Rightwing playbooks used in past election campaigns are being dusted off for an all-out assault on the vice-president
For Barack Obama there was “birtherism” and a name they said sounded like a specific Middle East terrorist. For Hillary Clinton there was “Lock her up” and merchandise that said, “Trump that bitch”, “Hillary sucks but not like Monica” and “Life’s a bitch: don’t vote for one.”
Rightwing playbooks deployed in past election campaigns are being dusted off for an all-out assault against Vice-President Kamala Harris, the de facto Democratic nominee aiming to become the first Black woman and first person of south Asian descent to be US president.
“It’s obvious that the Republicans are going to play the race and gender card, which we’ve seen already in some of the attacks on social media,” said Tara Setmayer, a Black woman who is co-founder and chief executive of the Seneca Project, a women-led super political action committee. “It may be catnip for their Maga base but it will be a turnoff for the moderate voters in the battleground states that will determine this election.”
The modern GOP don’t have a platform. They run on grievance. That’s why they’re freaking out about the fact that Joe Biden dropped out. They had been running “against Joe Biden” rather than running a campaign based on a platform or issues.
To be fair the Democrats don’t have a platform other than: not Republican/Trump/ diverse coalition. Ok, they didn’t want to backslide, which is good, but the things they want to accomplish don’t help the working class a whole lot.
Let me help you out.
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/
https://www.project2025.org/
Linking to this while also trying to argue that the Democratic platform is something more than “not Republican” is really funny.
…or they were linking you the two effective platforms of the parties for comparison’s sake.
Except no one asked for the other Party’s platform or accused them of not having one.They just dumped it, unsolicited. That implies Project 2025 is important for understanding Democrats.lol I can’t read 🤡
What? You missed the whole reason this reply chain started was someone saying Republicans have no platform? How?
Literally yes 😳
lol so fucking stupid
I linked to the Democrats platform and to this plan, written by the Trump team, for a fascist dictatorship in the US.
The fact that you felt the need to link to Project 2025 implies that the Democrats are defined by being opposed to it.
That’s quite a leap. You inferred something, I didn’t imply it. I simply posted a link to the Democrats platform which laysout their vision and policy and a link to the Republican platform which lays out their vision and policy. Any inference is entirely in your head.
We’re very lucky that the Republicans published a detailed 900 page roadmap for turning the US into a fascist theocratic dictatorship. It’s impossible to deny, now, since everyone can see it with their own two eyes.
The fact you’re talking about the Democrats implies you are defined by them.
And the fact I am talking to you means you define me.
And the fact that I mentioned that means we are both defined by our struggle to avoid the things that define us, or something.
One (or many) can be opposed to a platform or ideology while simultaneously advocating for a different platform or ideology.
From her speech the other day (in conjunction with Biden) these appear to be her focuses:
The middle class
Voting rights
Reproductive rights (limited to a bill, no mention of stuffing the Supreme Court)
Justice Reform
Gun Control
Hopefully we get more information over the best while and some formalization at the convention.
I mean democrats categorically support unions, support reproductive rights, support protecting the environment… They do have a platform that isn’t “not Republican”. It’s just that republicans know their platform (project 2025 really) is so wildly unpopular they have to focus not on that, they have to focus on tearing down the opposing candidate.
In terms of helping the working class: taxing the wealthy and wealthy corporations more will help the working class. Improving access to low cost / affordable healthcare will help the working class. Having strong unions will help the working class.
The problem is that “access to low cost / affordable healthcare” is such a limp dick policy. Yeah, I can “afford” healthcare, but it still costs me thousands of dollars every year and I’m tied to my employer for it. Then I’m still not getting very good care and I have a chronic mental health disorder. That cop just executed that schizophrenic woman in Illinois and I’ve been arrested and mistreated due to my own mental health. Nobody is helping people like me and her. Local jails are filled with people who are there because of the lack of mental healthcare. I’m lucky that I get to see a p-doc for 5 minutes a month without paying full price. Full price is $200 per visit, just to get a refill on a prescription that makes me feel like shit all the time. I got my appointment mixed up one time and couldn’t get a refill until I saw the doc a week later and had to restart on a lower dosage. Nobody wanted to help me get a refill, I talked to multiple people at the office and at the pharmacy and couldn’t get it and kept getting different answers from different people. The doctor told me I should have came in to see him without the appointment. I was afraid to do that because I didn’t want to get kicked out and lose access to my doctor. The healthcare system in this country is a mess and a joke due to shitty scum sucking MBAs taking over every aspect of it. They’re working for the private healthcare industry and doing nothing to help us.
I disagree the ban on non competes is a recent example of how this administration is helping the working class.
The recent supreme court case reverses that
So what you’re saying is that conservatives are once again holding up stop signs when progress presents itself.
