https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/kamala-harris-trump-election-08-06-24/index.html
Vice President Kamala Harris and her newly-announced running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz are holding their first joint rally in Philadelphia before going on a tour of battleground states this week. Follow here for the latest live updates on the 2024 presidential race.
Wow! I can't believe she didn't intentionally make the obviously worse choice. Unironically. This is entirely new territory as a democratic voter!
I see it as purposeful messaging that they're willing to change and be more progressive, if that's what we want. Now we need to prove them right and get out to the polls.
To be fair though, democrats don’t have a problem getting out to the polls, especially for national elections. No Republican has won the popular vote for 20 years; the only Republican wins in this time were based on technicalities.
I think what we’ll see in November is the same high voting numbers, but a much different demographics pivoting the central block from old centrists to younger progressives.
This is why Kamala and co need to release their plan to unfuck our election system, so we never have to deal with this bullshit again... If they don't, the left needs to start pushing it
That’s the last legit Republican National win. He only won the popular vote in 2004 due to 9/11. He lost the popular vote in 2000 and won by Supreme Court decision.
These fuckers HAVE to cheat to win.
That was also a colossal violation of the Constitution, because of probability and statistics.
I was too young to understand at the time, but I read that the conservative justices blocked the recount citing concern that the batch of uncounted votes might indicate an attempt by Democrats to steal the election.
But we can easily show that the uncounted batch was too small to change anything. Consider that, even if every single uncounted vote went to Gore, the resulting variance would still reside well within a statistical margin of error for that sample.
In other words, that election was the US’ first true tie in a presidential election since 1800. By the constitution it should have triggered a contingent election, which is the business of the legislative branch, NOT judicial.
A very strategic pick.
His wiki page reads like a check-list to attract the republican women voters.
White
Male
From Nebraska
Veteran.
Supports Abortion rights.
"Think of the children" (both him and his wife were teachers).
Cat and Dog Dad too!
(I believe the cat has crossed the Rainbow Bridge but the energy remains)
Penny for your thoughts? Pennsylvanians seem to be big fans of Shapiro, though I've not heard of Walz before just now.
Shapiro is a HUGE Zionist and has had problems in his office with sexual harassment (not by him, but his aides). With some saying he helped to cover it up.
He may play well in Pennsylvania, he does not play well in many states like Michigan and would not play well with the youth vote. The only real reason to pick Shapiro is for AIPAC money.
Shapiro has an extended history of being quite sympathetic to Israel to the point of problematic statements and treating anti-genocide protest as something it's not.
Walz has none of that baggage and seems to care about people. He's a far better (from what I know) person to be one heartbeat away from the presidency.
He should campaign well and I expect him to keep hitting Trump. Vance will self-own without too much assistance. Punching up will be a great look.
If Walz is her pick, I'm giddy.
I'm fairly far left and I want human rights for all. I don't understand why the party of small government needs to know my internet habits, what happens behind closed doors, what books are read, or why specific medical care (gender affirning or reproductive) is sought.
We're people. The republican nanny state can fuck right off.
That said, I'd like a better safety net. The nation has the money for it if we had a rational tax code. This combination on the ticket gives me hope that all the above are priorities.
I do NOT want Shapiro except as a calculated play for Pennsylvania. I have 0 interest in a war to defend Israel's right to be 1940s Germany.
Shapiro's approval rating is fine, but not high enough that the speculation of him guaranteeing Pennsylvania is justified.
On the other hand, he comes with a lot of baggage - some justified and some not so much - but all of which are terrible optics. He is an incredibly vulnerable pick whose only merit is the vain hope of delivering PA.
Shapiro hasn't been good for education in PA, including leading the closure of several rural public universities and promoting student vouchers. Along with other views, he would not be a progressive pick.
Terminally online leftists have seized on a few very old comments from Shapiro (when he was like 21) and taken more recent ones out of context for performative outrage with regard to the current Israeli conflict. The oddest part is that his actually policy position is shared by Harris, Kelly, Beshear, and even Walz. He's the only Jewish person on that list, though. That couldn't have anything to do with it, right?
