I don’t know why we can’t have a discussion in here without someone suggesting that any criticism of Harris means that someone is not going to vote for her or the democrats. I didn’t say anything like that.
I don’t think the Boing Boing comments section is so full of undecided voters or Republicans that a critical look at the likely candidate is going to tilt the balance.
Why assume racism in the abscence of anything even remotely suggesting that? Is it so completely unbelievable that someone could imagine a better candidate than Harris?
The US is truly wild. Does everything now need to come with two paragraphs of disclaimers? I don’t even need to say anything for people to start arguing with things I neither said nor implied or chastise me for claims I didn’t make.
It’s possible to accept that Harris is a million times better than Trump or indeed anyone the Republicans would put forward, to want her to win, to support her candidacy AND also have discussions about what we would want politics to look like if we had more choice.
Oh, she’s been quite thoroughly negatively criticized here in past, right along with Biden.
Getting out from under the direct threat of faschist rule is the US’s number one priority right now.
Let’s talk about redecorating AFTER we have put the fire out…
Don’t forget the misogyny!
Because when people levy vague criticism at highly capable women of color, 99.9% of the time it’s racism or sexism or both, whether they know it or not.
ETA:
No. The text you used after your initial post was disagreed with was both clearer and more concise.
Miss me with all that needless hyperbole and flagrant attempt at guilt tripping; I have neither the patience nor tolerance for anyone’s time wasting speculation/FUD at this point.
My energy is being reserved for the fight ahead of my country.
Good day.
Criticism is fine, but that’s not what you said… it was a vague statement of about how she’s going to be a failure, which absolutely could have certain connotations… and then you kind of blew up when people called you on it. People are disagreeing with you, not demanding conformity. If you have real concerns, by all means express them, but vague comments that can be read in a variety of ways ain’t that…
The reality is, though, that we probably should all rally around the candidate who is NOT a fascist, even if you have reservations about them. I assume that at the very least, you’d like to be able to vote again in the future, and that might not happen with a Trump presidency. They are working hard to tear down our democratic structures.
And as the shives video I posted noted, if you want the democratic party to be more progressive, that’s not going to happen by complaining on the internet. You got to get involved. Join at the local level and push for progressive policies there. You are more likely to have an impact and improve your local community and get a chance to have your voice heard further up the chain.
She’s a Black woman… of course people are going to be throwing racist shit at her.
Better than vague statements, actually. This is text, and intent can be easily misunderstood. Be clear about your meaning and you’re less likely to get called out.
Which is an advantage in this general election.
But she also kind of is. The US is just that far behind. She literally embodies several progressive causes and values, for one thing.
I still think the Biden admin made more progress towards some of the issues it promised on domestically than most and I do believe the economic policies he was pursuing were better than those the Republicans had previously or have now.
Mark Kelly is wonderful and would make a great veep.
Arizona state law requires the governor to appoint a replacement senator of the same party (and anyway, the current governor is a Democrat), so it wouldn’t immediately cost the Dems a senate seat.
But the seat would open up for a special election in the next general election. Arizona’s purple enough that without Kelly (who’s both popular and incumbent), that the seat wouldn’t be safe. So tapping Kelly would be a high-risk choice.
Biden isn’t a progressive, and yet he’s led the most progressive Presidential administration since LBJ. He’s actually pushed the needle to the left a little, something Obama and Clinton didn’t even try to do. I understand the desire to have a truly progressive and/or leftist President. Like AOC or Bernie or Elizabeth Warren. But they would have a super tough time getting elected. Two of them tried to get the Democratic nomination in the past and couldn’t do that. A majority of Democrats aren’t there yet. We certainly aren’t anywhere close to a majority of Americans being willing to elect a truly progressive or leftist candidate. That doesn’t mean we can’t get there. We just have to keep nudging the needle to the left. This country didn’t go from the Republican mainstream being represented by people like Eisenhower to Donald Trump in one election. It’s literally the result of decades of nudging the needle to the right a little bit every election. People on the left often sound like we want perfection right now. Progress is more important. Biden made progress. I feel confident that Harris will continue that progress. So that’s what I’m focusing on.
I do agree with you that the immediate “criticism means you’re okay with Trump!” is not helpful
I will say this though - as someone who was a bit sceptical of her myself, I’ve had a look over her more recent activities and she’s actually taken up some pretty important progressive causes in her time as vice president. I came away feeling much more positive about her. Whether her words will match her actions… Well, I hope she has an opportunity to show us.
It’s almost like actual digging into the facts and paying attention to those matter! /s
Frankly, it was the same with Biden. He ended up being far more progressive than people anticipated, which is why many of the progressive caucus backed him.
It’s also true, though. I know that’s been used to shut down criticism (especially with prior presidents, but frankly, people were right about that, too), but the fact is that people here will suffer if Trump is elected and people around the world will suffer greater with a fascist America. People in Republican dominated states are suffering right now, so they know what it will be like nationally. The only way to roll that back and protect all of us is to elect a democrat to office and give them a congressional majority. Throwing out vague statements isn’t particularly helpful, while having specific criticisms that we can bring to the campaign ARE…
But no one said that.
No one even implied it.
Mindy already expressed it succinctly:
There are no victims here, and no one’s legit concerns are being shouted down.
We’re saying ‘let’s solve the ‘existential threat’ problem first, so we can still be around to solve the less dire but still serious problems later.’
*Edited to correct typo.
In Washington DC, the word “Progressive” has a very specific meaning. It’s a club. There is a membership list.
That’s why, for instance, John Fetterman publicly clarified for the national media, “I am not a Progressive.” Of course he’s not. Everybody knows that — they can check the list.
The only Progressive senator is Bernie Sanders. That’s not news. We all knew that already.
I live in CO, too. Don’t forget Wyatt’s towing and Xcel Energy. I think Polis is prepping for a 2028 or 2032 Presidential run (if we still have free elections then). He’s been a solid governor overall, but he has taken a more Libertarian approach in his second term, tiptoeing rightward on economic issues while keeping his D credentials intact. His influence and veto pen have watered down or canceled several progressive laws passed to hinder wage theft, increase access to medications, etc., generally favoring big business lobbying concerns over the working class. His opposition to regulations on HOAs were particularly galling.
Colorado is not a swing state and neighboring states are pretty much set in their ways, other than AZ, which pays little attention to its 4 Corners neighbor except when water rights come up. Other VPs would have more pull in that regard in states where it matters, IMO.
Great so it’s 2016 again where we split hairs over ideological purity while a right-wing strongman waltzes to victory.
I don’t know a ton about Polis but all I want in a VP candidate is someone with a background marginally similar to Vance’s (veteran, rural, any part of the above) so they can call Vance on his BS during the debate.
In the UK we were told not to make a fuss over Labour being transphobic, we are now less than a month into their government and they are being just as bad as the Tories.
Your “ideological purity” is our life or death situation! We want reassurances, not uncaring dismissal!
