I wasn’t old enough to be politically involved when Al Gore ran, but I heard he had good policies. How many people can tell you what policies Kamala ran on?
She had a website, she promised to tax the rich on it. There were even some rightwing nutjobs producing cartoons about it claiming an unrealized gains tax would ruin the economy.
An unrealized gains tax would never make it out of committee, much less actually passing either house of Congress. She took absolutely zero risk w/ that one because everyone knows it’s not feasible.
When has that ever actually happened? Like anything else, there will be exceptions upon exceptions because the rich have the money and influence to successfully lobby Congress.
If you think the top 1% are going to pay even more in taxes without a massive concession, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Harris couldn’t pass that even if she actually, truly cared, and I fervently believe she’s just pandering to the left for votes. I don’t think she actually believes in most of the policies that made headlines, I think she just wanted to be Biden 2.0. She said as much in interviews, and it’s why she lost: she couldn’t convince her base that she’s actually different.
If you wanted actual, meaningful change from the left, Bernie Sanders was your best bet. I don’t even think he was that good of a candidate, but he actually seemed to believe in what he promised.
The tax laws that the GOP wrote in 2016/2017 expire this session and now they’re back in power to write the new ones.
Republicans have been the party cutting taxes for 50 years.
In 2023 they proposed tax raises across the board in order to have a chance of passing the senate with their 50 seat majority (with caucus) against the 49 Republicans, while they simultaneously expanded benefits like medicaid expansion so as to redistribute wealth to those who need it to survive.
GOP is the enemy. Remove the GOP, first and foremost.
EDIT: And also the Democrats removed money from politics from 2003 to 2010 until Conservative SCOTUS nominations struck it down with the “Citizens United Decision”, which every democrat has campaigned against since.
No, the enemy is the two-party system. The GOP is merely a symptom of that larger problem. The GOP proposing terrible bills doesn’t imply that Dem bills are “good,” they’re both generally quite terrible since most representatives don’t really need to worry about their seat since their district is likely uncontested, so they’re more beholden to special interests than their constituents.
Fix the electoral system and maybe I’ll entertain a discussion about the GOP being “evil.”
we already tax the rich much more than everyone else
the rich have more influence than lay people in Congress
Harris seemed to be grasping at straws to find things to say to build hype (also tried “price gouging”)
In short, I don’t believe her, especially when she said she wouldn’t have changed anything about Biden’s term. She’s very much a “business as usual” candidate, and people wanted change.
Will you please tell me more about trading your vote? Are there communities online where you can meet people willing to do that? How did you do it during the bush/gore election? Online? I live in MA, I’d trade a vote w a swing stater, assuming we have elections again.
The heritage foundations actual plan. Why we are funding the war in Israel. Isreal needs the one state solution so white evangelicals can have their rapture.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion and a salty comment.
That’s not criticism. That’s badmouthing.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
She was pro fracking.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
You assume that about anyone with any criticism whatsoever of harris.
I voted for harris; you just can’t abide anything other than unconditional worship of her.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style.
And you’re doubling down on the bad faith assumption that criticism of harris is support for trump.
I am not defending her. I am not defending democrats. She never wanted to become president. It showed. She and her entire party bowed down and conceded without even a hint of willpower to fight. She was the only thing left standing against fascism, and she just gave them the keys of the kingdom.
But she was right about what the current regime would do if it took power. Which the meme was about.
As much as I hate having to use the word, this genuinely is whataboutism. You’re being provided with a legitimate criticism of one candidate and instead of actually addressing it you just point to a different candidate.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
She was pro fracking.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style?
Oh, she showed she was just a little bit more right than center, she wasn’t left enough, so I’ll vote for the far-right fascist instead.
Every time I read some comment like what the person above wrote, I get to remember that these voters are “just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know…”
Criticizing a candidate doesn’t mean you voted for the other major candidate. It just means that the challenger to the other major candidate sucks. The DNC needs to run better candidates to actually convince people to show up and vote for them.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion in a salty comment.
A lot was implied in that comment. Implying that she is corrupt. That wasn’t criticism. That was badmouthing.
And that specific style of badmouthing usually insinuates justifying a non-vote, which in this case, meant a vote for the the other guy.
