The latest news and live updates on the 2024 election. Follow the Trump-Vance and Harris-Walz campaigns ahead of the presidential election in November.
This whole topic is the same people who make excuses for why the Cheney endorsements are good (or at a minimum irrelevant) saying how David Duke’s endorsement should make people supporting Jill Stein think twice.
Jill Stein is a grifter and a spoiler working to advance conservative causes, but the hypocrisy here is breathtaking.
There’s a very clear difference: Stein is a well-documented, intentional spoiler who’s funding comes primarily from Republican mega-donors and Russian interests, and who recently said out loud her purpose isn’t to advance her party but exclusively to block Harris.
Her track record makes that endorsement poignant.
If she was sincere and didn’t already align with fascist interests, we wouldn’t care what Nazis say about her.
Horrible person endorses candidate I like: “you can help who endorses you, it doesn’t mean anything about their values”. Horrible person endorses candidate I don’t like: “see, if you support them you’re in bed with [the KKK/war criminals]”.
If she was sincere and didn’t already align with fascist interests, we wouldn’t care what Nazis say about her.
If Harris was a progressive peacenik who didn’t seem open to aligning with neocon foreign policy, no one would think anything of welcoming Cheney into her campaign.
It’s the same exact reasoning, just reformulated for whether you like the candidate in question.
This isn’t about like or dislike. Again, it’s about her track record. If Duke had come out to support Cornel West, we’d have collectively shrugged. I’d still strongly recommend nobody vote for him because he’s a spoiler, too, and I don’t like him as a candidate, but a Nazi endorsement for him would not make any difference.
The entire reason Duke supporting Stein matters is because of her history supporting fascists. How is this difficult to grasp?
This is literally the argument for why the Cheneys endorsements raise concerns for Harris. Her history and current reticence to break from Biden (whose foreign policy is not obviously different from Cheney’s) and more directly criticize Israel indicates they might, at least to some degree, have some issues they agree on. If the Cheneys endorsed Cornel West, we’d also have collectively shrugged, but Harris has been explicitly tacking to the right and supporting a destructive war in the Middle East.
No, it isn’t. The Cheneys aren’t supporting Harris, but rejecting trump and trying to pull more moderate conservatives away from him. Not towards Harris – their platforms are not aligned at all – but to try to bring the GOP away from self-immolation.
Again,their motives are purely self-interest.
On the other hand, Duke is saying he supports Stein because her interests align with his. Huge ass difference.
Uh, they’re definitely supporting Harris. Liz Cheney is out there appearing at events trying to get her elected. That’s a hell of a lot more than Duke is doing. This claim is just expanding the mental gymnastics in a new direction.
You still haven’t addressed how Biden’s foreign policy and Harris’s presumed foreign policy (due to her unwillingness to create daylight) isn’t a part of her platform aligned with the Cheneys. Dick Cheney’s defining political interest was foreign policy, specifically one that bombs Arabs for geopolitical gain, and it just happens to be pretty compatible with what’s going on right now. If her platform was that neocons were war criminals and should be tried at the Hague they might have been a little less likely to get on board.
David Duke, who said he doesn’t agree with Stein on most issues and was actually rejected by the Stein campaign, is somehow an all-in representative supporter, but Liz Cheney, who also said she doesn’t agree with Harris on most issues but was embraced by the campaign and is literally campaigning for it, isn’t. Hell, Duke’s endorsement, if anything, is likely to work against the supposed shared goal of electing fascists. He could have just endorsed Trump, the fascist who most of his racist followers would have naturally supported.
Their endorsements are both self-interested with a limited overlap on platform, but one counts because you want it to. And by every possible measure the Cheney endorsements is getting more acknowledgement and encouragement from the campaign. Either bad people endorsing a campaign is in itself a mark against the campaign or it isn’t. You’re trying to figuyre out some complex logical structure that permits one and not the other but it’s nonsensical, especially since one set of the bad people was embraced by the campaign and it wasn’t the one your end goal demands.
I think I understand why you’re not getting this. You simply can’t understand that under FPTP, the only way to vehemently deny one candidate and to keep them out of office is to ‘support’ the other, even if you don’t agree with them. When one candidate will destroy democracy and usher in an autocracy, if you actually care about having a choice in the future, the only effective solution is to support an opposition that will not destroy everything.
