I'm to the left of 90% of the population - it's just on this message board, that makes me a neoliberal sellout.
It's not so much any individual political position you have, so much as your caping for the more ghoulish tendencies of the mainstream Dem establishment and the consultant class, under the pretense that incremental progress can render real change over time, when every example of liberal elites "getting shit done" going back to like the July Monarchy is a tale of betrayal of the working class and the marginalized, followed by the real power brokers chipping away at whatever gains actually were made. It's a condemnation of Leftist naivety undergirded by a wider historical naivety. It's not as bad as Cerium claiming on NeoGAF back in 2016 that Bernie Bros would rat out minorities hiding, Anne Frank-style, from hypothetical fascist regimes, but it's a puzzling deployment of political acumen and media literacy nevertheless. I wish more in your camp had had the Peter Daou "Come to Jesus" radicalization moment, but at the very least, I hope some Left-liberal solidarity in the face of the coming fortress politics of the 21st Century is possible.
Unbelievable that she lost to Tulsi Gabbard. Like giving up because you can't beat the level 5 slime
LmaoSo all those ex-Clinton people pretty much behaved exactly like they did on Clinton's campaign except with even less oversight? She got what she deserved, hiring that pack of clowns.
Yes, I know, I'm a ghoul for not believing in some secret majority of left-wing voters that have been bravely waiting for a true leftist to finally turn out to vote for the first time in decades, and all the actual polling about actual non voters show this view of people who don't vote simply isn't true.
Also, incremental progress (such as The New Deal & The Great Society, along with all the social democratic reforms in Europe) have been the only kind of progress that has not led to untold millions of innocent dead.
Now, you should know by now I'm going to ask for receipts on your foolishness.I didn't say you were a ghoul, I said you caped for ghoulishness, which I'd argue is what saying Kamala running on her morally spotty prosecutorial record would be good strategy is. Like, even if it's right, appealing to the devil on voters' shoulders is an act of political and ethical malfeasance.
I don't want to dip into the non-voter thing, as that's outside the scope of this thread, but I would suggest that pegging firm political commitments to non-voters based on current political conditions, people who basically by definition do NOT have firmly-held or well-examined beliefs (anti-electoralist Marxists excepted), is probably not a strong position.
As to the last part - wellllllll beyond the scope of this subject, but considering the status quo, whether incrementally elaborated upon or left stagnant, constantly racks up innocent and unnecessary bodies as unobtrusive background noise, that's not the solidest line of argument.
Anyway, sorry for the derail, folks. I'll exit now. Jesse, you're free to DM me if you wish, or have the last word here. Was inappropriate to hash this out in the context of this thread.
This is the truth.She should have been the perfect person to run as a law and order against a criminal President. It should have been a home run, but incompetence can sink any ship.
Now, you should know by now I'm going to ask for receipts on your foolishness.
Receipts about things that are purely speculative (I.e. that non-voters, regardless of how they claim to identify now, probably would go for more Leftist policies if there was actually a real push for them), or things that are objectively and uncontroversially true (I.e. that the current status quo sees people die by attrition due to lack of access to basic resources)? It's a rather unreceiptable post to make such a demand of, tbh, so I genuinely need clarification here.
So, here's what I know:
—Kamala's record.
—Her record compared to her predecessor's record.
—How other progressive prosecutors view her.
None of that is speculation. It's legal record. I was
The mod on this board who wore a Kamala Harris T-shirt in my avatar before she even formally announced her run. I weep over the incompetence of her campaign. The Harris 2020 campaign was a mess.
But I won't let a Black Woman whom transformed the criminal justice system in my home state be lied on in regards to her record and what she accomplished. Bring receipts.
Harris is to the far left of Krasner.I mean I think Leftists have done a good job of calling out her ill behavior in the role, but if you find those arguments unconvincing or think she had good reasons for doing those things, I'm not really sure what to say, given I have little interest in rehashing arguments that I've already seen you have dozens of times on here. Almost everything is justifiable, with the right set of priors, but not everything is just, and that's pretty much the box I'd put Kamala into. Pretty much any law enforcement behavior to the Right of Krazner is currently unacceptable to me in a Chief Executive, so we may be coming at this from different positions.
Even the "progressive" older candidates who not only signed the crime bill, but ran on it in re-elections in their totally white home states? The very crime bill she fought against?Harris sucks as a candidate.
No real vision
Mixed at best record.
Tainted by big money.
No thanks.
Ironically more of a dinosaur than the older candidates in the race.
Let's hope she never comes close to any office again where she has any prosecutorial power.
lol what the fuck?
I think "Law and Order" doesn't play that well in the Democratic base anymore, and I think that's a good thing.She should have been the perfect person to run as a law and order candidate against a criminal President. It should have been a home run, but incompetence can sink any ship.
so she can throw more people in jail?
Yeah, and making the current occupant of the White House among the first.
Even the "progressive" older candidates who not only signed the crime bill, but ran on it in re-elections in their totally white home states? The very crime bill she fought against?
Not sure if these are other receipts you are looking for...
Pro death penalty
Didn't prosecute Steve Mnuchins
Attempted to block sex reassignment surgery
Wanted to keep nonviolent parolees to work
To continue to add to her defense of parolee labor
Anti-truancy program
At least half of those are outright misrepresentations, but you're right that Harris's record isn't perfect.
Regardless, I think any even-handed review would demonstrate that she was one of the most progressive AGs/DAs in the nation at the time of her service.
Ultimately, it's not really worth reposting all the facts and rebuttals -- Harris isn't my first or even second choice, her campaign is flailing, and Politics Era is toxic AF.
So all those ex-Clinton people pretty much behaved exactly like they did on Clinton's campaign except with even less oversight? She got what she deserved, hiring that pack of clowns.
HRC's biggest strengths in 2016 were her name recognition and the relationships she'd built up over a quarter-century as a national political figure, neither of which are advantages Harris had