this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
254 points (94.1% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26659 readers
3306 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Oh god, I had somehow blocked Bloomberg and Tulsi Gabbard out of my brain. Yeah, that was a pretty big oversight on my part. And yeah, I wasn't counting the other people who dropped out before the primaries got started, which is kind of unfair. Fine. She's just a Democrat that's slightly more conservative than Biden. Are you happy now?
No. Because her voting history and her time as AG simply don't reflect that. Whatever you might say about Harris, Biden quite literally wrote the laws and funneled money into the agencies that let her chase around the poor and defenseless. In a different world, where a more Kennedy/LBJ-esque figure was in Biden's seat, Harris would have been granted a completely different mandate and toolkit and would have looked comparatively progressive as a result.
That's before you get into the real awful shit Biden passed as Senator that Harris has (without much conviction) opposed. She's been a vote for de-militarization in Iraq/Afghanistan, for decriminalization of a host of drugs, and for expanded public spending in health care and education in a way Biden simply hasn't.
She still sucks for a host of reasons. But to claim she's "more conservative than Biden" ignores Biden's entire time in the Senate under Bush and Kamala's entire time in the Senate under Trump.
Pfft. The idea that Kamala Harris wouldn't have voted the same way as Biden on Iraq and Afganistan if she had been in Congress back in 2001 is so naive that I can't even take anything else you said seriously. That is hilarious.
The AUMF of 2001 (Afghanistan) passed the Senate 98-0 with two abstentions from Senators Larry Craig, R-ID, and Jesse Helms, R-NC. Every Senate Dem supported it.
The 2002 extension passed 77-23 with the California Senate delegation splitting (Feinstein for, Boxer against). Harder to say what Kamala would have done here, but she had ample room to reject the legislation without fearing it would fail.
Regardless, it has been freely utilized and repeatedly defended by both parties with every new NDAA, excepting a failed repeal effort by the Senate in 2023 which Kamala endorsed to no ultimate effect.
That's going to require some actual knowledge of history and the state of the party past and present.
If you're just running on vibes, idk what to tell you.