this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
-31 points (22.8% liked)

politics

18852 readers
4125 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
-31
Kamala Harris Challenged on Policy Flip-Flops in First TV Interview (www.thedailybeast.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Totally fine, politicians change their views. The more concerning thing for me was this:

The Democratic nominee also revealed that she would name a Republican to serve in her Cabinet if elected

Why?!? The people give the president power by voting them into office, the president wields that power on our behalf. Now would not be the time to share our power with the party that doesn’t believe in democracy. I can’t think of any good reason to voluntarily give a cabinet post to the other side, bipartisanship is not the point here.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There were Republicans who spoke at the convention last week. She probably means Republicans like them, not MAGA ones.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, I don’t think she’d ever choose a maga nut, but as much as I respect Kinzinger and Cheney for standing up for democracy I do not want them in the cabinet. They still have wildly different political positions than Harris.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

All this, minus the respect part. The only thing different between them and the MAGAs is they have the small amount of intelligence required to know that in the long term Trump is going to hold them back and diminish their own power. This does not change the fact that they have been, for decades of their adult lives now, members of a political party that's been implicitly and explicitly traitorous bigoted and anti-science since at least the mid 1960s.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

True that. Respect is probably too strong a word.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Seems like a fine response to me.

There isn't anything inherently wrong with changing your stance on issues given more, and updated information. I think most voters would be glad to vote for someone who says "Yeah, I changed my mind, did you see this last study? We need to do something about this."

A candidate who just "sticks to their guns" is certainly not one you want in office in changing times. Why is this even a fucking question?

Trump's head is stuck in his childhood. He wants things back the way they were in the 60's. He's unflinchingly dedicated to making that happen, and to absolve himself of his many crimes, which is why he is running. Fuck.That.Noise.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

When they start coming out with shit like "flip flopper" and it starts getting repeated from a few different quarters as a consistent attack

That's when you know they don't have all that much to work with and they're just making shit up that sounds bad

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

You may be remembering a different time. Matters of current and flux issues, no problem.

When you say insane shit like "I prefer soldiers who don't get captured", then turn around and say dumb shit like "I LOVE ALL THE MILITARY, SO BEAUTIFUL. GREAT PEOPLE"

Don't vote for that person.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 weeks ago

Daily Beast - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Daily Beast:

MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.thedailybeast.com/kamala-harris-challenged-on-policy-flip-flops-by-cnns-dana-bash-in-first-tv-interview
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support