Not voting because Harris is a woman?

[50latinos]

2 minutes ago, Versholefun said:

Fear mongering memes is all trumpets have left, because the imbecile they nominated can't pot a sentence together. Let lone understand policy in the simplest terms.

[BootmanLA]

19 hours ago, backdoorjimmy said:

To be clear, I care a lot about the result. That's why I'm casting my ballot for Harris. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to want to give my vote to a candidate who's earned my vote. It's not that hard - medicare for all, which would be cheaper than the private healthcare system we have in place now, would be a great place to start. Increasing the federal minimum wage would be another layup. It hasn't moved since I was in elementary school, and I'm 25 now. Doing more to help the un-housed people in our nation find housing would be another way to earn my vote. None of those are unreasonable asks.

To be clear: I support M4A and increasing the minimum wage substantially. But neither is something a president can accomplish on her own. Mind you, the ACA is more popular than it's ever been, as people have come to understand what it is and what it does, and yet the GOP is still hell-bent on repealing it, even while they make empty promises to keep its popular features (because they know it's political suicide not to). At this juncture, I think it would be seriously problematic for any president to propose and push hard for M4A even though I think it would be a great idea to have in place. (Remember that backlash against the ACA, based on GOP lies about what it did, was the primary reason the Democrats lost the House in 2010, crippling Obama's ability to push through anything like an updated Voting Rights Act or anything else of substance.)

19 hours ago, backdoorjimmy said:

I think this highlights the problem with our two party system. We have other options (Green, Independent, Libertarian) but for some reason, the voters always default to the democrats or the republicans. The DNC and RNC are a perfect example of corporate capture - two non government organizations that are so ingrained in our political ethos that NOT voting for one or the other is seen as throwing your vote away. Or worse, handing the election to (insert candidate here) because you didn't vote for their opponent.

The real problem is that these other parties - especially the Green Party - refuse to do any of the work involved in building up a party, meaning organizing locally, getting people elected to local positions where the party name and positions can be made known in the parts of government closest to the people. They simply want to make a splash on the national level, and the current Greens even brag - publicly - that their real goal is to prevent a "lesser" (in their view) party, like the Democrats, win the election. If that means the country has to suffer through another four years of Trumpism, so be it; if it means that we never get another election because of some trumped-up national emergency, so be that, too.

And in our system, which combines a lot of anti-democratic things like the Electoral College, winner-take-all electoral votes, and so forth, yeah, not voting for one of the major parties IS throwing your vote away. Or as I say, it's jacking off in the voting booth, making yourself feel good but accomplishing nothing.

[BootmanLA]

13 hours ago, nanana said:

This is the typical opening salvo of people who let NPR and The New York Times do their thinking for them. Be careful, this sad minefield has been the excuse liberals use to stop thinking deeply, like a brain off switch. 

Is that a long, convoluted way of saying "I make it up"?

[BootmanLA]

10 hours ago, alphatop32 said:

Well said my brothers @BlackDude and @nanana. The Black community is waking up to the damage caused by the Democrats in all the big cities they rule. They support lawlessness in the name of “social justice” and banish cops in our hood causing the loss of black lives. In Chicago, the token black Mayor abolished shotspotter, the technology to report live gunshot locations and crimes. And guess who that is affecting?!! The poor black and brown communities. The high inflation caused by inept Joe Biden has affected black families to put food on the table. Black employment was better under Trump. The “newly” arrived will replace black workers and black voters. That has been their real Project 2025! Killing black babies through abortions and replacing the living ones through mass illegal immigration. 

Spotshotter was abandoned because it didn't work. It gave results, but those results were wrong as often as right. What it did, of course, was enrich a handful of white men peddling a snake oil solution to a problem, snake oil paid for by taxes that hit the poor especially hard.

You blame inflation on "inept Joe Biden". Why, then, did the entire rest of the world ALSO experience high inflation, and why has the US recovered from it much faster than any other place on earth? Do you seriously not read any news other than what some right-winger nutcases are telling you is "truth"?

Black unemployment was better under Trump briefly. It's now better under Biden. So your "information" is mistaken at best and a deliberate falsification at worst.

As for the rest of your screed: oh, honey, bless your heart. LOL

[BootmanLA]

7 hours ago, Blkmuscbreeder said:

@BlackDude @topblkmale @alphatop32

I just want to give a shootout to the only two (or three?) Black men here for expressing exactly what I've been thinking! 

Once again, the non-Black left is talking over Black people. This is why Candace Owens refers to the left as a plantation. Lol 

And no, I'm not a republican.

 

Actually: I asked, specifically, why Black men don't want to vote for Harris, so that I can understand, rather than "talk over" anyone. I've gotten zero in response other than a handful of clearly erroneous garbage bits (like black unemployment being lower under Trump, which isn't true, or "Biden's inflation", which apparently he managed to inflict on the entire world).