His "actual policy position" was saying the protests in his state should be forcefully disbanded and implicitly compared protesters to the KKK. He was worse than every other option, for very specific reasons that would have been easy for you to learn if you tried.
Like in the protests themselves, charges of antisemitism are inappropriately deployed whenever criticism is leveled against Israel and its supporters.
Kamala Harris' husband, Doug Emhoff, is also Jewish. So no, it doesn't have anything to do with it.
Establishment dems like you need to suck it up and vote with the democrats. You always complain when you don’t get everything you want. Don’t you know how compromise works? You’re like little babies it’s not all or nothing. That’s not how real politics works
I hoped that Biden dropping out heralded a tipping point away from the arrogant, conservative old guard that was stifling progress and toward a more progressive future.
I'm more hopeful still. I missed hope.
It funny how Harris is touted as a change from the old running for president. She’ll be an OAP at the end of her first term.
I woke up this morning, figured she'd have made her VP pick public by now (I'm on the West Coast), checked my phone and said "Not Shapiro?! Bahahahahaha!"
And I laughed and laughed and laughed. F Shapiro! Pleasantly surprised she picked Walz.
That's a surprisingly progressive ticket. Who would have guessed that the 2024 election would be between a lawyer & School Teacher (before politics at least) and a dementia riddled real estate mobster and a couch fucker
I'm looking at Davenport right now across the river, those dudes fuck some couches. Frankly I'm surprised they aren't giving him the key to the city.
Only reason they haven’t given him the key to the city is that someone lost it and they’re still looking for it between the cushions
Haven’t you ever seen the shows where they help people overcome their addictions? The first step is removing them from their current environment so that they’re not triggered to relapse.
a progressive ticket with one of the post popular governors in the country who was able to be a governor because he was relatable and popular enough with rural republican minnesotans
It makes sense. He was big on in person campaigning. I've shook his hand and chatted with him, my dad had lunch with him a while back.
Hes a no-nonsense guy. He's from Nebraska, retired Command Sergeant Major, taught in a small town, and listening to him reminds me of my grandfather who was a very popular educator and farmer in the midwest. It's hard not to like him.
not likely; but if walz does win, peggy flanagan would take over and probably have a big boost going into a full term.
Dems have been sneaky progressive since like 2018. It's been a real breath of fresh air. With the Biden Administration's achievements and policy goals basically being a leftist's wishlist, I'm excited to see what a Harris Administration can do on top of that.
Oh hot damn I'm so relieved. I was pretty worried she'd go with Shapiro, and then have a solid argument against her based on his service in the Israeli military. After seeing multiple people on lemmy say "They shouldn't choose Tim Walz.... we want to keep him for our selves", that seemed like a solid endorsement by his constituents. Then Bernie endorsed the guy, so I feel pretty damn good about this selection if it proves to be true.
As a Minnesotan, I'm saddened for our potential loss. But as an American, I'm happy that the rest of the country will get to benefit from him.
Same, but I have a feeling Peggy Flanagan will do well in his stead. She was part of the groups that used to coach others at the Wellstone Political training camps that Tim Walz went to before he started running.
I'm just hoping Kamala and him are able to give America the Minnesota treatment. We won't need these state reforms if they happen on the federal level instead.
then have a solid argument against her based on his service in the Israeli military.
That's an argument against for some and an argument in favor for others. It's about attracting independents and they are split on that issue.
On the other hand, Shapiro would probably not have done well among the large muslim minority in Michigan.
Overall, I think Walz seems like the best pick. I just hope he doesn't turn out to be another Tim Kaine.
Nope, but serving in the IDF, and having some vocal opinions on the campus protests in favor of Palestine is just the thing Harris doesn't need to be saddled with.
