I have to respectfully disagree. “Vibes” and “Joy” were nonsense to begin with, unless you are backing a "Joyful” genocide.
This woman has a history, and it’s not pretty or joyful.
If she or the Dems had ever been serious about winning, they would have called off the war in Gaza, called off the impending nuclear standoff in Ukraine, and would have raced to help the victims of two record breaking hurricanes. They most surely wouldn’t have embraced Dick Vader’s endorsement (Dick Cheney- the good fairy of vibey joy)
It’s interesting — you seem to think that I haven’t the same or similar criticisms about the Democratic party. This entire essay is criticism of the Democratic party. Granted, much of it is about strategy and tactics at the moment, not policy, but I am indeed criticizing our foreign policy on Israel. So I’m doing all the things that you apparently are looking for. It’s just very interesting to see that you believe that we’re disagreeing.
What I will push back on is this idea, which you haven’t stated directly but seem to have implied, that vibes are bad strategy. It’s not a bad strategy — and in fact, I would say that it was something that Harris et al. kind of lucked into. I don’t think they could have planned for the immense catharsis that swept through the Democratic party once Biden finally stepped aside. I don’t think that was engineered. Some of it, yes, was enhanced by the timing of the big-ticket donors, which made people believe that money would bring success. I grant that. But the feeling inside the party had shifted from utter gloom and near-existential dread to a sense of what a person feels when they witness the sun dawning.
My point is that she and her team could have kept that up. They abandoned their own winning strategy for something they felt would be safer. They keep thinking that Nikki Haley voters are like the creamy center of an Oreo cookie. It’s really dispiriting that they’ve traded the energy and excitement that the Biden-to-Harris transition generated for something that’s kind of limping along. It’s a balloon that looks intact but you come near it and find it’s been sitting out for weeks after a party and it’s sagging from the slow leak of air.
Again, as far as the Harris campaign hyping all of the right-wing endorsements that they’ve racked up, yes, that’s what I was pointing to when I said that this seems Republican-lite. She’s running as a centrist, really center-right; and if she’s elected with a centrist electorate, that’s how she’s going to govern. I don’t know if my fellow liberals have realized this. If not, and if she wins, they’re in for a rude awakening.
It's interesting, thst you think the two of you disagree on anything at all. One of you just drew the right conclusions while looking at kids burning alive, with IV drippers still attached, and realized that there is no point in Harris winning...
It’s interesting that you seem to think that you are a mind reader! I welcome you to re-read this essay again and find any instance where I advocate for any particular outcome. No, this essay is about what may be likely as an outcome, as time goes on. It’s an examination on the why.
It is possible that you are not familiar with some of my back work, which is fine. What’s there may surprise you.
I also wonder why it is you felt I brought up melting persons on fire at all if you felt that I was indifferent about the topic. If you would like to discuss it, we can, and we can do so with all sensitivity that the subject demands. But I also know that one person controls foreign policy in terms of implementation, and at the moment that person is not named Kamala Harris. Harris is responsible for her words, however, which is why I keep advocating that she break with Biden’s policies, and to do so while voters still have time to register her position and weigh it before they make a final decision.
See, and I advocate for leaving her in the dust, as she will never change her stance on Israel. So actually rewarding her and Democrats, for comitting a Hitlerian extermination campaign of semites, is a "lil" counterproductive.
If the Dems win this, they know, they can do literally ANYTHING
If you think you can influence Hitler, good luck with that.
Excellent exposition of how the Democrat party is going about handing the presidency to Trump. MAGA republicans aren’t the only ones living in their own alternate reality. The DNC not only blindly doubles down on their disproven, ineffective “republican-lite” tactics, they have gone all out to destroy the Green party’s chances of defeating Trump by doing what neither they nor the RNC are willing to do: STOP FUNDING ISRAEL’S GENOCIDE.
I’m not sure the Green Party ever had a chance, this cycle or in the past, of defeating Trump. Trump has a cult following and all of the accoutrements of the Republican Party to broadcast his message and attract new followers. Indeed, the Green Party does not threaten the GOP ideological base. It’s possible that the Green Party might appeal to libertarians and other such independents, but that’s a very small sliver of the electorate.
What Democrats should do is co-opt the Green Party’s message and/or platform if they want to absorb (to be blunt about it) votes on the table. I think they’ve squandered their time with regards to this particular election cycle, but that’s historically how it’s been done. That’s what happened when the Progressive Party folded in the ‘40s — they joined with the FDR coalition, for the most part.
But even at this late date, I believe that — considering how much support there is in the Democratic Party for restricting the transfer of offensive weapons to Israel, with some estimates at or around 77% — Harris would benefit greatly by saying that she would just enforce US law. That would be enough of a signal to those who are pro-peace that she is listening and able to adjust. At this point, considering the huge escalation that Netanyahu has implemented over the last month, the silence on that escalation from the Harris camp is profoundly dispiriting. It indicates that she’s comfortable just ignoring reality. She has a chance to break that perception.
We don’t disagree on much - just that it was ever a winning strategy, even if she had been able to keep it up. For it to have worked, she would have needed to stay in her basement and never open her mouth ever. The blatant inauthenticity of the whole vibe/joy shtick was bound to come out. Maybe had Joe lasted another month or two before flatlining like he did, maybe they could have kept her covered in 🌈 and clown puke long enough to win…
Again, we do split on this idea of vibes. I propose we look at it less with such a silly abbreviation with a connotation of unseriousness and use a word like 'motivation.’ I used ‘vibes’ in the essay because that’s what detractors have been using, and I wanted to dispense with their assertions by actually embracing their word. But let’s switch for a minute.
It’s been shown that the frame in which people approach a problem affects the ease in which they complete the problem. For example, there was a study conducted where people were separated into small groups and given items that did not necessarily seem to belong to the same category. One cohort was told that they would get a reward if they figured out the puzzle and constructed a certain structure using the items; another cohort was told it was a game and that it tested their creativity. The latter group completed the task faster and, as I recall, bonded more as a group (i.e., rated their teammates more highly). The pressure to execute was heavy in the first cohort, but a spirit of cooperation, ease, and problem-solving was in the second. And that’s the difference when it comes to vibes.
Democrats are beginning to recapture the anxiety that they had shed in July. It’s creeping back. They do have a goal to execute, but they need to look at this as a puzzle to be solved and a game in which they expend creativity if they are going to finish the way that they hope. Otherwise, they will be recapitulating Sisyphus’s torment in their minds every day until Election Day.
VOTE FOR KAMALA. she's great. the only nuclear stand off is in Putins head. ukraine has a right to exist. she's wonderful. good potlician. everybody hates what is happening in gaza. But USA supports I over Hamas due to twin towers and extremism.
You seem to assume that there's some there there in Kamala's head. She was District Attorney and then Attorney General in California and never tried a case. Her 2020 primary platform was very similar to that of Bernie Sanders, and when asked why she changed her mind on 60 Minutes, she had no answer. In fact, she appeared to have given the matter no thought whatsoever.
She's running as the "Turn the Page" candidate, yet says she would have done absolutely nothing differently than what Joe Biden did.
She told Stephen Colbert the difference between a Biden Administration and a Harris one is that she's a different individual than Joe Biden, but she's still not Trump so it's all good.
Then Obama goes to Pittsburgh and tells black men that they are using Biden's policy failures as an excuse to exercise their sexism and not vote for a woman; the same woman who incarcerated so many of them in California so they could be used as slave labor. Not a good look is an understatement.
Not to mention the fact that Kamala was anointed the nominee without a single vote ever being cast for her in a primary, and only then because it was obvious Biden was going to lose in a landslide.
No matter how much lipstick they paint on this pig, it's still a pig, and a stupid pig at that. The only reason this race is as close as it is that Kamala's chief opponent is a loud snake-oil salesman who is hated by the most hated people in America, the neocons like Dick Cheney, who have openly endorsed Harris.
Why any Democrat would vote for anyone endorsed by Dick Cheney, of all people, can only be explained by the fact that the Democratic Party is little more than a combination cult and moneylaundering operation these days.
Hi, OB. Thanks for commenting and for restacking. Apologies for the length of time it took for me to get to your comment.
I ... honestly am not sure why you projected all of this grievance at me and at this essay. You seem to think I'm here to stan for Harris. That's not what I'm doing at all. I get the feeling, though, that you expected a lot of pushback, perhaps even some huffing and puffing.
Incidentally, I wonder if you are acquainted with any conservatives who, over the course of the last twenty or thirty years, have said that they "held their nose" as they voted for the GOP nominee. I'm guessing you've met at least one. Well, I've never been that person for the Democratic party. Call me an idealist if you'd like. So what I've been writing, since pretty much the launch of this Substack, is a coming-to-terms with that idealism running roughshod into the insane foreign (i.e., Middle East) policy of the Biden administration.
I had been lukewarm toward Biden for much of his presidency but appreciated some of his interpersonal skills, especially when it came to those who'd lost family members in tragedy. Often he spoke to families recovering from mass violence (often by guns). Then he went ahead and exposed his utter lack of compassion with regards to civilian lives in Palestine. That revealed an entirely new side of him. And his willingness to fund and supply what rapidly was evidently a genocide meant that I had to re-evaluate my relationship to the Democratic party, especially one of which he was the standard bearer.
Well, in a way, my hopes were fulfilled when he made his catastrophic failure on the debate stage in June. He left the contest. I'd hoped for an open convention / mini-primary. That didn't happen because Biden put his thumb on the scale on his way out. I as an individual had no power to change the course of things. He distorted what little chance there was of having an open process.
I was not ever going to close to door to Harris on that point alone, however, as Harris had been my top choice in the run-up to 2020. I would have voted for her in the primary had she not dropped out for financial reasons. So I didn't hold it against her that she was selected in such an unconventional way -- especially as the party so quickly coalesced behind her. For all of the complaints from *conservatives* about the selection situation over here in the Democratic party, the fact that the party came together put to bed the idea that she was forced upon us or that it was an undemocratic choice. I didn't hear one rumble of anger from Democratic circles. I heard some disappointment about the missed opportunity for an open convention or mini-primary -- in fact, I was one of those who voiced such a thing. But, again, not a dealbreaker.
You've gone a bit around the bush here. You bring up Colbert saying that since Harris isn't Trump, she's the one. Well, that was the going line when Biden was the candidate. That didn't wash with me. Again, the Gaza conflict blew apart that entire frame. You (hypothetical you) are telling me that this is the most consequential election of our lifetimes -- as it has been for the last two contests -- and that democracy is on the line... but you won't change your carte blanche policy toward Israel, which is costing you votes? That doesn't seem like there's a big democracy-endangering emergency here. Even now, Harris is willing to sacrifice Michigan in order to maintain her Israel bona fides, when I and others in the party thought that she had selected Walz as her running mate to signal openness to revisiting that policy. So, I consider that argument as Colbert and others have put it forward to be unsound.
I didn't check into Obama's words. I just haven't been that much of a political junkie this season, and I've had personal stuff to attend to this month besides. So I suppose I've been picking and choosing. I do know that some -- WaPo among them -- immediately portrayed Obama's words as "scolding" or "lecturing" or some sort. I ignored the headline because it seemed like clickbait. Looking into a different issue altogether, I saw a transcript of a PBS roundtable with Jonathan Capehart and David Brooks, and Capehart contextualized Obama's words as being directed only to campaign operatives as lines / talking points that they could use when they were encountering potential voters in the field. I still don't know if that is true, but that seems more likely than Obama just dogging Black male voters the way that Bill Cosby demeaned Black men for sagging pants. Just saying. (Also, there is a sexism problem in the Black community -- which is not a monolith, I will say here. So perhaps Obama is catching heat for acknowledging reality with a live microphone.)
I don't have much else to say, except that your idea that the Democratic party "is little more than a combination cult and moneylaundering operation" is pure projection as far as the GOP is concerned. Is there a burgeoning problem with enforced conformity in liberal circles? Yes. I've written about Blue MAGA. There really may be a BlueAnon. But the Democratic Party is WAY too fractious for anyone to describe it as a cult. I certainly wouldn't, because I study cults. The interactions that are the hallmark of a cult simply aren't there. So I take your comment as hyperbole and strongly suggest that you rethink it as a criticism, because it doesn't work.
You seem to be very intent on using words that bring up poor or limited IQ in the context of Harris, and that skirts mighty close to racist stereotypes about POC and intelligence. I'm sure that you are capable of criticizing someone on the merits rather than trawling the gutter in such a way.
But, again, I think you've fundamentally misread my essay.
I wasn't "projecting" any personal grievance at you as another human being. I was just laying out my argument that Kamala Harris is neither intelligent nor compassionate, which is a pretty good description of how most Americans feel about the federal government in general.
This wasn't a personal attack against you--you seem to be a decent person--and rest assured, if it was an attack you would have no doubts. Ask Robert Reich or Michael Moore.
I'm certainly not endorsing Trump. I was a Democrat for decades, and supported Bernie Sanders the last two times out. As I've said elsewhere, enabling genocide is my red line when it comes to voting. I am saying that he can't possibly be worse than Harris and those who control the Democratic Party.
she is wonderful. I love her. strong and willing to reach out to the ENTIRE country. rurals and suburbans and city folk. what a load of griping garbage. paint listick on this pig. I am not in dem party as a cult but as as a MEMBER. wrong. Vote harris. dont listen to this griping bs. SHe's a decent politican, she's not a billionaire, shes married to a regular guy. Shes a middle class stepmom. Shes coming up with policies she wants to address the housing crises, and update ACA, etc. VOTE KAMALA
I will refrain from responding in kind, as I try to treat my guests with respect. But I encourage you to go through my past essays and try to come back with the same sentiment. I would expect you to have your hat in your hand.
And there are others — this is just the beginning of a list I was collating (months ago now) as a clearinghouse for those Zionist apologists who were visiting my page all of a sudden earlier this summer.
So have at it. You’ll see that you could not be more wrong in your assessment.
I’ll say that if you were really interested in my opinion, you’d ask for it instead of assuming.
Jill Stein the Green is a multi-million $ oil investor so. I don’t really trust a word she says. Harris or trump one will be president. Trump has called the Biden administration SOFT on Palestine on multiple different occasions. We already know the kind of shit he does when he’s in office. Exactly who do you think it’ll benefit for him to be president again????
Hint: he and Bibi are *friends* and his son in law is part of some sort of deal to build beachfront condos on the rubble of the Gaza Strip. Is it still going to feel morally good to you when Donald Trump joins Netanyahu in pounding the shit out of Gaza and the West Bank? When he deports pro-Palestine activists and revokes our citizenship? When he sends the military to “deal with us”? When the anti-genocide movement starts to struggle and die here because the people that care have too many domestic crises to deal with? When we “never have to vote again”? These are all things he’s said he’d do, most on day one.
You can believe me or not but I really hope we don’t all find out the hard way. It would suck more than I can comprehend for us and the rest of the world if he did all the things he’s talked about and/or promised. I view as much of the genocide as I can and keep up with news about it bc I owe it to the victims to not shut my eyes; if I fuck up with this vote those images will be my responsibility and will destroy me. Willing to bet the same is true for a lot of other voters this year.
there is something root-level, deep-down, beyond-monstrous, unspeakably despicable about the whole notion that deciding whether or not to publicly stand against burning people alive is or isn't a vote winner.
Everyone knows that she’s a toy to the deep state! Do not defend her. She is a vile person that is complicit in the genocide of Palestinians. She’s supplying the USA agent, Israel to commit crimes against humanity and bragging about it. She has no personality and she’s not working for, even the good of the Americans. So stop changing the subject to a race or racism. The USA is the most racist country in the world.
I think Stein has the potential to play spoiler in at least one swing state. But it’s a fever-dream to believe that Harris would lose to Stein. That’s not how our two-party system is set up.
NON O NO NON NONONO> shes wonderful. a good politician. as president she cant just be one thing. she has to represent the nation. its imperative she thinks about country as a whole and not just her state. or her party. NONONONONO> WRONG.
what a stupid comment I have no idea what that means. sounds like shit coming from trumps mouth. total nothingburger. trump is a disease affecting the american psyche. lies lies lies lies and more lies. Kamala is fearless, she is very cool. men hate cool women.
Putting the Republicans back into power does nothing to help Palestinians relative to what Democrats have to offer. So why the preference for Trump over Harris? You can say you don't have such a preference. but actions speak louder than words. If Trump wins and later analysis show that a Palestine-related vote was responsible, you will have shown your political clout, but you will also have Trump in power. Come 2028 the Palestinian issue will likely be resolved in a way you do not like (so what did you gain) or worst case the Democratic party will no longer have the power to counter Republicans with or without you help (meaning any political clout you might have in the future will be gone for good). Ask yourself, how much power does the opposition in Russia have anymore?
I have spoken out about the dangers of Trump and MAGA for years. My Substack began in January, but I was very active on another platform for some time and have gone into much depth about Trump’s status as a cult leader, the dangers of authoritarianism, and so forth. Your perception is wrong.
I can criticize my party without being for a different party. You realize that, right?
That’s the thing about this closing argument that some ardent anti-Trump/pro-Harris voters are trying to press upon those on the fence. I say this as someone who is observing these interactions — my training is in social science. Observing is what I do. So, this tack is to insinuate or outright claim that any criticism of Harris is an attack on her or an attempt to bring her down. This is ridiculous. In the same vein is the idea that a nonvote or a vote for someone other than the two main candidates is a vote for Trump. That’s disingenuous to the point of dishonesty.
The truth of the matter is, my concern with the Democratic Party, and with Harris as the party’s standard bearer, is that I hold my party to a standard. It’s that simple. I expect them to be better than genocide. It’s not much to ask.
Now, what I have been doing is strongly voicing my opinion that Harris should come out and say that she will enforce US law. That’s also not asking much. That should be the bare minimum. Realistically speaking, this would cost her very little, yet has the possibility of garnering rich gains. (She might even recover Michigan in her win column — I don’t think it’s there at the moment.)
She’s making errors and she needs to look at those errors if she wants to win.
I l ove her. She's mindful. And knows to win she had to go toward the middle. Fully support her bringing republicans in who hate trump. And giving them a seat at her table. Saying she can cross the isle. Absolutely. Most of which you say here I see as griping about her moving toward the center, and to some extent , exaggerating her carefulness into faults. I am glad she is NOT LIKE trump, that she fought back on Fox, and talked over the chair. I am glad. The joy thing isnt that big a deal for me. Turns out it seriously turns off some guys. Many refer to her by her laught. But it gives room to for the god thing...
I have to respectfully disagree. “Vibes” and “Joy” were nonsense to begin with, unless you are backing a "Joyful” genocide.
This woman has a history, and it’s not pretty or joyful.
If she or the Dems had ever been serious about winning, they would have called off the war in Gaza, called off the impending nuclear standoff in Ukraine, and would have raced to help the victims of two record breaking hurricanes. They most surely wouldn’t have embraced Dick Vader’s endorsement (Dick Cheney- the good fairy of vibey joy)
Americans aren’t stupid.
It’s interesting — you seem to think that I haven’t the same or similar criticisms about the Democratic party. This entire essay is criticism of the Democratic party. Granted, much of it is about strategy and tactics at the moment, not policy, but I am indeed criticizing our foreign policy on Israel. So I’m doing all the things that you apparently are looking for. It’s just very interesting to see that you believe that we’re disagreeing.
What I will push back on is this idea, which you haven’t stated directly but seem to have implied, that vibes are bad strategy. It’s not a bad strategy — and in fact, I would say that it was something that Harris et al. kind of lucked into. I don’t think they could have planned for the immense catharsis that swept through the Democratic party once Biden finally stepped aside. I don’t think that was engineered. Some of it, yes, was enhanced by the timing of the big-ticket donors, which made people believe that money would bring success. I grant that. But the feeling inside the party had shifted from utter gloom and near-existential dread to a sense of what a person feels when they witness the sun dawning.
My point is that she and her team could have kept that up. They abandoned their own winning strategy for something they felt would be safer. They keep thinking that Nikki Haley voters are like the creamy center of an Oreo cookie. It’s really dispiriting that they’ve traded the energy and excitement that the Biden-to-Harris transition generated for something that’s kind of limping along. It’s a balloon that looks intact but you come near it and find it’s been sitting out for weeks after a party and it’s sagging from the slow leak of air.
Again, as far as the Harris campaign hyping all of the right-wing endorsements that they’ve racked up, yes, that’s what I was pointing to when I said that this seems Republican-lite. She’s running as a centrist, really center-right; and if she’s elected with a centrist electorate, that’s how she’s going to govern. I don’t know if my fellow liberals have realized this. If not, and if she wins, they’re in for a rude awakening.
Thanks for stopping by.
It's interesting, thst you think the two of you disagree on anything at all. One of you just drew the right conclusions while looking at kids burning alive, with IV drippers still attached, and realized that there is no point in Harris winning...
It’s interesting that you seem to think that you are a mind reader! I welcome you to re-read this essay again and find any instance where I advocate for any particular outcome. No, this essay is about what may be likely as an outcome, as time goes on. It’s an examination on the why.
It is possible that you are not familiar with some of my back work, which is fine. What’s there may surprise you.
I also wonder why it is you felt I brought up melting persons on fire at all if you felt that I was indifferent about the topic. If you would like to discuss it, we can, and we can do so with all sensitivity that the subject demands. But I also know that one person controls foreign policy in terms of implementation, and at the moment that person is not named Kamala Harris. Harris is responsible for her words, however, which is why I keep advocating that she break with Biden’s policies, and to do so while voters still have time to register her position and weigh it before they make a final decision.
See, and I advocate for leaving her in the dust, as she will never change her stance on Israel. So actually rewarding her and Democrats, for comitting a Hitlerian extermination campaign of semites, is a "lil" counterproductive.
If the Dems win this, they know, they can do literally ANYTHING
If you think you can influence Hitler, good luck with that.
You continue to attempt to read my mind.
If I wrote: I advocate for Trump to change his stance on pro holocaust policies
Would you assume, that I'm pro Trump?
I would, and in 99,5% I'd be right.
Excellent exposition of how the Democrat party is going about handing the presidency to Trump. MAGA republicans aren’t the only ones living in their own alternate reality. The DNC not only blindly doubles down on their disproven, ineffective “republican-lite” tactics, they have gone all out to destroy the Green party’s chances of defeating Trump by doing what neither they nor the RNC are willing to do: STOP FUNDING ISRAEL’S GENOCIDE.
I’m not sure the Green Party ever had a chance, this cycle or in the past, of defeating Trump. Trump has a cult following and all of the accoutrements of the Republican Party to broadcast his message and attract new followers. Indeed, the Green Party does not threaten the GOP ideological base. It’s possible that the Green Party might appeal to libertarians and other such independents, but that’s a very small sliver of the electorate.
What Democrats should do is co-opt the Green Party’s message and/or platform if they want to absorb (to be blunt about it) votes on the table. I think they’ve squandered their time with regards to this particular election cycle, but that’s historically how it’s been done. That’s what happened when the Progressive Party folded in the ‘40s — they joined with the FDR coalition, for the most part.
But even at this late date, I believe that — considering how much support there is in the Democratic Party for restricting the transfer of offensive weapons to Israel, with some estimates at or around 77% — Harris would benefit greatly by saying that she would just enforce US law. That would be enough of a signal to those who are pro-peace that she is listening and able to adjust. At this point, considering the huge escalation that Netanyahu has implemented over the last month, the silence on that escalation from the Harris camp is profoundly dispiriting. It indicates that she’s comfortable just ignoring reality. She has a chance to break that perception.
We don’t disagree on much - just that it was ever a winning strategy, even if she had been able to keep it up. For it to have worked, she would have needed to stay in her basement and never open her mouth ever. The blatant inauthenticity of the whole vibe/joy shtick was bound to come out. Maybe had Joe lasted another month or two before flatlining like he did, maybe they could have kept her covered in 🌈 and clown puke long enough to win…
Again, we do split on this idea of vibes. I propose we look at it less with such a silly abbreviation with a connotation of unseriousness and use a word like 'motivation.’ I used ‘vibes’ in the essay because that’s what detractors have been using, and I wanted to dispense with their assertions by actually embracing their word. But let’s switch for a minute.
It’s been shown that the frame in which people approach a problem affects the ease in which they complete the problem. For example, there was a study conducted where people were separated into small groups and given items that did not necessarily seem to belong to the same category. One cohort was told that they would get a reward if they figured out the puzzle and constructed a certain structure using the items; another cohort was told it was a game and that it tested their creativity. The latter group completed the task faster and, as I recall, bonded more as a group (i.e., rated their teammates more highly). The pressure to execute was heavy in the first cohort, but a spirit of cooperation, ease, and problem-solving was in the second. And that’s the difference when it comes to vibes.
Democrats are beginning to recapture the anxiety that they had shed in July. It’s creeping back. They do have a goal to execute, but they need to look at this as a puzzle to be solved and a game in which they expend creativity if they are going to finish the way that they hope. Otherwise, they will be recapitulating Sisyphus’s torment in their minds every day until Election Day.
VOTE FOR KAMALA. she's great. the only nuclear stand off is in Putins head. ukraine has a right to exist. she's wonderful. good potlician. everybody hates what is happening in gaza. But USA supports I over Hamas due to twin towers and extremism.
You seem to assume that there's some there there in Kamala's head. She was District Attorney and then Attorney General in California and never tried a case. Her 2020 primary platform was very similar to that of Bernie Sanders, and when asked why she changed her mind on 60 Minutes, she had no answer. In fact, she appeared to have given the matter no thought whatsoever.
She's running as the "Turn the Page" candidate, yet says she would have done absolutely nothing differently than what Joe Biden did.
She told Stephen Colbert the difference between a Biden Administration and a Harris one is that she's a different individual than Joe Biden, but she's still not Trump so it's all good.
Then Obama goes to Pittsburgh and tells black men that they are using Biden's policy failures as an excuse to exercise their sexism and not vote for a woman; the same woman who incarcerated so many of them in California so they could be used as slave labor. Not a good look is an understatement.
Not to mention the fact that Kamala was anointed the nominee without a single vote ever being cast for her in a primary, and only then because it was obvious Biden was going to lose in a landslide.
No matter how much lipstick they paint on this pig, it's still a pig, and a stupid pig at that. The only reason this race is as close as it is that Kamala's chief opponent is a loud snake-oil salesman who is hated by the most hated people in America, the neocons like Dick Cheney, who have openly endorsed Harris.
