top 92 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 85 points 1 month ago (15 children)

Please just go away already.

Fuck

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children)

    You're learning the wrong thing

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/30/harris-trump-economic-proposals-poll

    Kamala Harris’s economic policies proved far more popular than Donald Trump’s plans in a blind test of their proposals.

    https://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/trump-wins-while-americans-vote-for-progressive-policies/

    This was not a loss on policy. This was not a loss on ideas.

    This was a propaganda war, people were lead to fear the Democratic party and were convinced Trump was a good businessman.

    People said they voted for Trump due to the economy, while every economic policy they liked when presented it without a name attached came from Kamala. They HATED Trump's ideas when his name wasn't attached.

    Stop teaching yourself the wrong lesson. Get prepared to fight the propaganda, don't join the infighting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Policies are meanignless if you are bad are presenting them or people do not trust that you will accomplish them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Listen to her speak, she is actually really good at presenting her policies, the issue is nobody will pay attention to her and she won't lie to get the attention she feels she needs like Vance has stated he does. Remember during the 2024 election cycle when she literally had to chase down reporters? There are endless examples of her walking up to the press and trying to discuss policy just for them to shut her down without a chance to speak... meanwhile those exact same people were doing anything to be the 9 trillionth person to report on whatever nonsensical blatant lies and hate were spilling out of Trump's mouth at the time.

    And all of that aside...how in the fuck are you going to claim somebody lost to Trump because they were bad at presenting policy? Trump has the poorest speaking abilities of anybody in the entire history of US politics, same with his displayed understanding of policies, laws, governmental structure, constitutional framework, etc. He is literally the absolute worst we've ever had at all of the things you say are the reasons the other side lost.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    yes, when we she get the credit she deserves for being such a great communicator?

    Kamala Harris on geography: So, Ukraine is a country in Europe. It exists next to another country called Russia. Russia is a bigger country. Russia is a powerful country. Russia decided to invade a smaller country called Ukraine. So, basically, that’s wrong, and it goes against everything that we stand for.

    on community banks: We invested an additional $12 billion into community banks, because we know community banks are in the community, and understand the needs and desires of that community as well as the talent and capacity of community.

    on the pandemic: We also recognize just as it has been in the United States, for Jamaica, one of the issues that has been presented as an issue that is economic in the way of its impact has been the pandemic.

    on Roe v. Wade: I think that, to be very honest with you, I do believe that we should have rightly believed, but we certainly believe that certain issues are just settled. Certain issues are just settled.

    on the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade: I think of this moment as a moment that is about great momentum.

    on a mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois: We’ve got to take this stuff seriously, as seriously as you are because you have been forced to take this seriously.

    on space exploration: It is critical that we… partner to ensure that we are speaking the same language with the same motivation, inspired by the opportunity of it all, but then doing the work of updating how we have been talking and thinking about our exploration in space.

    on transportation: Together, we are expanding access to transportation. It seems like maybe it’s a small issue; it’s a big issue. You need to get to go and need to be able to get where you need to go to do the work and get home. Kamala Harris on the record flow of illegal immigrants crossing the border We have a secure border in that that is a priority for any nation including ours in our administration.

    Harris on water policy: We have long — and Wade and I worked together for years back in San Francisco — talked about the importance of taking seriously the urgency of this moment and, in particular, in dealing with the various issues that are present when we look at the climate crisis, thinking about water policy, diversifying water policy, understanding that we must have the ability to diversify our approach and our — and the resources to everything from what we do in terms of conservation to recycling, desalination, and storage of water.

    I'm inspired. Arent you inspired? I mean, she is the one person who could continue Bidens oratory legacy, but we passed her by because of the trivial issue that she wouldn't oppose genocide. Thats just unfair, right. Clearly this is 100% the media's fault. It cant be that the Dem elite ran an incoherent loser who was out of touch with what Dem voters cared about. Lets run her again in 2028.

    /s

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago* (4 children)

    I will not waste my time with a cultist

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    What cult am I in? I've spent my entire life advocating for human and worker rights against both parties and every organization in the US government. I've been personally blocked by countless US reps and law enforcement organizations across the country.

    You were literally arguing antithetical statements and jumped to baseless name calling when you were called on it. You can't claim somebody lost to Trump over their ability to discuss policy when Trump himself is the de facto worst policy speaker in the entire history of the country, dude even routinely shits on his own policies and verbatim states that whoever signed them in is the worst president ever...while taking credit for the things democrats passed after he shit talked it while it was up for debate.

    Are you sure you aren't in a cult? Right wing authoritarianism is just as popular in Europe as it is in the US, how are you making sure you aren't being misled into believing contradictory things...like the statements you made here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    you are called a Democrat, shouldn't you believe in some sort of inherent sacredness of popularity? why champion the verifiably least popular known Democrat?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Not a Democrat. And if I believed in some "sacredness of popularity" I would be defending Trump...like you keep doing.

    Are you positive you are not in cult yourself?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    defending Trump is different than celebrating the fall of an empire. i don't think he ever done a correct thing, other than convince people to vote for him

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Yes, let's send away every popular democrat, why even bother winning over Trump, even if the other option isn't ideal

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -31 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    The same to people Iike you honestly. Green MAGA fuckwits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 month ago

    I guess Third Way is sending in their nuke.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 1 month ago (56 children)

    Why would El-Syaed agree to such a thing.

  • source
  • hideshow 56 child comments
  • [–] [S] 10 points 1 month ago

    From NBC:

    Roxie Richner, a spokesperson for El-Sayed, told NBC News on Wednesday that “Abdul is thrilled to welcome Vice President Harris to Michigan for a conversation about improving Black maternal health and bringing down healthcare costs.”

    Richner added: “He looks forward to hearing directly from Black women and healthcare providers and discussing how he’ll continue that work in the Senate. There’s no better choice for Michiganders than Abdul when it comes to making healthcare more affordable, and he’s grateful Vice President Harris will join him in spreading that message.”

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago*

    I share your sentiment to a degree. However, Kamala remains popular with centrist liberal voters who are still sore she lost the 2024 election. Having her endorse El-Sayed on his campaign trail could entice voters who see him as “extreme.”

    At this point, he needs every last vote he can conjure. It’s politics in 2026. Such is the state of a corrupt, two-party, winner-take-all electoral system.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -12 points 1 month ago (52 children)

    We've been calling him a liberal Zionist for a while now, well the you go directly partnering with the genocide committers to absolve them off accountability and normalize "we're against killing, on both sides" and "two state solution" bullshit.

    Hope it brings him down and teaches others a lesson.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 52 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (50 children)

    Who the fuck is the "we" you speak for in your insane purity test?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 50 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (43 children)

    Purity testing is when you check if somebody supports settler colonialism, as everyone knows.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 43 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (42 children)

    And he has openly criticized the genocide, but because he didn't also do a backflip while doing so apparently he needs to fall so a Republican can take his seat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 42 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 month ago (41 children)

    This is exactly fucking it. You hear "Gaza genocide real" in the year of 2026 and you immediately start soyfacing because of it. Get a fucking grip.

    Has your favourite Dubai landlord made 1 (one) anti-Zionist (not liberal Zionist) statement yet? Or is he too busy collaborating with the main genocidaires while not doing the bare minimum (what you call a "backflip" for fucks sake).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 41 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (40 children)

    Has your favourite Dubai landlord

    I'm just gonna highlight that and walk away with a W.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 40 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago* (39 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (38 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (30 children)

    "That's some nice 'evidence' you've got there. Unfortunately, the person talking about it doesn't agree with me politically so that means it's not real."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (29 children)

    It's electorialism actually. El-Sayed may not be perfect. But look who you're allying with to criticize him.

    Maybe you will answer the question they were obviously too cowardly/ignorant/your alt to answer.

    Who should I write in?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (28 children)

    Lmao "my alt?"

    Personally, I think you should probably vote for El-Sayed, because I'm not that person and don't agree with all of her positions on everything. See, and I know this is a difficult concept to grasp, sometimes, a person is right about something, even if I disagree with them about something else. Kind of like Free Beacon, actually!