You still haven’t addressed how Biden’s foreign policy and Harris’s presumed foreign policy (due to her unwillingness to create daylight) isn’t a part of her platform aligned with the Cheneys.
This is not the topic of conversation, and I’ve already given you enough of my time. Google exists., and I’m not your polisci professor. You can look the rest up for yourself.
And anyone who doesn’t agree with the echo chamber, is a “Trumper” or works “for the Russians” or my personal fav, “posting/commenting in bad faith.” lol
Funny words from someone with a proven history of trolling, lack of civility, and spamming according to the modlog. But please, enlighten us all about how you engage in good faith posting and commenting.
Yeah having his daughter who defended all of his bad actions on your events isn’t standing by him and he going on about how honored she is. Liberals will literally work with fascists. Malcolm X was correct long ago. Vote for who you want best of luck.
No, this is a situation where the dems need to get as many votes as possible, and you’re underestimating the voting power of old people.
The dems are accepting the Cheney’s support specifically to wake up some moderate, old conservatives who would otherwise vote reflexively for trump simply because of the R after his name.
This isn’t an ideological move, but a purely political one. Politics is not always tasteful. Ideological purity is useless against actual, real-life fascism, and it’s a strategic move. Reality isn’t always rainbows and unicorns.
It isn’t ideological purity. The only people who give up ground is Dems that is why the GOP can dog walk them while going on about space lazers and weather control. There should be some limits when it comes to people like Dick Cheney getting a pass. I’ve done the whole vote for the lesser evil. I’m good. I’ll do what I can locally and vote down ballot for in local elections.
When Trump can come out call Harris for adopting his policies and she has nothing to say back. I’m good. I don’t support right-wingers even with (D) next to their name.
genocide jill is perfectly fine with genocides except for the one that’s hot in the news right now.
by the way, those people are who are being genocided in the genocide hot in the news right now? they support kamala harris.
you don’t care about genocide. especially that one. because if you did you would be voting for her. it’s either you hate israel or you just refuse to vote for a black woman or you want to vote for trump or some combination of the 3.
she is not a member of an ongoing genocide. that would be the government of israel, specifically benjamin netanyahu and his war cabinet. they are using the weapons we gave them to defend against iran in a conflict disproportionate to the way they were attacked and they are disinterested in paying us the united states any attention with requests and demands unless trump gets in who will allow netanyahu to act in gaza without restraint.
so tell me, which one do you want, someone who will use all the soft power we have to influence israel’s actions, or do you want someone who will allow israel to make what’s going on in gaza look like a water gun fight and then target the west bank next?because don’t you dare believe that gaza will be the end of this.
i am also black. I early voted. I didn’t vote for her because she’s black. I voted for her because she’s not a wannabe dictator, a 34 time felon, a credibly accused insurrecionist, a credibly accused thief of government documents, a racist, a bigot, a narcissist, an adjudicated rapist and sexual abuser, an adjudicated con artist, an adjudicated tax fraud, showing severe and obvious signs of mental decline, and is the only person who has the ability to be president since literally every third party candidate is not on enough state ballots to constitute the necessary 270 electoral college votes needed to become the president.
It could be Harris if she decides to change course She wants to earn support and the ball is in her court. She can do things for the mythical centrist Dick Cheney voter. Then asking for her to follow international law and stop being active in genocide isn’t much.
You mean the Reagan/Bush era republicans who are now the most reliable voting block, and who feel like the current Republican party has gone too far, but have been dutifully ticking that R every election since they were able to vote? The ones on a steady diet of Fox News who think trump can’t really be that bad, but if the Cheney’s of all people, those dyed in the wool conservatives, are supporting Harris, maybe they should at least look a bit closer at it – those people who don’t exist?
I assure you, those people exist. Especially in swing states. They exist so much, professional pollsters warn they might be over represented.
This is not giving up ground. The only people looking at this and thinking it means Harris somehow supports the Cheneys rather than the other way round are ideological purists. Nobody sane is giving the Cheneys a pass. They’re slime and we all know it. The only thing this tells us is that he’s* so unabashedly heinous that even old school Republicans can’t stomach him. It’s not a difficult concept.
Nobody is ‘standing by him’. Hitler liked dogs. Am I supposed to hate dogs because Hitler ‘stood by’ them?
I couldn’t give less of a fuck who the Cheneys support. Their opinions don’t factor into my choices at all.