[BootmanLA]

4 hours ago, topblkmale said:

 

carob chip cookie

 

Still better than a shit sandwich filled with broken glass bits.

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, BlackDude said:

Thank you for posting that. I kind of see it as seven types of people who don’t have a problem with what Obama did.

8. I believe that electing Kamala Harris is existential-level important, and frankly, anything that drives home that point is key. 

[BootmanLA]

23 minutes ago, 50latinos said:

Fear mongering memes is all trumpets have left, because the imbecile they nominated can't pot a sentence together. Let lone understand policy in the simplest terms.

Especially since the wars we've gotten into since Korea have basically all been at the hands of Republicans. Eisenhower got us into Vietnam, Nixon into a bunch of other places in SE Asia, Reagan into multiple smaller skirmishes, and Shrub into Iraq and Afghanistan. To his credit Bush assembled a coalition to go into Kuwait and made sure we stopped with the liberation of that country, so at least we shared the pain and didn't do any insane things like trying to "nation-build". 

[analluv27]

30 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

To be clear: I support M4A and increasing the minimum wage substantially. But neither is something a president can accomplish on her own. Mind you, the ACA is more popular than it's ever been, as people have come to understand what it is and what it does, and yet the GOP is still hell-bent on repealing it, even while they make empty promises to keep its popular features (because they know it's political suicide not to). At this juncture, I think it would be seriously problematic for any president to propose and push hard for M4A even though I think it would be a great idea to have in place. (Remember that backlash against the ACA, based on GOP lies about what it did, was the primary reason the Democrats lost the House in 2010, crippling Obama's ability to push through anything like an updated Voting Rights Act or anything else of substance.)

The real problem is that these other parties - especially the Green Party - refuse to do any of the work involved in building up a party, meaning organizing locally, getting people elected to local positions where the party name and positions can be made known in the parts of government closest to the people. They simply want to make a splash on the national level, and the current Greens even brag - publicly - that their real goal is to prevent a "lesser" (in their view) party, like the Democrats, win the election. If that means the country has to suffer through another four years of Trumpism, so be it; if it means that we never get another election because of some trumped-up national emergency, so be that, too.

And in our system, which combines a lot of anti-democratic things like the Electoral College, winner-take-all electoral votes, and so forth, yeah, not voting for one of the major parties IS throwing your vote away. Or as I say, it's jacking off in the voting booth, making yourself feel good but accomplishing nothing.

I totally agree with your statement in regards to the Green Party. Say by some miracle Jill Stein won the election. How much support would she get from a Democrat and Republican run congress and senate. 

[Blkmuscbreeder]

32 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

Actually: I asked, specifically, why Black men don't want to vote for Harris, so that I can understand, rather than "talk over" anyone. I've gotten zero in response other than a handful of clearly erroneous garbage bits (like black unemployment being lower under Trump, which isn't true, or "Biden's inflation", which apparently he managed to inflict on the entire world).

Who said I talking, specifically, about you? 

Edited October 15 by Blkmuscbreeder

[BlackDude]

44 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

8. I believe that electing Kamala Harris is existential-level important, and frankly, anything that drives home that point is key. 

So number 3? Black men need to be a emasculated and sacrifice their humanity for the good of humanity as a whole?

[50latinos]

2 minutes ago, BlackDude said:

So number 3? Black men need to be a emasculated and sacrifice their humanity for the good of humanity as a whole?

Sorry but if you seriously think that the election of vice president Harris would "emasculate" you humanity, you didn't have much to emasculate in the first place.

[BlackDude]

22 minutes ago, 50latinos said:

Sorry but if you seriously think that the election of vice president Harris would "emasculate" you humanity, you didn't have much to emasculate in the first place.

That’s a non sequitur. We are referring to Obama’s speech to black men and the tone. 
 

 

[TaKinGDeePanal]

11 hours ago, alphatop32 said:

Remind me the last time you and your party saved it since it was the Republicans who freed the slaves while the Democrats wanted to keep them in chains. 

The 13th Amendment (a GQP construct) still permits slavery "in state-mandated cases" - and Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation only referred to black slaves in the Confederacy. In truth, Lincoln basically only GAF so far as slavery was concerned as an economic weapon: [think before following links] https://www.loc.gov/collections/abraham-lincoln-papers/articles-and-essays/abraham-lincoln-and-emancipation/

[408curious]

On 10/13/2024 at 12:08 PM, alphatop32 said:

Not voting for Kamala because she is very incompetent! Please don’t be the white saviors and tell us how to and whom to vote for! 

By what measure do you consider her incompetent?