Former Vice President Kamala Harris confirmed Friday that she is “thinking about” running for president in 2028 at the 2026 National Action Network Convention – in her most open public remarks to date about her political future.
Please point out where I expressed any kind of support for her running, or where I implied that she should run in any manner or form. Please do.
Because I’m fairly certain I pointed out that she wasn’t a good candidate, that the Dems should’ve picked someone better.
I’m also fairly certain that I made it super clear that the main issue was indeed that she was the main candidate (and that she replaced Biden too late but I think that’s obvious). That was deterring enough for most. But even then, there were enough people who would’ve voted for the ‘not Trump’ candidate even if it was a literal sack of sentient horse shit, for that candidate to win.
However, your sentiment is wrong here. Absolutely no candidate is immune to this kind of Russian meddling, because no Democrat that would make it onto the ballot would want to upset the moneymen - the people behind the defense companies that make the big bucks supplying Israel with weapons, so that that rogue apartheid genocide state can keep poking its much more powerful neighbours.
The problem is that people seemingly lack critical thinking, and consider Kamala not coming out against Israel somehow worse than Trump directly supporting it. I mean the core of the problem is that the US political system is geared towards a two-party approach, which means there will never be a good candidate for people with good conscience, so it’s not about voting for a good candidate, but preventing the worst from entrenching himself as king. But hey if you want that chip on your shoulder that you didn’t vote for the one who didn’t say the word genocide, and by that allowed the one who will do anything to appease the ones committing genocide, so yay, you did so good!
Do you think she won’t be vulnerable to the same strategy a second time?
Please point out where I expressed any kind of support for her running, or where I implied that she should run in any manner or form. Please do.
Because I’m fairly certain I pointed out that she wasn’t a good candidate, that the Dems should’ve picked someone better.
I’m also fairly certain that I made it super clear that the main issue was indeed that she was the main candidate (and that she replaced Biden too late but I think that’s obvious). That was deterring enough for most. But even then, there were enough people who would’ve voted for the ‘not Trump’ candidate even if it was a literal sack of sentient horse shit, for that candidate to win.
However, your sentiment is wrong here. Absolutely no candidate is immune to this kind of Russian meddling, because no Democrat that would make it onto the ballot would want to upset the moneymen - the people behind the defense companies that make the big bucks supplying Israel with weapons, so that that rogue apartheid genocide state can keep poking its much more powerful neighbours.
The problem is that people seemingly lack critical thinking, and consider Kamala not coming out against Israel somehow worse than Trump directly supporting it. I mean the core of the problem is that the US political system is geared towards a two-party approach, which means there will never be a good candidate for people with good conscience, so it’s not about voting for a good candidate, but preventing the worst from entrenching himself as king. But hey if you want that chip on your shoulder that you didn’t vote for the one who didn’t say the word genocide, and by that allowed the one who will do anything to appease the ones committing genocide, so yay, you did so good!