this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
763 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3979 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
 

American gen Z voters share how they feel about Kamala Harris’s presidential bid, why they like or dislike her as a candidate and whether they think she could beat Donald Trump, as the vice-president races towards winning the Democratic nomination for November’s election.

‘I think she’s just what we need’

“I think [Kamala Harris] is the only one that makes sense. She will get the votes Biden couldn’t. She could get the Black, Asian, Latino, women’s, LGBTQ+ and youth votes. She stands more for progress and equality than an old white dude and if she wins it will be historic. The Democrats need a bold move and I think she’s just what we need.

“I hope the Democrats realize what an opportunity this is for them.” Will, 22, construction worker from Portland, Oregon

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It's another reason Harris would be crazy to go with anyone but Mark Kelly. You'll get people who never dreamed of voting to just vote for the novelty of an astronaut and fighter pilot.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

I want science to win so that’s a good option anyway.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Mark Kelly would normally be a great choice but Andy Beshear is way better in this election. He balances the west/east and is not that fat from the east. Also he draws from the Appalachia/rust belt area that Baby face Vance was supposed to attract but was a horrible failure.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

I love Beau of the Fifth Column, but I have to politely disagree with him here. I'm originally from rural Appalachia and I don't think you try to combat Vance by one-upping him with someone from that region. To me he makes less of a case for Beshear in this video and just more explains why JD Vance is a terrible pick, which I agree. Recognizing that much of the Presidential election ultimately comes down to a popularity contest, I think you go with the more flashy figure. For instance, I'm a pretty big political junkie and even I don't know much about Beshear. That's not to say he won't skyrocket in name-recognition if the announcement comes that he's her pick, but it's just an easier sell to the average voter: "Wow, Mark Kelly is an astronaut and navy fighter pilot veteran!" The mere novelty of that will draw people to vote for him. I think this is powerful enough to draw those same voters away from Vance in itself.

Having someone popular running as VP from a key battleground state is a plus, too. We have to realize that much of rust/bible-belt isn't particularly in play anyway. We have Whitmer who will help carry Michigan; and we have Shapiro who will help carry Pennsylvania. Seems like Tony Evers is doing well in Wisconsin. These are the three key battleground states while the likes of AZ and NV and so forth are more secondary battleground states.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Wow. Americans really say shit like this without a trace of irony 🤷‍♂️

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

hahaha — oh please, do enlighten me, good foreigner.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think that’s possible.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ah so you've got nothing. That's what I thought.

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

No I’m saying you’re too dense

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

“Wow. Americans really say shit like this without a trace of irony 🤷‍♂️”

What was I referring to in your opinion?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You tell me, buddy! Go on, teach!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Ok! The thing is, you revealed yourself to be a prime example of an uneducated, uncultured, too-American moron who unironically thinks that someone is a good politician because he was previously a fighter pilot. You think the only person who’d be even better to run the country is Tom Cruise because he played a fighter pilot and is a super-successful actor, I.e. your trashy version of royalty. You’re no different than the MAGA cultists who think their guy should be a dictator because he’s “good at business”. You and your ilk are everything that’s wrong with the world and if a nuclear war happens the only solace in my last moments will be that guys like you and your potential maggot spawn will be ended too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

hahahah, finally! Now we're getting somewhere!

You think the only person who’d be even better to run the country is Tom Cruise because he played a fighter pilot and is a super-successful actor

Well now, you're just wrong here, friend. Blind speculative straw-men are not a sign of sound critical-thinking.

Now I'm glad you got all that out. But in all of this ranting, isn't it painfully ironic that you never mentioned one single policy but instead focused on the person(s), me, and the American people? lol. I bet you don't even know the policy positions of AZ US Senator Mark Kelly. For someone so hellbent on policy, you sure sling Ad-Hominems left and right lol.

Ultimately Americans recognize that policy platforms can change and mean little if the person is a scumbag. Many of us put an emphasis on the character of a person because that signals core values. We like Mark Kelly because he actually served his country; we like Mark Kelly because as an astronaut and fighter pilot he ascended to some of the most rigorous demands of intellect, courage, and knowledge. We like Mark Kelly because he's a stand-up guy, unlike Donald Trump, and that he has a reasonable policy platform anchored to the Democratic party no less. But perhaps you don't understand this because you're not American? Who knows. All I know is your arrogance is leading you to over-extend your confidence past the point of understanding.