This whole topic is the same people who make excuses for why the Cheney endorsements are good (or at a minimum irrelevant) saying how David Duke’s endorsement should make people supporting Jill Stein think twice.
Jill Stein is a grifter and a spoiler working to advance conservative causes, but the hypocrisy here is breathtaking.
There’s a very clear difference: Stein is a well-documented, intentional spoiler who’s funding comes primarily from Republican mega-donors and Russian interests, and who recently said out loud her purpose isn’t to advance her party but exclusively to block Harris.
Her track record makes that endorsement poignant.
If she was sincere and didn’t already align with fascist interests, we wouldn’t care what Nazis say about her.
LOL, no there isn’t.
Horrible person endorses candidate I like: “you can help who endorses you, it doesn’t mean anything about their values”. Horrible person endorses candidate I don’t like: “see, if you support them you’re in bed with [the KKK/war criminals]”.
If Harris was a progressive peacenik who didn’t seem open to aligning with neocon foreign policy, no one would think anything of welcoming Cheney into her campaign.
It’s the same exact reasoning, just reformulated for whether you like the candidate in question.
This isn’t about like or dislike. Again, it’s about her track record. If Duke had come out to support Cornel West, we’d have collectively shrugged. I’d still strongly recommend nobody vote for him because he’s a spoiler, too, and I don’t like him as a candidate, but a Nazi endorsement for him would not make any difference.
The entire reason Duke supporting Stein matters is because of her history supporting fascists. How is this difficult to grasp?
This is literally the argument for why the Cheneys endorsements raise concerns for Harris. Her history and current reticence to break from Biden (whose foreign policy is not obviously different from Cheney’s) and more directly criticize Israel indicates they might, at least to some degree, have some issues they agree on. If the Cheneys endorsed Cornel West, we’d also have collectively shrugged, but Harris has been explicitly tacking to the right and supporting a destructive war in the Middle East.
No, it isn’t. The Cheneys aren’t supporting Harris, but rejecting trump and trying to pull more moderate conservatives away from him. Not towards Harris – their platforms are not aligned at all – but to try to bring the GOP away from self-immolation.
Again,their motives are purely self-interest.
On the other hand, Duke is saying he supports Stein because her interests align with his. Huge ass difference.
e: formatting
Uh, they’re definitely supporting Harris. Liz Cheney is out there appearing at events trying to get her elected. That’s a hell of a lot more than Duke is doing. This claim is just expanding the mental gymnastics in a new direction.
You still haven’t addressed how Biden’s foreign policy and Harris’s presumed foreign policy (due to her unwillingness to create daylight) isn’t a part of her platform aligned with the Cheneys. Dick Cheney’s defining political interest was foreign policy, specifically one that bombs Arabs for geopolitical gain, and it just happens to be pretty compatible with what’s going on right now. If her platform was that neocons were war criminals and should be tried at the Hague they might have been a little less likely to get on board.
David Duke, who said he doesn’t agree with Stein on most issues and was actually rejected by the Stein campaign, is somehow an all-in representative supporter, but Liz Cheney, who also said she doesn’t agree with Harris on most issues but was embraced by the campaign and is literally campaigning for it, isn’t. Hell, Duke’s endorsement, if anything, is likely to work against the supposed shared goal of electing fascists. He could have just endorsed Trump, the fascist who most of his racist followers would have naturally supported.
Their endorsements are both self-interested with a limited overlap on platform, but one counts because you want it to. And by every possible measure the Cheney endorsements is getting more acknowledgement and encouragement from the campaign. Either bad people endorsing a campaign is in itself a mark against the campaign or it isn’t. You’re trying to figuyre out some complex logical structure that permits one and not the other but it’s nonsensical, especially since one set of the bad people was embraced by the campaign and it wasn’t the one your end goal demands.
I think I understand why you’re not getting this. You simply can’t understand that under FPTP, the only way to vehemently deny one candidate and to keep them out of office is to ‘support’ the other, even if you don’t agree with them. When one candidate will destroy democracy and usher in an autocracy, if you actually care about having a choice in the future, the only effective solution is to support an opposition that will not destroy everything.
This is not the topic of conversation, and I’ve already given you enough of my time. Google exists., and I’m not your polisci professor. You can look the rest up for yourself.
Harris has not “aligned with” any Cheney or other neocon. Stop pretending that you don’t understand how electoral politics works.
Yep! Insane hypocrisy around these parts.
