2020 US Election (Part Two)

Status
Not open for further replies.
For once, I share your disappointment. ><
 

Well, I guess it's official. Biden has made the grave error, typical of the arrogant, detached, ivory tower, plutocratic, self-righteous Establishment, of locking the Progressives, who are visibly, vocally, and actively showing overt disgust right now with the "system," and how it works, and whose votes and support he depends on to win, off of the ticket and put a flimsy "Uncle Tom," candidate strongly tied to a major part of the visible issues by the Progressives - the unjust and over-draconian law-enforcement, judicial, and correctional systems. What a disgustingly stupid and tactless move that effectively gives the finger to the Progressive branch - possibly just to spite Sanders and Warren, personally. No chance of a decent candidate sorely needed by the nation, or any redeeming quality for advancement or betterment coming out of this election (not that there ever was, but still). Yet another U.S. Presidential Election, like 1852, 1920, 1968, 2004, and 2016, where no candidate "with a chance of winning," will be worthy of winning, or anything but a villain or a failure. The last nail in any good coming from this election has now been made.
 
Well, I guess it's official. Biden has made the grave error, typical of the arrogant, detached, ivory tower, plutocratic, self-righteous Establishment, of locking the Progressives, who are visibly, vocally, and actively showing overt disgust right now with the "system," and how it works, and whose votes and support he depends on to win, off of the ticket and put a flimsy "Uncle Tom," candidate strongly tied to a major part of the visible issues by the Progressives - the unjust and over-draconian law-enforcement, judicial, and correctional systems. What a disgustingly stupid and tactless move that effectively gives the finger to the Progressive branch - possibly just to spite Sanders and Warren, personally. No chance of a decent candidate sorely needed by the nation, or any redeeming quality for advancement or betterment coming out of this election (not that there ever was, but still). Yet another U.S. Presidential Election, like 1852, 1920, 1968, 2004, and 2016, where no candidate "with a chance of winning," will be worthy of winning, or anything but a villain or a failure. The last nail in any good coming from this election has now been made.
And who would have been a winning choice?
 
Picking a cop during the year of BLM demonstrations?

Yikes.
Let's be honest, you would criticize anyone Biden picked. I also note you immediately seek to downplay the status of a US senator and former AG from one of the largest states by calling her merely 'a cop'.
 
At the time I still believed Evangelicals had some principles. The pussy grab thing was bad but I figured they'd forgive that. It was the fact that he cheated on Melania with a pornstar while she was pregnant with Baron that should have tanked him.

The Christian Rights ability to embrace Trump still is baffling and depressing. He only wheels out his 'Christianity' for publicity stunts such as that photo op at St. John's Church. Other then that it seems to have no impact on him. I know that Nietzsche once said that “there was only one Christian, he died on the cross,” but Trump does not even seem to remotely live a Christian life. If Pence was president (God forbid!) I would at least understand them supporting him, as he seems genuine in his beliefs and appears to try to live what could be considered a 'Christian lifestyle.'



As for picking Harris, I am neither for or against it. But was there actually a 'correct choice?' From following this discussion there seemed to be no agreement or who he should pick, with every candidate having plenty of up and downside. :dunno:
 
Let's be honest, you would criticize anyone Biden picked. I also note you immediately seek to downplay the status of a US senator and former AG from one of the largest states by calling her merely 'a cop'.

Eh, the melanin and the genitals are already a stretch I suppose. Gotta go with the most basic ass path up ever for an American politician. Bleh.
 
Let's be honest, you would criticize anyone Biden picked. I also note you immediately seek to downplay the status of a US senator and former AG from one of the largest states by calling her merely 'a cop'.

So the **** what?

Harris is the status quo, I'm allowed to be annoyed and frustrated with that. I couldn't give a **** about her "status", she sucks as a candidate, she sucks as a politician and she sucks as a human being, by any definition that actually includes her actions, she ****ing sucks

And she's a cop and cops tend to suck as well
 
The Christian Rights ability to embrace Trump still is baffling and depressing. He only wheels out his 'Christianity' for publicity stunts such as that photo op at St. John's Church. Other then that it seems to have no impact on him. I know that Nietzsche once said that “there was only one Christian, he died on the cross,” but Trump does not even seem to remotely live a Christian life. If Pence was president (God forbid!) I would at least understand them supporting him, as he seems genuine in his beliefs and appears to try to live what could be considered a 'Christian lifestyle.'



As for picking Harris, I am neither for or against it. But was there actually a 'correct choice?' From following this discussion there seemed to be no agreement or who he should pick, with every candidate having plenty of up and downside. :dunno:

She wouldn't have been my choice but I can see why Biden picked her. Just disappointed because if Biden wins shes the most likely Democrat candidate in '24.
 
And who would have been a winning choice?

Although my familiarity with a lot of American politicians who are often mentioned as practically household names with their ideologies as common knowledge often leaves me with a "who?" of those I am aware of, I would say Warren. But, I felt the Democratic ticket was already on a ship that might not be fully seaworthy back when Biden was nominated, as is.
 
Let's be honest, you would criticize anyone Biden picked. I also note you immediately seek to downplay the status of a US senator and former AG from one of the largest states by calling her merely 'a cop'.
Let's be honest, it seems like you're predisposed to bashing whoever decides to criticise Biden or his choices. See! We can all do this silly, aggravating game!

But seriously, to try and move past this immediate kneejerk reaction, "Kamala Harris is a cop" is a very common left-leaning sentiment. It's not playing down her status, or history. It's stating that she is a cop; in what she represents and acts as in her service to the state. You're making assumptions about anybody's motivation if you read too much into it.

Both of these things can be true: Harris is a sensible mainstream pick that will resonate well with enough voters to help Biden beat Trump. Harris is also a dogmatic example of the police state the US has become and has gone way too hard in upholding that institution. I don't always recommend Mother Jones, but this is a reasonable enough piece on the topic. I don't expect to convince you with just this, but at least it's perspective from which you might then understand the range of negative reactions from this appointment.
 
And who would have been a winning choice?
Someone who doesn't come across as a socioipath, numerous other candidates were more popular than Harris, picking her was a very shallow choice reinforcing the idea the democrats care about appearance over substance.
 
Vote for the least crappy option, sure. But everyone is a hundred millionth of a share. Your conscience matters more than some guilt trip.

I've been voting for the 3rd party that I hope pisses off the RNC the most. I might swap tactics this year, but find your most bliss.
 
Ha, I called it (not in here, but elsewhere).

It's the Hollywood choice, and I mean that in more than one sense. We'll see how it goes and what they will say. At the moment I'm under the impression that a sack of rice would win against Trump (and be better at governance then also).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom