this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
1063 points (98.8% liked)

politics

18852 readers
4141 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 407 points 1 month ago (18 children)

"There is a strong sense by many in the Democrat Party - namely Barack Hussein Obama - that Kamala Harris is a Marxist fraud who cannot beat President Trump, and they are still holding out for someone 'better.' Therefore, it would be inappropriate to schedule things with Harris because Democrats very well could still change their minds," the statement said.

This is a statement from a presidential campaign.

[–] [email protected] 136 points 1 month ago (4 children)

The quote should be put with spoiler tags and a surgeon general's warning that reading the contents has been shown to lower your IQ by at least four percentage points, and prolonged exposure to even seeing the words on the screen could cause permanent brain damage.

[–] [email protected] 66 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's okay I already have permanent brain damage, I can translate for everyone.

It says,

Donald Trump is tired of changing his pants every time someone mentions debating Harris, so we respectfully decline.

Thank you,

Your future inmate president.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago

Implying Trump changes when he shits himself is far too generous. People literally say he smells of shit.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago

This quote goes in the square hole.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

Little late now, now all I want is a truck at 37%, Trump president and strangely threatened by accomplished women.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Yeah it says "remember that old racist dog whistle we used to use with the previous minority president? Let's try that again, but throw in a little McCarthyism."

[–] funkless_eck 87 points 1 month ago (2 children)

am I reading this right? Republicans are saying that Obama thinks Kamala Harris is too Marxist to beat Trump?

what, and I cannot stress this enough:

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

What if she started roasting things. Completely breaking down the things they say in front of a whiteboard. I want that to be her entire campaign just... Letting them talk and then talk about it

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

I get the strategic value, but I'd rather she run on actual policies that help people.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

Because what it says literally doesn't matter, it's just a perfectly crafted stew of buzzwords to stroke the right. We have to stop reading this shit as normal language and start understanding the code they use. It's just about saying Obama, in their eyes an evil black muslim terrorist (hence HUSSEIN), still holds sway over the democrats, meaning the institution as a whole is infected with his evil muslim blackness, and is acknowledging Marxism, the big bad enemy of good Christian values, in a way that simultaneously aligns it with party ideology AND presents Kamala as an even-greater looming threat. This isn't nonsense word salad, it's meticulously crafted fearmongering to the ignorant party base whose lack of literacy they have cultivated by design.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Their campaign is literally saying shit that I would normally expect to hear from the mouths of 3rd world dictators. The GOP is now conspiracy theory bullshit from stem to stern.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It’s wild how frequently they just… make shit up and say it like it’s factual.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah I was just trying to imagine living that way, so bizarre... Nothing is concrete and reality can be anything.

Well, not anything... Only the things that the fake billionaire reality TV personality (who was unironically the basis for every movie and cartoon villain throughout the 90s), tells me. Because that's a totally rational way to behave.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Barack Hussein Obama

Gotta get his middle name in there

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Without birtherism Trump never runs in 2016.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Without Obama making fun of him at a correspondents dinner...

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

That was the White House correspondents dinner with the most influence on history of all time

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I said this in deeper reply, but I think it bears repeating, so I'm quoting myself here:

Because what it says literally doesn’t matter, it’s just a perfectly crafted stew of buzzwords to stroke the right. We have to stop reading this shit as normal language and start understanding the code they use. It’s just about saying Obama, in their eyes an evil black muslim terrorist (hence HUSSEIN), still holds sway over the democrats, meaning the institution as a whole is infected with his evil muslim blackness, and is acknowledging Marxism, the big bad enemy of good Christian values, in a way that simultaneously aligns it with party ideology AND presents Kamala as an even-greater looming threat. This isn’t nonsense word salad, it’s meticulously crafted fearmongering to the ignorant party base whose lack of literacy they have cultivated by design.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I made a similar comment above.

You missed the attempt at a subtle dig at the Democratic party by calling them "the Democrat party" (https://www.factcheck.org/2007/12/the-democratic-or-democrat-party/ )

They love to see shit like this because when they see those (fucking stupid) terms used, they get to feel like they have some kind of secret, inside knowledge. For a brief moment, they get to forget that they've alienated all of their friends and their entire family over this, and get to feel like they're part of something.

But only for a brief moment... As a single tear drops into his Healthy Choice frozen microwave dinner and he turns on Duck Dynasty.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

You missed the attempt at a subtle dig at the Democratic party by calling them “the Democrat party” (https://www.factcheck.org/2007/12/the-democratic-or-democrat-party/ )

Wow, yep, that one is new to me; thank you for educating me!. God these people and their doublespeak are exhausting.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's not for us. It's for his minions. Part of the conservative bubble.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago

It's not even a good excuse because even if they did change their minds, he could still attempt to debate whoever it is on the scheduled date.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Obama's forthcoming speech endorsing Harris will be worth watching I think

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I hope there's a forthcoming lawsuit against the Trump campaign, because I am very, very sure that Obama is not on record publicly nor privately saying Kamala Harris is a "Marxist fraud."

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Obama will take the high road. A lawsuit would just make him martyr and give some semblance of evidence to the radical left trying to silence him and his right to free speech like the gag order. Obama really has nothing to gain but a lot to lose. He's more coy than that based on his prior actions. I suspect that he'll sit on that for awhile, give it its time in the media to get as widespread attention as it can, then release a statement enthusiastically endorsing her while citing her policy and character.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

He did already endorse her but I haven't read his statement. I see your point overall though. https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/26/politics/barack-michelle-obama-kamala-harris-endorsement/index.html

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

"there are many" - continues to name one.

Yeah yeah sorry! I know I tried to search for logic in a statement from that guy..!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Ha ha "many" followed by one guy.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

I'm sorry what?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

This just feels like a shitpost

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

In the strictest technical sense.

[–] greenshirtdenimjeans 3 points 1 month ago

James Donald Bowman

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Interesting that they are still today apparently served by mentioning Obama’s middle name.

Whenever I see Obama referred to by his full name, I instantly know that the author is pushing manipulative islamaphobic dog-whistle propaganda and everything else by such authors automatically has zero credibility, lacks substance, and the drivel is a waste of time to finish reading. I wonder if that manipulation attempt is still largely unknown, or if the rt-wing nut jobs are really just out of touch with the pursuadables they are trying to reach and thus shooting themselves in the foot.