Why any Democrat would vote for anyone endorsed by Dick Cheney, of all people, can only be explained by the fact that the Democratic Party is little more than a combination cult and moneylaundering operation these days.
Hi, OB. Thanks for commenting and for restacking. Apologies for the length of time it took for me to get to your comment.
I ... honestly am not sure why you projected all of this grievance at me and at this essay. You seem to think I'm here to stan for Harris. That's not what I'm doing at all. I get the feeling, though, that you expected a lot of pushback, perhaps even some huffing and puffing.
Incidentally, I wonder if you are acquainted with any conservatives who, over the course of the last twenty or thirty years, have said that they "held their nose" as they voted for the GOP nominee. I'm guessing you've met at least one. Well, I've never been that person for the Democratic party. Call me an idealist if you'd like. So what I've been writing, since pretty much the launch of this Substack, is a coming-to-terms with that idealism running roughshod into the insane foreign (i.e., Middle East) policy of the Biden administration.
I had been lukewarm toward Biden for much of his presidency but appreciated some of his interpersonal skills, especially when it came to those who'd lost family members in tragedy. Often he spoke to families recovering from mass violence (often by guns). Then he went ahead and exposed his utter lack of compassion with regards to civilian lives in Palestine. That revealed an entirely new side of him. And his willingness to fund and supply what rapidly was evidently a genocide meant that I had to re-evaluate my relationship to the Democratic party, especially one of which he was the standard bearer.
Well, in a way, my hopes were fulfilled when he made his catastrophic failure on the debate stage in June. He left the contest. I'd hoped for an open convention / mini-primary. That didn't happen because Biden put his thumb on the scale on his way out. I as an individual had no power to change the course of things. He distorted what little chance there was of having an open process.
I was not ever going to close to door to Harris on that point alone, however, as Harris had been my top choice in the run-up to 2020. I would have voted for her in the primary had she not dropped out for financial reasons. So I didn't hold it against her that she was selected in such an unconventional way -- especially as the party so quickly coalesced behind her. For all of the complaints from *conservatives* about the selection situation over here in the Democratic party, the fact that the party came together put to bed the idea that she was forced upon us or that it was an undemocratic choice. I didn't hear one rumble of anger from Democratic circles. I heard some disappointment about the missed opportunity for an open convention or mini-primary -- in fact, I was one of those who voiced such a thing. But, again, not a dealbreaker.
You've gone a bit around the bush here. You bring up Colbert saying that since Harris isn't Trump, she's the one. Well, that was the going line when Biden was the candidate. That didn't wash with me. Again, the Gaza conflict blew apart that entire frame. You (hypothetical you) are telling me that this is the most consequential election of our lifetimes -- as it has been for the last two contests -- and that democracy is on the line... but you won't change your carte blanche policy toward Israel, which is costing you votes? That doesn't seem like there's a big democracy-endangering emergency here. Even now, Harris is willing to sacrifice Michigan in order to maintain her Israel bona fides, when I and others in the party thought that she had selected Walz as her running mate to signal openness to revisiting that policy. So, I consider that argument as Colbert and others have put it forward to be unsound.
I didn't check into Obama's words. I just haven't been that much of a political junkie this season, and I've had personal stuff to attend to this month besides. So I suppose I've been picking and choosing. I do know that some -- WaPo among them -- immediately portrayed Obama's words as "scolding" or "lecturing" or some sort. I ignored the headline because it seemed like clickbait. Looking into a different issue altogether, I saw a transcript of a PBS roundtable with Jonathan Capehart and David Brooks, and Capehart contextualized Obama's words as being directed only to campaign operatives as lines / talking points that they could use when they were encountering potential voters in the field. I still don't know if that is true, but that seems more likely than Obama just dogging Black male voters the way that Bill Cosby demeaned Black men for sagging pants. Just saying. (Also, there is a sexism problem in the Black community -- which is not a monolith, I will say here. So perhaps Obama is catching heat for acknowledging reality with a live microphone.)
I don't have much else to say, except that your idea that the Democratic party "is little more than a combination cult and moneylaundering operation" is pure projection as far as the GOP is concerned. Is there a burgeoning problem with enforced conformity in liberal circles? Yes. I've written about Blue MAGA. There really may be a BlueAnon. But the Democratic Party is WAY too fractious for anyone to describe it as a cult. I certainly wouldn't, because I study cults. The interactions that are the hallmark of a cult simply aren't there. So I take your comment as hyperbole and strongly suggest that you rethink it as a criticism, because it doesn't work.