Pennsylvania Governor and potential Democratic vice presidential nominee Josh Shapiro on Friday sought to distance himself from a recently uncovered op-ed he wrote in college, in which he identified as a former volunteer in the IDF and argued that the Palestinians are too “battle-minded” to pursue peace with Israel.
“While he was in high school, Josh Shapiro was required to do a service project, which he and several classmates completed through a program that took them to a kibbutz in Israel where he worked on a farm and at a fishery,” Shapiro’s spokesperson Manuel Bonder told The Times of Israel.
“The program also included volunteering on service projects on an Israeli army base. At no time was he engaged in any military activities,” Bonder added in a statement responding to an inquiry regarding the nature of his volunteer work.
Sounds like he was trying to talk himself up in the article he wrote right out of high school. Definitely seems he worked on an IDF base but probably not for the IDF.
Either way, probably good he wasn’t the pick. The opposition wouldn’t be concerned with such nuances.
Yeah, the facts and his actual current opinions matter much less than optics. Still, he has further vulnerabilities too besides Israel so I'm very positively surprised by the Walz pick. Dems seem to be on the ball and have their finger on the pulse of America for once.
Walz is a low risk, medium reward pick. Shapiro is reverse. Can't win the Presidency without Pennsylvania. I think the jabber that the far left came up with regarding Shapiro is shameful and embarrassing, but the choice is made and it's time to move forward.
Wouldn't the opposite of a low risk, medium reward pick a high risk, medium reward pick?
Shapiro was high risk and high reward. Now that the decision has been made, I hope you can cheer for the Philly ward ladies to deliver Pennsylvania.
I don't think Shapiro guarantees PA. His approval is good, but it's not crazy high like Beshear. And his vulnerabilities make him too risky of a pick, you don't want to halt the positive momentum and alienate the young voters you have finally gotten energised.
Not that it matters, but the political tactics in Pennsylvania are a bit different. Shapiro's popularity in rural communities would be quite beneficial.
I think you'll be surprised by the number of surprise states going blue for this election. A lot has happened since 2020 on Trump's side, and none of it has been good.
Yeah, but you celebrate the genocide. I know you post a lot so the arguments between us from months ago will be far back in the history, but there is nothing surprising about someone who justifies genocide siding with the candidate who served in the military that is currently committing genocide.
I'm not siding with any candidate. I don't care who the democratic VP candidate is. Try again.
I don't need to try again, but when you post seemingly innocuous opinions that tangentially touch on your support for genocide without referencing it, and I see it, I will post so that others will know that they are interacting with something posted by someone that supports genocide.
His position on almost everything isn't that much different from corpo Dems. I was reading through one of those "know your politician" sites and I was fuming saying "wtf does he even bring to the table other than mayyyyybe PA and keeping wall st happy?"
I doubt it. There isn't a politician in the country that candons flag burning and defacing public property.
Why do you guys keep assuming it's some generic nothingburger rather than looking up the actual complaints?
Lots of people died under that flag, friend. You can call it a nothingberger but that hardly makes it so for a majority of the US
What? You don't seem to even understand the issue. You refuse to look up the actual criticisms of Shapiro, assuming it's an issue about flag burning, which you say no one would object to. It's not about flag burning.
I don’t rightly care. You're the the one who seems kerpluxed. No politican is going to go along with the demonstrations. Actually, the US has shown restraint compared to the Europeans. A place like Philadelphia or Boston does not take bullshit demonstrations and that's before the cops show up. I am happy that you have found a social cause to support. Shapiro is not going to be the nominee, so again, I really don't care at this point.
If people are dying under the flag then we should destroy the flag to prevent others from dying under it.
I'd spend more time on a response to someone that doesn't make bad faith arguments and supports genocide.
For you, though? No.
Vance will make threats and insults while the progressive sighs in response and explains how the world works
He was coincidentally the keynote speaker at the Esri UC a few weeks ago (a big GIS conference/industry trade show), he was surprisingly entertaining and thoughtful. He used to be a geography teacher, and you could really tell by how well he connected with people. That was my first exposure to him, and I was genuinely impressed.
