Vote progressives into local offices so they can get experience to work in state offices so they can get experience to work in Congress so they can get experience to be a good presidential candidate. Also to fill offices at every level with progressives.

Clearly she wasn’t referring to the office of Vice President, but was acknowledging that he was a president beset with numerous vices

Why should it? Why should anyone vote for a candidate with no political administration experience? Regardless of their stated positions, what evidence do voters have that any of the third party candidates have the skills necessary to execute the duties of the office effectively? Without progressives in Congress, how exactly is a progressive administration supposed to navigate gridlock better than the neo liberals?

With the exception of Donald Trump, every single US President previously served as a Senator, or Governor, or a Major General, or Secretary of State, or Director of the CIA, or something. Some kind of higher office to prove their fitness in a political administrative role.

If we want a progressive president, we need progressive members of Congress and State Governors. Not only so we have an experienced candidates to put forward, but by having a significant representation people will just psychologically consider a progressive candidate to actually be viable.

And if we want progressive Governors and Congresspeople, we need progressive mayors and County Commissioners and Attorneys General to pull from. And if we want those, we need progressive City Council members and School Board members and all the other local elected offices.

These third party candidates with no real political experience shooting straight for President are so counterproductive, it’s difficult to imagine they’re anything but bad faith, intentional spoilers.

She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.

But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for.

I don’t think it’s generous to conclude that many of those blunders can in fact be credited to Harris deliberately striking his ego.

Fair, these self-destructive leftist types get my blood boiling.

Do whatever stupid political moves you think work, just do it silently so you don’t drag others down with you. Your false equivalences are either ignorant or monstrous. I’m not wasting any more time with your callousness.

Removed by mod

You really don’t get it. This is just politics to you. Find. Just please, for the love of God, stop trying to drag others down with you. That’s all I have to say.

I dunno what to tell you. My heart aches, aches for Palestine. More than you know. But I’m not a politician, I don’t have tangible power to improve things for them directly. And none of the politicians seem particularly bothered. They’re focused on their campaigns, maintaining the status quo, all of it. Like you said, complicit. It would be great if any of your strategies, or the strategies of the protesters, if anything helped. Actually made a difference. It might assuage some of the dread implicit to our daily lives as profoundly privileged and comfortable citizens of the West.

But it’s resoundingly obvious that’s it’s just another minor calculation that gets rolled into the other calculations to win elections. People are dying. Innocent people. It eats me alive. But I’m a privileged , comfortable westerner. My ethical inclinations don’t mean shit at best, and soothe me into thinking my compassion is valuable in and of itself at worst.

But I know what backwards looks like. And backwards is bad for everyone, Palestine included. Ukraine too. All the disenfranchised minorities in this country too. I can’t just revel in my irrelevance, exercise my privilege by tapping out because no one on the ballot has the perfect platform. I’m afforded the opportunity to slow the backslide. And maybe slowing the backslide isn’t enough for you.

But it’s something tangible, and I’m going to do it. I’m going to vote lesser evil. Not like my life depends on it, because for all my troubles it’s been a blessed life compared to others. If I die tomorrow, I’ve had a better go than most. I’m voting lesser evil to slow the backslide to mitigate damage for others, because that’s what I can do.

I don’t live in a clear blue state. Lots of other people don’t live in clear blue states. Lots of them identify as leftist. Many of them are here. I’m begging you, don’t project your exceptional privilege as a clear blue citizen as universal. This is serious, backsliding is bad for everyone. Carelessly fomenting apathy in people who could actually help is horrific. This isn’t just Internet arguments. Innocent people are dying. Stop this. The Dems are garbage neo-libs, but the opposition is tangible evil. Enabling genocide is horrific, but it’s marginally better than acceleration of genocide. The opposition is worse. Anything I, and the millions in swing states, can do to mitigate that horror is better than apathy.

Of poll respondents. There’s a large overlap between people who don’t care, and people who don’t answer polls. And oh yeah, Harris has been calling for a ceasefire

And disregarding AIPAC is stupid. Picking up the single issue voters by overtly pissing off AIPAC during the election will unleash a multimillion dollar ad campaign. Look at what happened to the squad.

There’s no good reason to do that now. A smart candidate would stay relatively quiet until the election, and then go full bore on the offensive. Especially since, y’know, the vice president doesn’t even have authority here so it’s stupid to blame it on her. Especially when the other candidate is actively sabotaging ceasefire negotiations.

There’s just no logic here.

They must have a very comfortable margin if they can ignore the majority of Americans

Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s the majority. I think the majority either support Israel without really thinking about it, or don’t care.

you can safely ignore my vote and my voice

Your vote I can ignore, your voice muddying the water for other impressionable voters I cannot

The Greeks invented orgies, the Romans came up with the idea of inviting women.

A party with a comfortable margin can embrace less centrist policies when their voters ask for them (write to your representatives everyone). A party with an uncertain margin has to calculate their platform to target the largest demographics. Using your vote + using your voice = representation.

How, precisely, does a promise that you won’t vote for them unless they alienate a larger demographic entice them into anything?

I’ll base my decision not on the promises they make, but the ones they have already fulfilled.

Not sure what promises the Harris administration have fulfilled, since it hasn’t existed yet.

how much time you’re wasting trying to convince a disillusioned old anarchist

That might be a point if I was trying to convince a disillusioned old anarchist. What I’m actually doing is publicly debunking your public nonsense so that impressionable onlookers in swing states don’t try to emulate that nonsense.

Make up your mind, is it “democratic” or does everyone’s vote not count?

Votes count. Non-votes don’t. There is no conflict in logic here.

Democrats will keep triangulating towards the right to pick up the mythical “moderate” and become the new right-wing party while some new group starts to pick up the pieces on the Left. Probably the greens.

All the more reason to entice them further left now so that the future landscape, in the good timeline, rests further left. I’m all for that future, and want it to start off as far left as possible.

I don’t feel the need to vote in support of a corrupt system.

Do you… do you think that if enough people don’t vote that the government will say “Shucks, guess we have to redo the election with better candidates”? If only one person in the whole country votes, they decide the winner. You gain absolutely nothing by not voting, all you’re doing is shifting power to those who disagree with you the most. This is just plain idiotic.

If they need our votes, they should start acting like they’re trying to earn them.

They need enough votes. If they think pandering to your demographic will cost them other demographics, they will not pander to you. Despite your claims, America is a democratic republic, granted with it’s own peculiarities in determining electoral votes. The candidate who wins the most votes wins the state. You will be left in the dust as irrelevant noise in the flood of people who know how to use their vote, and you will get zero representation. Congratulations.

It’s perfectly logical, you just don’t like the conclusion that the logic points towards, because it betrays the party leadership as being self-interested, cynical, and willing to aid and abet genocide to preserve their bloody campaign funding.

Nope, there is no logic. It’s based on nonsense feelings with no correspondence to the functional mechanism of our elections. Abstinence has no effect, and in fact will probably push the party farther right to scoop moderates because they actually vote. Congratulations.

Totally irrational. It’s not about who represents you most, they aren’t on the ballot. It’s about which of the two represents you more than the other. What incentive does the party have to sabotage their races (AIPAC influence is real) to court an uninformed bloc that’s unlikely to vote in the first place? Your abstinence is not incentive, no logic whatsoever.

Nope. That validates progressives not voting, which can convince the progressive you’re talking to to not vote, which results in a Republican victory and more support for Netenyahu. That strategy hurts Gaza, we’ve been over this. It’s like you totally ignored all the logic in favor of repeating the same geopolitically ignorant taking points you’ve been fed by right-wing stooges trying to sabotage the neoliberal party in favor of the fascists.

the Democrats have shown that they love Netanyahu and will do whatever he wants. If he calls for nukes, maybe a Harris administration will consider it.

Speculation.

Second, Trump said that? Oh yeah, he means whatever he says all the time. He never lies, he never talks out of his ass, he ever makes promises he won’t keep

The mental gymnastics here is too much for me to believe you’re sincerely suggesting this excuse. The Republicans are far more favorable to Netenyahu. To suggest otherwise is laughably out of touch.

Meanwhile, the current administration has failed to act at every “red line” crossed by Israel and continues to ACTUALLY SUPPLY Israel with weapons to continue its genocide.

Say you didn’t read the to comment without saying it.

1, that stuff is appropriated by Congress, the administration legally cannot deny supplying what was voted on. Legally, Israel is our ally, and our actions are limited, unless you prefer that American hegemony was entirely unchecked and the President could just do whatever they want regardless of how Congress votes? Maybe if leftists voted lesser evil instead of clutching their pearls, we’d have a Congress that would change things by now, but at least you get to be proud of inaction as the world passes you by.

2, as noted above, AIPAC is a powerful force in our elections, and there are more Zionists in this country than you think; this should be the case, it’s terrible, but it’s true and pretending it isn’t relevant does not achieve useful goals. A hard-line stance at this point will mobilize them and possibly cost Dems the election.

3, as noted above, Republicans would be objectively worse for Gaza, they’re open about that fact. The administration has been trying to broker a ceasefire for months, Trump has personally taken action to sabotage that same ceasefire.

Long term, the best strategy is voting Dem and applying pressure immediately after the election, when they can safely take action. Voting Republican is the worst strategy if you care about Palestinians; not voting is the second worst strategy, and ultimately achieves the same thing. When you can understand why careful deliberate action is necessary in complex and delicate political situations, you will be mature enough to have a potentially valuable opinion on geopolitics. If you think abstention is ever an effective strategy, then you are not yet mature.

Sounds like speculation to me. On the other hand, Trump said Netenyahu to finish the job, and called him as a private citizen to tell him not to agree to the Democrats ceasefire because it would help the Harris campaign.

You need to consider actually learning about what’s going on instead of clutching your pearls over politically impotent purity tests. Gaza is a wildly complicated geopolitical situation, as the top comment pointed out. You just come across as naive and uninformed.