    I'm just chiming in to point out how utterly ridiculous you're being by writing off evidence just because the source presenting the evidence is biased.

    "Get out of the road! There's a car coming!"

    "Who did you vote for? Who do you say I should vote for?"

    "Turn around! Look, you can see it with your own eyes!"

    "So, you're too cowardly to answer my questions."

    "Dude, she's right, there's a car right there!"

    "You must be her alt then. Who do you say I should vote for?"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (27 children)

    Oh so you're just criticizing the cantidate you hope wins?

    Maybe pull over and let someone else drive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (26 children)

    Oh so you’re just critisicing the cantidate you hope wins?

    Yes? That's called being intellectually honest and not a partisan hack.

    Are you openly admitting that you won't acknowledge criticism of people you support, even if that criticism is backed by hard evidence?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (25 children)

    No I'm admitting most people are too ignorant to engage with politics intellectually and it's the job of those who will to simplify the positions for them.

    If the other side is going to stand lock step against us; our divisions will be exploited.

    You win an election or you lose it. Intellectual honesty doesn't get a vote multiplier.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (24 children)

    So you're a partisan hack and a liar, understood.

    And a bad liar, at that. If you're gonna lie, don't do so in a way that you can get caught out and exposed so easily lmao.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (23 children)

    I'm an objectivist.

    If you want to align yourself with fools and charlitains to pretend you have some moral high ground be my guest.

    The facts remain the facts no matter how they are twisted.

    Either way vote El-Sayed is the end of your point and that's fine with me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

    Well don't worry in the upcoming election of truth versus lies I'll very much be on your side.

    But in this specific election. The real one that actually exists, you're serving Mike Rodgers. So feel free to list his myriad financial entanglements in the pursuit of truthfulness and fairness that you're so obviously committed to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I'm "serving" Mike Rodgers? Keep this up and people will be able to start saying that reality has a conservative bias.

    I even said that I think people should vote for El-Sayed. But I also acknowledged something that is objectively true. If telling the truth is "serving" his opponent, if his path to winning depends on spreading lies and misinformation, then perhaps I should reconsider my assessment.

    Some of us are more concerned with building a movement than on your petty electoral shit, and betraying people's trust with misinformation is not a basis for a movement. Doing so in such a way that you instantly get caught, and then doubling down and admitting all of this openly, is not even helpful to the goal of winning an election.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    "Petty electorial shit"

    I fucking died laughing.

    Build your non electorial movement then swine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (17 children)

    The facts remain the facts no matter how they are twisted.

    Lol, very rich of you to say that.

    The fact is the claim about El-Sayed being a Dubai landlord is objectively true. It remains a fact, even if you try to twist it by claiming that anyone who acknowledges it is "aligning with fools and charlatans."

    Either way vote El-Sayed is the end of your point and that’s fine with me.

    It absolutely is not. Whether you vote for him or not is trivial, whether you are honest or not is much more important. The end of my point is that you're a liar and a hack, and that you're not even good at being a lying hack.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (16 children)

    Lol can't wait to see what the "Honesty Senate" accomplishes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (15 children)

    I can't wait to see what, "Hey everybody, I'm a liar, and I think you should vote for this guy" accomplishes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (14 children)

    See it's the implication that truth exists that makes me see you as an ignorant child.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    Might want to workshop it before you put that on the side of a bus.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (12 children)

    As opposed to? What's your bus slogan?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (11 children)

    I don't have one, I'm not the one promoting him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (10 children)

    It's easy to be against anything with nothing to defend.

    So easy I wonder why anyone would devote a moment to the exercise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago* (9 children)

    Of course I have things to defend. El-Sayed is not one of them.

    What I'm confused about is, why defend anything if nothing is true?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (8 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Oh no, I'm so owned.

    If I were actually trying to discredit El-Sayed, and I didn't believe in intellectual honesty, I'd probably go around telling blatant lies on his behalf and then doubling down on "lying is good" when called out.