Wait what, he knows GEOGRAPHY? What kinda 'merican does he think he is?
No worries, my cat says I'm to vote Harris-Walz and D down the ticket, and she knows best.
Wow, color me impressed! This is not the old guard Democrat strategy, and I am so here for it.
Thank God. I can't believe this actually came down to, "one of the most popular Democrats in the country vs. the worst possible choice for every state except PA (debatably)."
I so want this to be true. I'd lose my mind and donate more.
Is she like a real politician who cares about peolple? I'd love to see it.
As much as I would have liked to see her make a strategic pick who could help her win an at risk state like Arizona or Pennsylvania, he has less baggage than Shapiro.
I think too, there's strategy in a non-strategic pick. The cynics would have said "Oh, she only picked Shapiro because she needs Pennsylvania" or "Yeah, yeah, he's an astronaut, but she wants Arizona".
In this case? I think he's going to be a delight to watch. He'll devastate Vance in the debate.
The Democrats need an effective communicator that really connects with people.
I'm excited for this ticket, not because I'm Minnesotan, but because the country desperately needs Waltz, on television, at least as much as MAGAs have been. His rational and relatable mind is a remedy to the years of maddening bullshit that have been blasting us lower and lower to the depths.
I was so jaded by the Democrats and their inability to escape their ivory tower of power and even attempt to relate to me, that I was firmly resolved to vote RFK this election.
Now they offer a glimmer of hope. Here's hoping the tides are changing and they actually have conviction behind their normally hollow words. Biden has achieved some progressive agendas, and thankfully he released his grip to let others continue his surprising work.
RFK is terrible.
Last Week Tonight did a whole hour on him on Sunday. It’s on YouTube.
———
It has video clips from interviews where he himself brings up that he was friends with Epstein, OJ, and Bill Cosby. When he himself was accused with rape, his response was “I’m not a church boy” and “more might come out.”
There are also video clips showing how on more liberal interviews he says with vaccines he’s open to changing his mind (and even apologizing) if he’s introduced to new facts showing they’re safe. But then he routinely goes on conservative shows and tells them that vaccines are not safe and that he goes up to random people in the park to tell them not to vaccinate their kids.
He also went to Samoa and influenced the death of over 80 people by inspiring a fear of vaccines. (Last Week Tonight shows photos of him there and the welcoming ceremony they put on for him.) But when asked about Samoa, he denies even going there.
I felt so bad for john oliver watching that episode, airing right after the news broke of RFK abandoning a dead bear cub in Central Park 10 years ago. The downside of pre-recording the day before I guess. Can't wait for the follow up next week.
Don't vote for RFK
Ok that just sounds whacky and made up. At best a mischaracterization of some obscure situation.
Boy do I have some news for you: https://apnews.com/article/robert-kennedy-rfk-bear-cub-central-park-f7e6cba9aa19dc2066a8d9c543974a97
Also, incase you haven't heard: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/08/us/rfk-jr-brain-health-memory-loss.html
So he and some friends found roadkill and thought it would be funny to put it in a park to give the appearance that a NY bicyclist ran it over and left it? That's supposed to make me not vote for the person?
To me that says he has a sense of humor, strange as it may be. But how is that supposed to turn me off compared to grabbing women by the pussy or approaching young women from behind and smelling their hair and pecking at them publicly? I'll take dark humor over fucked up shit any day.
Come back when you have a video of RFK doing anything as grizzly as the two formerly leading candidates. Brain worms are fairly common and only support his claim that he's an avid outdoorsman. Again, how is that something to disqualify a candidate, when the next two are both literally and publicly out of their minds?
I don't care to debate about it. You said it sounded wacky, which it is, and made up, which it isn't.
I did end up watching that episode. The part where Jon called him a red-pilled Smokey the Bear was really funny.
The accusation wasn't of rape but sexual assault, which is quite different, though no less wrong.
