kamala has that Obama ‘outsider’ vibe. Yes, I know she’s VP and therefore not an outsider by any means, BUT she doesn’t feel like an insider. I think you nailed it. I’ve been saying that Kamala cannot repeat the mistake that Hillary did with picking a boring VP like Tim Kaine was. I understand that she can’t pick another woman (our country is stupid), but I really hope she keeps the excitement going with a VP candidate who also excites. It won’t happen, but Pete Buttigieg would be amazing. He’s so talented and extremely well spoken. Hell, he goes on Fox News and wipes the floor. Don’t pick a boring old dude and don’t pick someone who people think is an insider. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
