Kamala Harris shouldn't have to answer to the abuse of a bunch of NEET deadbeats like the users who browse this site on the regular.

  • Glass [he/him,they/them]
    ·
    3 years ago

    You'd think after an (ALLEGED) criminal president, a president with a track record of actually enforcing the law would be a welcome change

    "Oh what, so you're mad when we start illegal wars and assassinate foreign diplomats, but you're also mad when we incarcerate millions of people for non-crimes so we can use them as slave labor? SMH the loony left doesn't know what they want."

    Also love the little tacit admission that Kopmala is basically the president lol

  • BeamBrain [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Sure, Harris' record is nothing to be ashamed of, but the "leftist" douchebros need some excuse for why they hate her to obscure the reason for their hatred (that she's a black woman).

    +29 in the comments. Liberals do not believe that there is such a thing as principled opposition to the carceral state and its enforcers.

    • cawsby [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      The only reason the old white guys/gals in charge at the top of the DNC relented on letting black leadership into the top positions in the party was because they were forced to when the Tea Party ran roughshod over Pelosi's dithering centrism in 2008-2009.

      Who did they nominate to those positions? All ghoulish neoliberals like Tom Perez and Donna Brazile. Once Keith Ellison got too close so they sandbagged him with a deputy position than showed him the door.

      • MarxMadness [comrade/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Eh, Ron Brown was DNC chair from 1989-1993. Between him and black politicians in state and federal offices, I don't think there's good evidence of a conscious plan (as "relenting" suggests) to exclude black people from Democratic leadership positions. Unconscious bias, absolutely.

        • cawsby [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          That was before my time, so forgive my youth. I do know of how they treated Jesse Jackson in the 1988 primary and after, and that always seemed like the DNC establishment taking a stand against strident lefty voices among african americans.

          His entire platform for the 1988 election was purposefully voted down by the DNC even though he won 2nd place.

          • RobotnikFeminism [they/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Jackson was screwed in 88 (84 too, but that was more of a protest campaign), but after? He basically sold out and went all-in the DLC machine. Granted, it was not in good faith that the Democrats incorporated Jackson and his son into their machine — they were deathly afraid of him running against Clinton in 96 or Gore in 00 — but it happened. Jesse Jackson has done a lot of great things in his career, but he's always been corrupt.

  • cawsby [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Wonkette banned me in 2015 for saying Hillary Clinton had already lost nationally against Obama and they wouldn't turn out for her because she was racist towards Obama.

    Following their twitter though is something else, they have pledge drives to support their founders like every 3-4 months it seems. They can't monetize the site for shit, and depend on handouts from wine moms to keep the lights on.

  • Sacred_Excrement [comrade/them]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Kamala failing to capture anything close to a majority in her home state, getting about 1% of the vote, and then getting tapped to be veep to a man who could shuffle off this mortal coil tomorrow is just a fantastic analogy

  • Awoo [she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    a president with a track record of enforcing the law would be a welcome change

    That is the problem actually.

  • dlefnemulb_rima [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Cops are good actually because trump criminal fsshist and cop good arrest criminak