cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/5309499

After Biden's meltdown, the Democrats are hoping to reenergize people with a supposedly "progressive" pick for Kamala Harris' running mate.

  • sloth [none/use name]
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don't disagree, those options would produce better results. Do you think they would win an election though?

    From what I've seen Walz is the most pro-palestine candidate they considered.

    • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think a ham sandwich with a small bit of mold on the corner could win this election. Donald Trump is the most beatable presidential candidate in a generation. I’m pretty sure Shillary and Genocide Joe were some of the only people on earth who could lose to Trump.

      The only demographic that will lose the Dems this election is people pissed about the genocide. Picking Stephanie Fox (Director of JVP), for example, combined with calling for Biden to stop weapon sales would convince the one demographic they need to bring back.

      I do still think picking Walz was both a strategically sound choice and not the most evil thing the Dems could’ve done. If they wanted to lose and be the most evil while doing it they would’ve chosen Josh Shapiro.

      Also isn’t it fucking crazy that serving in a foreign military doesn’t disqualify you from being president? It should disqualify you from any elected office, from president down to school board.

      • sloth [none/use name]
        ·
        3 months ago

        I still agree with you. The problem is there isn't a VP that guarantees a ceasefire, Kamala is still the 'president'. Thank god it wasn't Shapiro.

        • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
          ·
          3 months ago

          Oh 100% I was saying if they wanted to actually guarantee that constituency they need to pick an anti-Israel VP and Kamala has to do a 180, the VP pick just helps solidify it