And anyone who doesn’t agree with the echo chamber, is a “Trumper” or works “for the Russians” or my personal fav, “posting/commenting in bad faith.” lol
Funny words from someone with a proven history of trolling, lack of civility, and spamming according to the modlog. But please, enlighten us all about how you engage in good faith posting and commenting.
Yeah having his daughter who defended all of his bad actions on your events isn’t standing by him and he going on about how honored she is. Liberals will literally work with fascists. Malcolm X was correct long ago. Vote for who you want best of luck.
No, this is a situation where the dems need to get as many votes as possible, and you’re underestimating the voting power of old people.
The dems are accepting the Cheney’s support specifically to wake up some moderate, old conservatives who would otherwise vote reflexively for trump simply because of the R after his name.
This isn’t an ideological move, but a purely political one. Politics is not always tasteful. Ideological purity is useless against actual, real-life fascism, and it’s a strategic move. Reality isn’t always rainbows and unicorns.
It isn’t ideological purity. The only people who give up ground is Dems that is why the GOP can dog walk them while going on about space lazers and weather control. There should be some limits when it comes to people like Dick Cheney getting a pass. I’ve done the whole vote for the lesser evil. I’m good. I’ll do what I can locally and vote down ballot for in local elections.
When Trump can come out call Harris for adopting his policies and she has nothing to say back. I’m good. I don’t support right-wingers even with (D) next to their name.
We all know who you really want in power. Transparent as fucking glass.
A person who isn’t backing genocide and with an agenda for working class and poor people. Pretty lowbar.
genocide jill is perfectly fine with genocides except for the one that’s hot in the news right now.
by the way, those people are who are being genocided in the genocide hot in the news right now? they support kamala harris.
you don’t care about genocide. especially that one. because if you did you would be voting for her. it’s either you hate israel or you just refuse to vote for a black woman or you want to vote for trump or some combination of the 3.
I’m black why would I vote for Harris just because she is black and an active member of ongoing genocide? We’re not monolith.
you assume too much.
she is not a member of an ongoing genocide. that would be the government of israel, specifically benjamin netanyahu and his war cabinet. they are using the weapons we gave them to defend against iran in a conflict disproportionate to the way they were attacked and they are disinterested in paying us the united states any attention with requests and demands unless trump gets in who will allow netanyahu to act in gaza without restraint.
so tell me, which one do you want, someone who will use all the soft power we have to influence israel’s actions, or do you want someone who will allow israel to make what’s going on in gaza look like a water gun fight and then target the west bank next?because don’t you dare believe that gaza will be the end of this.
i am also black. I early voted. I didn’t vote for her because she’s black. I voted for her because she’s not a wannabe dictator, a 34 time felon, a credibly accused insurrecionist, a credibly accused thief of government documents, a racist, a bigot, a narcissist, an adjudicated rapist and sexual abuser, an adjudicated con artist, an adjudicated tax fraud, showing severe and obvious signs of mental decline, and is the only person who has the ability to be president since literally every third party candidate is not on enough state ballots to constitute the necessary 270 electoral college votes needed to become the president.
And who is that?
It could be Harris if she decides to change course She wants to earn support and the ball is in her court. She can do things for the mythical centrist Dick Cheney voter. Then asking for her to follow international law and stop being active in genocide isn’t much.
You mean the Reagan/Bush era republicans who are now the most reliable voting block, and who feel like the current Republican party has gone too far, but have been dutifully ticking that R every election since they were able to vote? The ones on a steady diet of Fox News who think trump can’t really be that bad, but if the Cheney’s of all people, those dyed in the wool conservatives, are supporting Harris, maybe they should at least look a bit closer at it – those people who don’t exist?
I assure you, those people exist. Especially in swing states. They exist so much, professional pollsters warn they might be over represented.
Ok. You didn’t answer the question.
This is not giving up ground. The only people looking at this and thinking it means Harris somehow supports the Cheneys rather than the other way round are ideological purists. Nobody sane is giving the Cheneys a pass. They’re slime and we all know it. The only thing this tells us is that he’s* so unabashedly heinous that even old school Republicans can’t stomach him. It’s not a difficult concept.
e: *
Jesus can you people just stop pretending that you don’t understand basic electoral politics… For fuck sake it’s so tired.
Ahh yes the average electoral politics post insurrection and still barely outperforming in polls. These aren’t normal times goofball.