She wasn’t absolutely perfect, and she wasn’t the absolute exact perfect fit for everyone. And yes, her campaign could have been run better. Nobody’s perfect. No one can please everyone. But hey, at least she didn’t wear a tan suit!
Active support of genocide is not “not absolutely perfect”, unless you don’t believe foreigners are actually human, which does seem to be the case for American liberals.
And I personally wouldn’t give a fuck about American politics—hadn’t it been for the actual regime amusingly destroy the entire planet, using Palestine as target practice and a real estate opportunity.
She was and is a corrupt corporate shill who actively supports genocide and environmental destruction, and you’re still making excuses even after her worthless ass lost. You deserve Trump and worse. You belong in El Salvador.
You say she had a spec of dust, yet if you look at her primary election performance, you’ll find she’s just a bad candidate. She did so poorly that she withdrew early. If the DNC held a primary election in 2024, she probably wouldn’t have won. The only reason she had a semblance of a chance in 2024 was because Trump was so bad.
If your best argument in favor of a candidate is their opponent is worse, that tells me everything I need to know about why they lost. Yes, Trump was worse than Harris, but being less bad doesn’t motivate people to get to the polls.
It’s not a double standard, you’re just butthurt about having your preferred candidate being held to any standard at all. “Maybe she was” is bullshit, it’s extremely easy to verify that she was, you either don’t care enough to find out or you know perfectly well already and are deliberately lying. She was a shit candidate fielded specifically for her loyalty to corporate dems and their billionaire backers, the only people who are still pretending otherwise are incurable morons or paid propaganda posters. I don’t know or particularly care which you are, either way you’re a spineless sack of shit. You should be ashamed and silent, in that order.
Because it’s an either-or choice. We were always going to get either Harris or Trump. Criticism of one candidate must be viewed in the context of the only other alternative. So calling out Harris on fracking is only meaningful if her position was substantially different than Trump’s. And if their positions are really no different, but only one candidate got called out for it, then the criticism is irrelevant and that makes me question the motives of the accuser.
Other countries don’t have this problem, most picked other voting forms than “first past the post”, which over time destroyed our ability to have more than two actual serious political parties. So both those parties get overtaken by ethically dubious people, overtly for the entire republican party, and subtly with the establishment democrats, and it all collapses.
Have you seen the recent elections in Germany, Poland or France? Literally the entire western world is at risk of fascism. The problem isn’t “first past the post”, the problem is capitalism.
Only for immigrant first generation home buyers with no other members of your family owning a house and after you had lived in government backed apartment housing for more than 2 years.
Same way her business loan suggestions were only for specific communities with super strict requirements.
Set it up “help” so restrictive to only “the people who actually need it” so that you don’t have to give out any at all and just sounds good on paper. They don’t want to actually help people, Democrat leaders just needed to keep status quo.
provide working families who have paid their rent on time for two years and are buying their first home up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance, with more generous support for first-generation homeowners – or homebuyers whose parents don’t own a home.
Nothing at all about “immigrants”. Where did you hear that bullshit?
Mostly pro immigrant news sources that were happy about the benefit this would give directly to those communities and the fact that it targets people that have no other family members with a house in the US which those of us with older parents who were born in the US likely have.
The $10,000 credit for only first time homebuyers was a later addition and was not even set as it was more an additional thought tacked on and does nothing for actually giving money for the down payment but only credits you after you bought it.
Specifically, it targets individuals and families who have paid their rent on time for two years and are looking to buy their first home. The proposal offers up to $25,000 in down payment support, with more generous assistance available for first-generation homebuyers, meaning those whose parents do not currently own a home.
Proposed a $10,000 tax credit for first time home buyers.
Yeah, it was a shame it was so restrictive, literally was also set for a limit of 400,000 individuals when first proposed too.
Its a criticism of the garbage solutions that were brought forward for good headlines rather than actual support.
This plan will significantly simplify and expand the reach of down-payment assistance, allowing over 1 million first time-buyers per year – including first-generation home buyers – to get the funds they need to buy a house when they are ready to buy it," the Harris campaign said.
The Biden-Harris administration initially proposed providing $25,000 in downpayment assistance only for 400,000 first-generation home buyers—or homebuyers whose parents don’t own a home—and a $10,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers.
This is from Harris’s campaign announcement. The extension to millions would be the 4 year plan. And was adjusted again after Biden’s original proposal of this was panned for being what I originally sourced. The very last offering she made by the end of the campaign was looser on restrictions.
