2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Threatening us all with a good time
INVESTIGATED THE FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES
HOW DARE SHE!! The absolute nerve of her.
Source: trust me bro
Might just hasten the Obama endorsement..
Trump basically swapped out Joe Biden's name with Kamala, and it is quite entertaining how silly he sounds.
He’s using Lyin’ Kamala (mispronouncing her name).
...
his recent stint as governor means he has easily the most progressive record:
The 93rd Minnesota Legislature, in session from January to May 2023, was the first legislature to be fully DFL-controlled since the 88th Minnesota Legislature in 2013-15. It passed several major reforms to Minnesota law, including requiring paid leave, banning noncompete agreements, cannabis legalization, increased spending on infrastructure and environmental issues, tax modifications, codifying abortion rights, universal free school meals, and universal gun background checks.
Plus, his response to the uncommitted vote against Biden wasn't to call them equal to KKK, but to say they had a point.
but he looks very old. and there was also this:
he vetoed a bill intended to increase pay for rideshare drivers, his first veto as governor, saying that it did not strike the right balance.
Kelly announced he's reconsidered and would now support the PRO Act. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/07/24/congress/kelly-to-support-pro-labor-bill-00170954
Really wild seeing the topics Democrats are hemming and hawing over for the VP pick when this guy is the current opposition…
Gosh whenever I login to Twitter, aside from the stuff I’d usually expect I keep getting US RW propaganda mocking Harris. I have to keep putting them on ignore / mute. It’s not even funny but mostly sick vile content that the algorithm is somehow promoting.
That has to be the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard.
I just watched Ron Klain on MSNBC. He sounds tired and old. Amazing what being in the White House does to you (and I know that he left some time ago).
Or brilliant, if you are also pushing abolished abortion, limited access to birth control, and the importance of the large traditional family to a population that’s afraid that it’s being outnumbered by liberal youth and immigrants.
He only says that because it would benefit republicans and a dig to Kamala. If it would benefit democrats he would say nothing. You might agree or not, But I don't think is a stupid idea. In the end when you vote is for the future of your kids also. The Electoral College and life time SCOTUS is up there in stupidity and they are real
e - the full article is linked in the tweet and isn't behind a paywall
Oh I know. As a political tool, even here the right wing ruling party instilled fears about minorities having more children and Hindus needing to ensure they don’t one day become a minority. But I meant purely on a logical level (which many fantasies don’t bother with).
No it’s a stupid and uncivilised idea. Children aren’t of a sound and developed enough mind to vote and their parents have no right to vote on their behalf. Your one vote for “the future of your kids” is enough. The children can vote when it’s their time not before. Imagine growing up to find out your “old school” father voted on your behalf for an autocratic megalomaniac to sink the countries future. That any vote (and this would really be a child vote) to be decided not be the voter goes entirely against the fabric of a democracy.
So the current attack lines are: she laughs, she may or may not be hot, she doesn't have a kid, and DEI.
GOP panic stations
How long till "Commie Kamala" makes it debut in right-wing online circles?
Is this actually seen as a bad thing in political circles? The current 18-30 generation, certainly in the western countries, are probably the most unsure about if they actually want children or not than any other generation from before (Anecdotally, based on what I see online and people I know). Certainly loads of people don't have kids by the age their parents had them. I can't see who would actually view this as a negative thing besides the same smooth brains who would be maga types anyway.
No is not. Is your opinion. If we should blame our father for voting each 4 years, imagine what you could blame for the day by day decisions that they do for you constantly. Day care, school, books, TV shows and a big fecking etcetera. But sure, an autocratic vote each 4 years is what you can through at their faces. See it how you like but parents are the influence for the future of their kids every single day and denying that it is what is really stupid
I am not saying that I would agree on this, I would need to give it a better thought, but saying stupid that parents have a saying on the future of their kids is amusing. And again, the fabric of democracy is attack in many other voting skewing and unelected powers
I dont think its stupid that parents have a saying on the future of their kids, its just stupid that parents should, what, vote 2 times, one time themselves and 1 time for each of their kids. So who has more kids should have more voting rights?
that is precisely the discussion. Not convinced Maybe parents vs no parents. Policies are focused on the future of the country so I don't see why is stupid that who has more invested in the future shouldn't have more saying
At the same time, I believe that voting should be a right that should be earned. So yes, I like to think of alternatives because definitely, I don't think the current models works. Major "democratic" countries tends to be organized in bipartidism with some hiccups here and there
That's a definiton of a discrimination right there.
You vote for the future of your fellow citizens.
which, or both?
So many voters have more power than others in UK, in US, in Spain, etc... I don't see why the current should be better than others. And also, are this systems that unfair? don't some of them protecting the rights of undeveloped regions to have more saying to be able to develop? But might be overprotection?
No system is equal, fair and sometimes works better than others. Everything can be discussed, but qualifying in of stupid... Vance doesn't put it out there in good faith, but there is some reasoning to it behind that is not untrue
People with kids should have more than 1 voting right.
Only reasoning why Vance is putting it out is to have a sly dig at Harris. As if people with kids are more special than the people who have no kids. Also Harris is a stepmother but that doesnt stop Vance from his disguisting attacks.
I already said in previous post that it was a dig to harris and also twice that he is not saying that for the right reasons. I am well aware of that. And is not how are more special. Is not about being special is having voters voting for their future and all the decisions that affect future kids are delegated. Vote could be one of it.
Don't get me wrong. I understand your argument and could well be that I would be inclined on that side also, but I see the other point too. Why if I decide for my kid, his school, I decide for him, the curriculum, I decide the extra curriculars basketball over football, piano over violin. judo over karate, etc...His diet and many more, why I should not decide for him/her his/her vote for the country that I think is best
So anyway, JD Vance is turning out to be a disaster, no? Claims about him having sex with a couch, his comments on childless women and so forth.
The GOP must've used those charlatans over at vetting.com to perform a background check.
Please give it more thought becuase it’s clearly an extremely stupid idea. Making personal decisions relating to your household, schooling and lifestyle do not impact society at large. Voting for your leaders and government does. Handing a person two votes becuase they have two kids makes no logical sense whatsoever. And which parent gets that second vote anyway? What if the kid is being taken care of by the grandparent with the parents doing very little?
Each vote counting equal is an essential part of the democratic fabric. Giving a shitty parent with 5 kids a more relevant vote than a great human being who is unable to conceive is wrong.
You're mixing things up. One theme is deciding on kids school, activities, judo over karate and so on, the other is deciding for them what's their political stance before they get to know things. And as @amolbhatia50k said deiciding on the future of society based on having kids and so on.
Also he made great points, so a someone who has kids but is a shitty parent should have more voting rights than someone who doesnt have or cant have kids?
The whole idea is ludicrous.
it's the sign of a great painting when the eyes follow your pussy around the room!