201
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] aew360@lemm.ee 17 points 9 months ago

Can someone explain to me why I shouldn’t like Kamala Harris? And if someone says because she hasn’t been an effective VP, could someone show me an example of an effective VP in modern US history?

[-] sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works 51 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Peoples arguments stem from her political career before VP specifically due to her being a cop, her strong support for stop and frisk, and some terrible policies which harmed the black community by propagating their mass incarceration along with poor standards of education and access to public services. To be clear though, still better than the guy who states he'll be a dictator for "a day" whose lawyer claimed in court he could have his political opposition killed and as long as he wasn't impeached, it'd be legal

[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

Additionally, Biden is one of the biggest proponents of the drug war and was more than happy to destroy people's lives over cannabis, all based on his own anecdotal fear towards drugs.

In 1986, then-Senator Joe Biden authored the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986–a critical component of the broader War on Drugs that devastated low-income communities of color through mass criminalization and systemic police violence.

Biden and Harris are just a step below Hillary Clinton when it comes to how muddy and shady they are. They really need more progressive people within the party who have the ability to rally Democrats to change. Like what Bernie tried, but find someone young who can actually bring about the change.

It's all better then Trump and the Republicans, but Harris and Biden are as right wing as you get from a democrat.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 26 points 9 months ago

Cheney was pretty effective. Not that that was a good thing.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

He was part of the Nixon, Ford, and both Bush Whitehouses...served in Congress during Reagan.

He knew where a lot of bodies went, which helps you get your things done.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

As a VP backing up Biden, I think she's swell. As the candidate who has to beat Trump, I don't think she's strong enough. She shat the bed in the primary debates, and she has a complicated record as a prosecutor and previously supported policies that make it easy to criticize. She's either "evolved" on divisive issues, or she's on the wrong side of history.

The same could be said of Biden, but he has the decades of connections and experience, not to mention charisma, that helped him pull ahead in the primary and the general in 2020. I don't like him, and I think he's very beatable, but I think Harris would be much worse. In an open primary, I don't think Harris would win the nomination, even running as an incumbent (like if Biden stepped down). Maybe if Biden wins and then immediately steps down, giving her four years to establish herself, she could craft a new identity. But it is too late for that now.

If Biden were unavailable as a candidate, we'll get four more years of Trump.

[-] mydude@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

To name a few:

-Championed and implemented legislation that put parents in prison if their child skipped school (truency)

-She blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from death row until the courts forced her to do so

-Put 1900 people in prison for smoking weed, while giggling about smoking it herself

-Blocked access to 12$ DNA tests, to check if the preserved DNA from a crime is from the defendant.

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/10/17/924766186/the-story-behind-kamala-harriss-truancy-program https://www.theblaze.com/news/kamala-harris-criminal-justice-record

[-] cyd@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago
this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
201 points (90.7% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2941 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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