The Case for Kamala Harris
The Case for Kamala Harris
Won't destroy democracy: Check.
✅ Also has some good ideas
Which unfortunately will never get anywhere because the Republicans are almost guaranteed to win back the Senate...
It really sucks. Either Trump wins and gets the trifecta of control letting the fascists at the heritage foundation run rampant or Kamala wins but still loses the Senate and we get nothing but the statue quo for at least 2 more years... But if anything the Republicans will gain seats in the next cycle because they can point to the previous 2 years of nothing (caused by them) as evidence that Democrats suck...
Big sad. :(
One wants to be a dictator, the other doesn't. They're the same! \s
The installed candidate won't destroy democracy?
There is only one sane choice. People who abstain are choosing insanity the same way that those who abstained in 2016 allowed insanity to prevail.
Having said that, I think voters would be pretty excited to get out and support a candidate that they had actually chosen in the primaries after seeing them go through some campaigning and debates. None of us chose Kamala, and Biden's late dropout was not ideal. I am hoping that America can have this opportunity back in the next election.
Not a Nazi.
Her support for the genocide of Palestinians says otherwise.
USian police = Nazi
she's not a raging lunatic who sundowns at every rally?
This endorsement will not be controversial to Trump's antagonists. Nor will it matter to his supporters. But to the voters who don’t much care for either candidate, and who will decide the country’s fate, it is not enough to list Harris’s strengths or write a bill of obvious particulars against Trump. The main reason for those ambivalent Americans to vote for Harris has little to do with policy or partisanship. It’s this: Electing her and defeating him is the only way to release us from the political nightmare in which we’re trapped and bring us to the next phase of the American experiment.
Trump isn’t solely responsible for this age of poisonous rhetoric, hateful name-calling, conspiracies and lies, divided families and communities, cowardly leaders and deluded followers—but as long as Trump still sits atop the Republican Party, it will not end. His power depends on lowering the country into a feverish state of fear and rage where Americans turn on one another. For the millions of alienated and politically homeless voters who despise what the country has become and believe it can do better, sending Trump into retirement is the necessary first step.
If you’re a conservative who can’t abide Harris’s tax and immigration policies, but who is also offended by the rottenness of the Republican Party, only Trump’s final defeat will allow your party to return to health—then you’ll be free to oppose President Harris wholeheartedly. Like you, we wish for the return of the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, a party animated by actual ideas. We believe that American politics are healthiest when vibrant conservative and liberal parties fight it out on matters of policy.
If you’re a progressive who thinks the Democratic Party is a tool of corporate America, talk to someone who still can’t forgive themselves for voting for Ralph Nader in 2000—then ask yourself which candidate, Harris or Trump, would give you any leverage to push for policies you care about.
And if you’re one of the many Americans who can’t stand politics and just want to opt out, remember that under democracy, inaction is also an action; that no one ever has clean hands; and that, as our 1860 editorial said, “nothing can absolve us from doing our best to look at all public questions as citizens, and therefore in some sort as administrators and rulers.” In other words, voting is a right that makes you responsible.
Trump is the sphinx who stands in the way of America entering a more hopeful future. In Greek mythology, the sphinx killed every traveler who failed to answer her riddle, until Oedipus finally solved it, causing the monster’s demise. The answer to Trump lies in every American’s hands. Then he needs only to go away.
If you’re a progressive who thinks the Democratic Party is a tool of corporate America, talk to someone who still can’t forgive themselves for voting for Ralph Nader in 2000—then ask yourself which candidate, Harris or Trump, would give you any leverage to push for policies you care about.
This is contradicted by this:
Like you, we wish for the return of the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, a party animated by actual ideas. We believe that American politics are healthiest when vibrant conservative and liberal parties fight it out on matters of policy.
I don't want a return to party of Bush. I want the American people to have the highest standard of living in the world - not the people of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
If you're saying that Kamala will restore the GOP, then it seems that the American people will never be prioritized. In which case, we should all leave and emigrate to Scandinavia where their people are treated like human beings rather than servants
Like you, we wish for the return of the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, a party animated by actual ideas.
Emphasis mine. They're pining for the party of Bush because it was grounded in truth and ideas.
If you’re saying that Kamala will restore the GOP, then it seems that the American people will never be prioritized. In which case, we should all leave and emigrate to Scandinavia where their people are treated like human beings rather than servants
How on Earth did you get that from this endorsement? In fact, they said exactly the opposite:
only Trump’s final defeat will allow your party to return to health
That whole paragraph is prefaced with "If you’re a conservative who can’t abide Harris’s tax and immigration policies". They're not talking to you, they're addressing conflicted conservatives.
You really should have read it more carefully.
The poster above you didn't put the entire article. Their post was merely the snippet from the end of it.
Earlier on, the article stated:
The Atlantic is a heterodox place, staffed by freethinkers, and for some of us, Kamala Harris’s policy views are too centrist, while for others they’re too liberal.
In other words, this endorsement is the decision of more than one person. It isn't contradictory for different people to want different things. The whole point was that multiple people have found multiple reasons to come to the same conclusion.
But the article isn't behind a paywall, and the link is right there. In the search to make sense of an extracted quote, the original source is a good place to start.
Atlantic - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Atlantic:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News