I was incorrect, in that she removed the tax credit and made wider eligibility though stated that those still meeting the original criteria would get more assistance, though all would be required to meet the 2 year of proven rental payments through an assured rental agency.
Wow, that’s very different from the “must live in government housing” and “only immigrants” that you started with. How many times does your bullshit need to be called out before you tell the truth?
Not government housing. Government assured or recognized rental agencies. For proof of payment. It’s part of the boring bureaucracy parts.
And primarily focusing on first generation homebuyers benefits people who have had no previous generations living in the country which is directly beneficial to 1st or second generational immigrants.
I am adjusting my position as I gain further information but the the proposed plans did not just offer free cash to assist the average American in buying a home. That’s still at the base of my point and still accurate. I am now aware that the plan was proposed by Biden and adjusted late into the campaign by Harris after backlash for it.
How much conversation does it take to get to the truth? However long it takes for both sides to agree on what it is.
I voted for Gore, but a bunch of my moron friends voted for Nader in that election. And Nader an ego was so big he could never admit fault for fucking up the next 2 decades of our country.
Now it looks like we fucked for the rest of this century.
I wasn’t old enough to be politically involved when Al Gore ran, but I heard he had good policies. How many people can tell you what policies Kamala ran on?
She had a website, she promised to tax the rich on it. There were even some rightwing nutjobs producing cartoons about it claiming an unrealized gains tax would ruin the economy.
An unrealized gains tax would never make it out of committee, much less actually passing either house of Congress. She took absolutely zero risk w/ that one because everyone knows it’s not feasible.
If we vote for the Tax The Rich candidates then the Rich will get taxed.
Instead the anti-tax rich candidate won.
When has that ever actually happened? Like anything else, there will be exceptions upon exceptions because the rich have the money and influence to successfully lobby Congress.
And the rich already pay the most in taxes, and the richest get loopholes:
If you think the top 1% are going to pay even more in taxes without a massive concession, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Harris couldn’t pass that even if she actually, truly cared, and I fervently believe she’s just pandering to the left for votes. I don’t think she actually believes in most of the policies that made headlines, I think she just wanted to be Biden 2.0. She said as much in interviews, and it’s why she lost: she couldn’t convince her base that she’s actually different.
If you wanted actual, meaningful change from the left, Bernie Sanders was your best bet. I don’t even think he was that good of a candidate, but he actually seemed to believe in what he promised.
The tax laws that the GOP wrote in 2016/2017 expire this session and now they’re back in power to write the new ones.
Republicans have been the party cutting taxes for 50 years.
In 2023 they proposed tax raises across the board in order to have a chance of passing the senate with their 50 seat majority (with caucus) against the 49 Republicans, while they simultaneously expanded benefits like medicaid expansion so as to redistribute wealth to those who need it to survive.
GOP is the enemy. Remove the GOP, first and foremost.
EDIT: And also the Democrats removed money from politics from 2003 to 2010 until Conservative SCOTUS nominations struck it down with the “Citizens United Decision”, which every democrat has campaigned against since.
No, the enemy is the two-party system. The GOP is merely a symptom of that larger problem. The GOP proposing terrible bills doesn’t imply that Dem bills are “good,” they’re both generally quite terrible since most representatives don’t really need to worry about their seat since their district is likely uncontested, so they’re more beholden to special interests than their constituents.
Fix the electoral system and maybe I’ll entertain a discussion about the GOP being “evil.”
You think taxing the rich is bad?!
I’m saying:
In short, I don’t believe her, especially when she said she wouldn’t have changed anything about Biden’s term. She’s very much a “business as usual” candidate, and people wanted change.
Gore’s election was the first I could vote in.
I voted for Kucinich in the primary and then traded my vote for Gore in a swing state for a vote for Nader in MA.
Then my “Al Gore won the votes” bumper sticker was torn off my car while I was at work at Cracker Barrel.
Will you please tell me more about trading your vote? Are there communities online where you can meet people willing to do that? How did you do it during the bush/gore election? Online? I live in MA, I’d trade a vote w a swing stater, assuming we have elections again.
It works like this: they say they will wote your choice if you vote theirs. Then both of you end up voting an orange ape.
Yep, it was done over the internet. The idea was to get Nader to 3% without electing Bush.
Neither happened because people are terrible and we can’t have nice things.
5%. You need 5% for the federal grant.
Thanks. As you can tell I am very old.
She was pro fracking. Got to line those pockets afterall.
And Trump? What’s his policy about the environment? Please, do enlighten us!
The Rapture. Trump’s plan is to utilize the environment to Rapture the entire species, all at once.
That explains the Zionism, at least.
Eh what the funk did I just read!!?!?
You just read highly classified top secret plans regarding mass emigration to the Kingdom of God.
You mean deportation?
In a manner of speaking.
Fine, fine, deportation to the Kingdom of God
What did that god do to deserve such punishment?
The heritage foundations actual plan. Why we are funding the war in Israel. Isreal needs the one state solution so white evangelicals can have their rapture.
They’re in dire need of psychotherapy.
Aren’t we all?
As always, any criticism for harris is interpreted in bad faith as support for trump.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion and a salty comment.
That’s not criticism. That’s badmouthing.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style.
I’m so f… tired of the double standard.
You assume that about anyone with any criticism whatsoever of harris.
I voted for harris; you just can’t abide anything other than unconditional worship of her.
And you’re doubling down on the bad faith assumption that criticism of harris is support for trump.
I wasn’t criticizing your comment. I never implied that you had voted for the other guy.
And I have no worship for her. She’s a politician. I only had hope, for the country and for the world, that the other guy wouldn’t take power.
A lot was implied in that comment the person wrote. Implying that she is corrupt.
That isn’t criticism. That is badmouthing.
And that is what I have a problem with. The double standard, and the gratuitous smearing. That’s what revolts me. That’s what upsets me.
And what I have a problem with is the bad faith assumption that criticism of democrats for corruption is support of trump.
Which is what centrists leap to when they have no defense for their politicians or positions, which is pretty much all the time.
I am not defending her. I am not defending democrats. She never wanted to become president. It showed. She and her entire party bowed down and conceded without even a hint of willpower to fight. She was the only thing left standing against fascism, and she just gave them the keys of the kingdom.
But she was right about what the current regime would do if it took power. Which the meme was about.
Genocide is what revolts and upsets me.
As much as I hate having to use the word, this genuinely is whataboutism. You’re being provided with a legitimate criticism of one candidate and instead of actually addressing it you just point to a different candidate.
Yes, it is. And I don’t give a f.
I’m so f… tired of the double standard.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style?
Oh, she showed she was just a little bit more right than center, she wasn’t left enough, so I’ll vote for the far-right fascist instead.
Every time I read some comment like what the person above wrote, I get to remember that these voters are “just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know…”
Criticizing a candidate doesn’t mean you voted for the other major candidate. It just means that the challenger to the other major candidate sucks. The DNC needs to run better candidates to actually convince people to show up and vote for them.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion in a salty comment.
A lot was implied in that comment. Implying that she is corrupt. That wasn’t criticism. That was badmouthing.
And that specific style of badmouthing usually insinuates justifying a non-vote, which in this case, meant a vote for the the other guy.
She wasn’t absolutely perfect, and she wasn’t the absolute exact perfect fit for everyone. And yes, her campaign could have been run better. Nobody’s perfect. No one can please everyone. But hey, at least she didn’t wear a tan suit!
Active support of genocide is not “not absolutely perfect”, unless you don’t believe foreigners are actually human, which does seem to be the case for American liberals.
I’m Canadian.
And I personally wouldn’t give a fuck about American politics—hadn’t it been for the actual regime amusingly destroy the entire planet, using Palestine as target practice and a real estate opportunity.
Oh, and threatening to invade my country.
She was and is a corrupt corporate shill who actively supports genocide and environmental destruction, and you’re still making excuses even after her worthless ass lost. You deserve Trump and worse. You belong in El Salvador.
Yours is the same, but somehow less useful.
You say she had a spec of dust, yet if you look at her primary election performance, you’ll find she’s just a bad candidate. She did so poorly that she withdrew early. If the DNC held a primary election in 2024, she probably wouldn’t have won. The only reason she had a semblance of a chance in 2024 was because Trump was so bad.
If your best argument in favor of a candidate is their opponent is worse, that tells me everything I need to know about why they lost. Yes, Trump was worse than Harris, but being less bad doesn’t motivate people to get to the polls.