The show makes the distinction of mainstream and not. Not sure the real difference is liberal versus conservative.
And the Samoa situation is really strange, but I don't think Robert went around and told locals to not vaccinate. I said in another comment that he has something to answer for here, but saying he is responsible seems like speculation, given the evidence as presented.
He's a Kennedy, I'm sure he's been around a great number of people. But of all the interviews I've seen, both before and after his intention to run for president, I never heard him refer to those people as his friends. He had rational reasons for his relationship as far as Epstein goes. I don't have any reason to believe he was a child rapist.
As far as the other two, all I can say is that famous people tend to talk to other famous people at parties. It doesn't mean RFK approves of their behavior or character. If you have evidence of the contrary I'm all ears. Cherry picked sounds bytes don't impress me so you don't have to bother with that.
Also I'm not saying he's the pinnacle of greatness. He only had to top Trump and Biden, and that's not hard to do this election. There were other Democrats I would have gladly voted for but the DNC and Biden didn't give me the chance.
Don't care about down votes, but at least have the guts to support your decision. I'm putting my thoughts out there, you can refute them just the same.
Glad you changed your mind but RFK literally caused babies to die in Samoa in an anti MMR vaccine campaign he called an experiment.
Sorry it took so long to get back at you but here's a link from a quick search. Honestly I think it's minimizing his influence even in that article but it should explain.
No worries, I really appreciate your follow-up.
I agree with Robert's professed view that vaccines should have enhanced safety protocols to ensure positive health outcomes. Specifically, a long term study on ingredients and so forth. This, he claims, stems from the staggering increase in child health issues in the past forty years. It makes perfect sense to want to use US health institutions to research possible causes and get to the bottom of it. I don't trust monied interests, but I do trust the scientific method.
However, scaremongering is wrong, and that appears to be what caused the issue. It isn't perfectly clear that Robert directly has blood on his hands, but it does seem like the company he kept at the time has done some damage, and so he at least has something to answer for here.
Thanks again for getting back to me on this.
His issue was specifically with mercury. Which was in medically insignificant amounts at the time and is no longer used.
The medical consensus on the increase in childhood issues over the past forty years is that it's not really in increase. It's an increase in diagnosis. 40 years ago most kids who had an autism spectrum issue were undiagnosed and remain so to this day.
However what we do have on our hands are measles outbreaks and polio on the horizon due to vaccine skepticism. I saw a study yesterday on Lemmy showing that 31% of Republicans think vaccines are worse than the diseases they prevent, which is total insanity. Few seem to understand herd immunity or even really the purpose of vaccination.
I think it's because we haven't seen children dying large numbers due to measles and all the people who were crippled for life by polio are dead. Because we vaccinated almost everyone. Now that it's a distant memory people question what the vaccines are for.
I can see how the advance/change of criteria can lead to an increase in diagnosis. But I don't think it's merely a perception that has evolved. Cancer rates in youth are rising significantly. The recommended age for common cancer screens are being lowered to reflect the change.
There was a time when the use of lead was perfectly normal and the flight to eliminate it for public safety was deemed as fringe. Likewise, I feel that we have new kinds of pollutants affecting our health and I have a keen interest in knowing what's safe and what isn't, now that I have children to care for.
I see vaccinations as one of humanity's greatest achievements. mRNA technology is exciting to me. But just like scaremongering upsets me, so does hasty policy making and social policing.
That said, my family is fully up to date on vaccination schedules. But I have worries that if we let our guards down and only take in facts on authority, we'll give way to corruption due to our unquestioning nature. This is in no way limited to vaccines, in fact I hardly question vaccines at all. I'm mostly interested in industrial pollution and Robert has extensive experience in this area. That's why I favored him, as a figure who lived to expose industrial and government corruption at the cost of human health.
::: spoiler CNN - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report) Information for CNN:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
:::
::: spoiler Search topics on Ground.News https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/kamala-harris-trump-election-08-06-24/index.html ::: Media Bias Fact Check | bot support