Because Democrats let them because they refused to attempt Court packing, which is the only way to stop the fascist agenda.
I’m for it, but increasing the size requires a Congressional majority. Sadly, we’re not there. FDR took a run at it and fractured the party. The fear is that if Democrats are able to do it, then the next Republican majority will do the same. I don’t think this consideration has merit. They are likely to do it anyway should they have the ability when the court doesn’t have a right bias.
I think there are better ways to go about it. The whole structure is flawed as it concentrates a wealth of power to small amount of people. Something like using a lottery composed of the federal appellate court judges for each case. In theory, many cases could be tried simultaneously as there are about 180. Those bringing the cases would also not have insight as to the court’s composition. They’d have to rely solely on the merit of their case.
I like this item. It’s a bit dated, and the source leans left; but so does reality:
https://www.alternet.org/2019/06/here-are-4-ways-to-expand-the-us-supreme-court
I used “refused” in the past tense. I’m pretty sure that route is gone. Democrats will never have the majorities they need because this Court has made so many anti-democratic and pro-corruption rulings as to render the electoral process into a joke.
Gratuities are legal now! It is now legal to give a politician money as thanks for passing legislation. It’s not “bribery” because it occurs after the act, you see, and so therefore it’s just protected speech. I’m sure Clarence Thomas is happy about that one.
But! Dems could still run on the issue as a way to sway voters! But they’re too scared because, as you said, then Republicans will just do it too and it’ll probably lead to a civil war. So. Uh. Whatever I guess, country is fucked.
Wow the ONLY way? That doesn’t sound right at all.
The Court is the key to the fascist’s agenda and the way they keep scoring victories despite being a minority Party.
Either the fascist Court is dealt with politically or… what? Tell me something that wouldn’t get us banned for talking about.
Do you mean the Raimondo decision? That has no direct bearing. At worst, it means the FTC rule is more susceptible to challenge. But if you look at the actual court cases, it is being upheld. One judge in Texas temporarily delayed the ban for a small number of employers, and that is the biggest challenge so far.
No, that’s just ‘‘I’m rubber your glue’’ bullshit. It isn’t so. Just like CNN isn’t FoxNews for Liberals, and there’s absolutely no cult of personality for Unkie Joe, as you can see from him stepping down, and left wing engagement went WAY up.
It’s not enough to simply claim there’s no platform, there is, it’s not just ‘‘Trump bad’’. But to be fair, he is promising to create a dictatorship and end our country in order to remake it in his image.
I’m sorry you’re ignorant. But the good news is that you can actually do something about. Go ahead! Give it a try.
Yeah, I saw her speech to the DNC the other day. She used a bunch of weasel words like “affordable” healthcare, “middle class” , assault weapons ban, etc. These things range from meaningless to barely a move in the right direction. Y’all got tricked into thinking the conservative corporate candidate is so progressive because she is compared to the fascist option. It’s a bunch of B.S.
And I suppose you have a viable alternative non-incrementalist approach that is going to be appealing to the majority of voters.
Take control of the DNC away from the center right and get progressives in charge.
And in your mind does that get more or less votes overall? Does it actually win elections?
Because incredibly, not everyone is progressive. I know, it’s insane to me too. But that’s the unfortunate reality.
It’s almost as if they’re saying things like universal healthcare can’t win elections and instead need to seize power from the top down. Which really undersells the appeal of these programs.
I’m saying I want universal healthcare and Dems won’t do it. They want to give health insurance companies and private hospitals a shitton of taxpayers money and keep insurance tied to employment. It’s a crock of shit.
At least they have an ethos, man.
Yeah, funnel tax money into private hands.
Obviously you are not a golfer.
You’re wrong. Some wisdom for you: If you’re always wrong about something, and only people who hold precisely the exact same viewpoints as you agree, you should consider looking into it yourself. Because the question is no longer whether you’re right, it becomes about who is the most correct, and whether you personally care enough and are brave enough to challenge your own viewpoint.
Yeah, we are a bit of a microcosm here. However, when it comes to people on the left you can at least trust that most of us will go around correcting one another, often to our own detriment.
Top things everyone I know is worried about:
College costs and student loans for themselves and maybe their children, must younger people can’t afford children. Medical costs Housing costs Ability to retire at a reasonable age Cost of living
Kind of hard to see how they want to fix those issues when they’re taking money from those industries and using private health insurance companies to administer Medicare/Medicaid plans and still paying sky high prices to private hospitals. Private health insurance is a huge gift to employers as well. It keeps people from easily leaving and they get huge tax breaks.
Global warming is the issue that supersedes all issues and the Dems are much better on that. Literally everything you listed gets worse with climate change everything gets more expensive.