It’s not a double standard, you’re just butthurt about having your preferred candidate being held to any standard at all. “Maybe she was” is bullshit, it’s extremely easy to verify that she was, you either don’t care enough to find out or you know perfectly well already and are deliberately lying. She was a shit candidate fielded specifically for her loyalty to corporate dems and their billionaire backers, the only people who are still pretending otherwise are incurable morons or paid propaganda posters. I don’t know or particularly care which you are, either way you’re a spineless sack of shit. You should be ashamed and silent, in that order.
Because it’s an either-or choice. We were always going to get either Harris or Trump. Criticism of one candidate must be viewed in the context of the only other alternative. So calling out Harris on fracking is only meaningful if her position was substantially different than Trump’s. And if their positions are really no different, but only one candidate got called out for it, then the criticism is irrelevant and that makes me question the motives of the accuser.
That’s the awesome part about democracy: you get one of two shitty choices.
*American “democracy”.
Other countries don’t have this problem, most picked other voting forms than “first past the post”, which over time destroyed our ability to have more than two actual serious political parties. So both those parties get overtaken by ethically dubious people, overtly for the entire republican party, and subtly with the establishment democrats, and it all collapses.
Yes but we don’t live in other countries. We live in the stupid one.
Have you seen the recent elections in Germany, Poland or France? Literally the entire western world is at risk of fascism. The problem isn’t “first past the post”, the problem is capitalism.
Whataboutism
Shitpostingism
Average liberal
Let’s list out all the good and bad policies Harris and Trump ran on then see which is the lesser of 2 evils.
I don’t think Kamala could even tell you what policies Kamala ran on.
Straight up cash to help buy your first house. I wasn’t thrilled about it.
Only for immigrant first generation home buyers with no other members of your family owning a house and after you had lived in government backed apartment housing for more than 2 years.
Same way her business loan suggestions were only for specific communities with super strict requirements.
Set it up “help” so restrictive to only “the people who actually need it” so that you don’t have to give out any at all and just sounds good on paper. They don’t want to actually help people, Democrat leaders just needed to keep status quo.
Nothing at all about “immigrants”. Where did you hear that bullshit?
Mostly pro immigrant news sources that were happy about the benefit this would give directly to those communities and the fact that it targets people that have no other family members with a house in the US which those of us with older parents who were born in the US likely have.
The $10,000 credit for only first time homebuyers was a later addition and was not even set as it was more an additional thought tacked on and does nothing for actually giving money for the down payment but only credits you after you bought it.
Not helpful.
deleted by creator
Yeah, it was a shame it was so restrictive, literally was also set for a limit of 400,000 individuals when first proposed too.
Its a criticism of the garbage solutions that were brought forward for good headlines rather than actual support.
Source
You keep making shit up. One million > 400,000.
This is from Harris’s campaign announcement. The extension to millions would be the 4 year plan. And was adjusted again after Biden’s original proposal of this was panned for being what I originally sourced. The very last offering she made by the end of the campaign was looser on restrictions.
I was incorrect, in that she removed the tax credit and made wider eligibility though stated that those still meeting the original criteria would get more assistance, though all would be required to meet the 2 year of proven rental payments through an assured rental agency.
Wow, that’s very different from the “must live in government housing” and “only immigrants” that you started with. How many times does your bullshit need to be called out before you tell the truth?
Not government housing. Government assured or recognized rental agencies. For proof of payment. It’s part of the boring bureaucracy parts.
And primarily focusing on first generation homebuyers benefits people who have had no previous generations living in the country which is directly beneficial to 1st or second generational immigrants.
I am adjusting my position as I gain further information but the the proposed plans did not just offer free cash to assist the average American in buying a home. That’s still at the base of my point and still accurate. I am now aware that the plan was proposed by Biden and adjusted late into the campaign by Harris after backlash for it.
How much conversation does it take to get to the truth? However long it takes for both sides to agree on what it is.
I voted for Gore, but a bunch of my moron friends voted for Nader in that election. And Nader an ego was so big he could never admit fault for fucking up the next 2 decades of our country.
Now it looks like we fucked for the rest of this century.
Thankfully the Left learned from this mistake and added ranked voting
Oh wait that was New Zealand. But yea, everything since 9/11 is Nader’s fault