    Can you honestly say you think this is a good look?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (6 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Yeah, that's consistent with what I'd do if I were trying to discredit him while pretending to be a supporter too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

    Hey just glad we both support him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    That too! It's like you're trying to make voting for him as odious as possible.

    I said it as a jape before, but now I'm wondering if you really are a right-wing op.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Well to all the undecided voters who have followed us to the the third or fourth segments of the extended comments on the trans communist website I'll tell ya. We support El-Sayed, his stance against billionaires and for universal healthcare and a free Palestine are real. We're allowed to disagree. And if two people as opposed as myself and Objection@lemmy.ml can agree on that then you know he's the right choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Would you like to dispute his financial disclosures, or is the only thing you have is them being biased?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Posting right wing agitprop is posting right wing agitprop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    It's not my problem that American liberal media doesn't talk about it, and this still does nothing to refute that Abdul El-Sayed is a self-admitted capitalist Dubai landlord who owns 3 rental properties (the others being in India and Michigan).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Oh is the election between El-Sayed and a perfect Marxist without a speck on their record?

    Oh it's not?

    Wow post more right wing links. It's not weird or telling that you read those.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    You're right. He's a good Dubai landlord.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

    It's always good when people like you out themselves, that you consider opposition to genocide, apartheid, and occupation an "insane purity test".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    "If you don't agree with every single word I say exactly like I say it you are a right wing extremist and a literal nazi.

    Now if you don't mind I need to inform the mailing list that you and everyone you associate with have been canceled."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    They literally killed over 50,000 people while gaslighting us about it, blaming Hamas at every turn, refused to even talk about the topic on three campaign except for calling for the deadliest military, defending Israel's non-existent "right to exist", and saying she can't think of a single thing she would have done differently than Biden.

    Or as you put it, "don't agree with ever single word I far exactly like I say it".

    What you're doing is genocide denial. You're minimizing and flat out denying her involvement in the genocide, and trying to twist reality and convince others that our issue with her is over disagreement on words.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Disingenuous. Life's not that black and white, especially in politics. Someone can be against those things, and still have voted for Kamala because it was the best option available.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    You cannot be against genocide and vote for the person saying they will continue it. You're disingenuous. This was Biden's genocide and Kamala said there's not one thing she'd have done different.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Oh, so you're saying we should have voted for Donald Trump? Thats what youre arguing for right now? Please elaborate on that. Or should we just not have voted at all? Which, by the way, still results in Donald Trump becoming president.

    I cannot see any way that voting for Trump would have been the "correct" thing to do.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 1 month ago

    Could she… not?

  • source
  • [–] 83 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Why? Does he want to lose?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    https://infosec.pub/comment/23712904

    Trump's policies were all unpopular and people hated his ideas.

    He won because media told people the Democrat's good ideas were his and that only be could be trusted to implement them, and too many believed it. He copied promises from Kamala outright and media only reported on his statements and not hers.

    People LIKED the Democrat campaign plan. They were simply convinced to not trust it by propaganda.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 1 month ago

    Are they doing that thing that parents do to try and get their kids to stop doing something by showing interest in it?

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago
    [–] 14 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I'd prefer if she stayed away.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    everyone would prefer if she stayed away. However the DNC is probably going to push her again as they consider her the 'safe' candidate who is not going to upset their donors or push any sort of real change like people want.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 month ago

    She's going to run in 2028, isn't she? She's trying to ride his coattails.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Ooh. This is probably not a good idea. She's toxic as fuck.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Can you explain what you mean by that? Toxic? How?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    Most progressives see her as something of an opportunistic, establishment puppet. She was chosen to be Biden's VP, in order to pander to the black / Latino vote, and specifically because she lacked the moral core to oppose the establishment in any meaningful way.

    Her presence may be viewed as the DNC either trying to co-opt El-Sayed's campaign and steer it towards the establishment's goals...or that it was all astroturf from the beginning, and shouldn't be trusted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago
    [–] 13 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    a lot of shitty dems have turned coat and said they'll support rogers. i suspect this is an attempt to get them back. I hate it, but that's the best reason I can come up with.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›