You seem to be very intent on using words that bring up poor or limited IQ in the context of Harris, and that skirts mighty close to racist stereotypes about POC and intelligence. I'm sure that you are capable of criticizing someone on the merits rather than trawling the gutter in such a way.
But, again, I think you've fundamentally misread my essay.
I wasn't "projecting" any personal grievance at you as another human being. I was just laying out my argument that Kamala Harris is neither intelligent nor compassionate, which is a pretty good description of how most Americans feel about the federal government in general.
This wasn't a personal attack against you--you seem to be a decent person--and rest assured, if it was an attack you would have no doubts. Ask Robert Reich or Michael Moore.
I'm certainly not endorsing Trump. I was a Democrat for decades, and supported Bernie Sanders the last two times out. As I've said elsewhere, enabling genocide is my red line when it comes to voting. I am saying that he can't possibly be worse than Harris and those who control the Democratic Party.
We have no good choices this election.
she is wonderful. I love her. strong and willing to reach out to the ENTIRE country. rurals and suburbans and city folk. what a load of griping garbage. paint listick on this pig. I am not in dem party as a cult but as as a MEMBER. wrong. Vote harris. dont listen to this griping bs. SHe's a decent politican, she's not a billionaire, shes married to a regular guy. Shes a middle class stepmom. Shes coming up with policies she wants to address the housing crises, and update ACA, etc. VOTE KAMALA
She's trash🤮 She's pro genocide. I'm voting for Jill Stein.
I appreciate the fact that you are voting according to your conscience. I wonder: could anything happen that might change your mind?
You're pro genocide. 🖕
I will refrain from responding in kind, as I try to treat my guests with respect. But I encourage you to go through my past essays and try to come back with the same sentiment. I would expect you to have your hat in your hand.
Here’s a few to tide you over:
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/south-africa-has-charged-israel-with “South Africa has charged Israel with genocide, and the case is strong.”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/the-transformation-of-israeli-society “The transformation of Israeli society”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/why-what-israel-is-doing-is-genocide “Why what Israel is doing is genocide and October 7 was not”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/israels-inversion-of-reality-linked “Israel’s inversion of reality linked to its reversal of morality”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/the-reproduction-of-genocidal-culture “The reproduction of genocidal culture”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/similarities-between-quotes-of-israeli “Similarities between quotes of Israeli officians and RTLM broadcasts in Rwandan genocide”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/genocide-wont-stop-with-the-removal “Genocide won’t stop with the removal of one man”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/people-say-whats-happening-in-gaza “People say what’s happening in Gaza is merely ethnic cleansing. But ethnic cleansing is itself genocide.”
https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/it-was-always-the-land “It Was Always the Land”
And there are others — this is just the beginning of a list I was collating (months ago now) as a clearinghouse for those Zionist apologists who were visiting my page all of a sudden earlier this summer.
So have at it. You’ll see that you could not be more wrong in your assessment.
I’ll say that if you were really interested in my opinion, you’d ask for it instead of assuming.
Jill Stein the Green is a multi-million $ oil investor so. I don’t really trust a word she says. Harris or trump one will be president. Trump has called the Biden administration SOFT on Palestine on multiple different occasions. We already know the kind of shit he does when he’s in office. Exactly who do you think it’ll benefit for him to be president again????
Hint: he and Bibi are *friends* and his son in law is part of some sort of deal to build beachfront condos on the rubble of the Gaza Strip. Is it still going to feel morally good to you when Donald Trump joins Netanyahu in pounding the shit out of Gaza and the West Bank? When he deports pro-Palestine activists and revokes our citizenship? When he sends the military to “deal with us”? When the anti-genocide movement starts to struggle and die here because the people that care have too many domestic crises to deal with? When we “never have to vote again”? These are all things he’s said he’d do, most on day one.
You can believe me or not but I really hope we don’t all find out the hard way. It would suck more than I can comprehend for us and the rest of the world if he did all the things he’s talked about and/or promised. I view as much of the genocide as I can and keep up with news about it bc I owe it to the victims to not shut my eyes; if I fuck up with this vote those images will be my responsibility and will destroy me. Willing to bet the same is true for a lot of other voters this year.
No.
there is something root-level, deep-down, beyond-monstrous, unspeakably despicable about the whole notion that deciding whether or not to publicly stand against burning people alive is or isn't a vote winner.
It’s largely an “own goal”.
It’s incredibly frustrating.
In danger!!!
She shouldn’t be in, not her! SHES A STUPID BICH OF AMERICA
First, we're not having gender slurs here. We're just not. Choose your words carefully and please be respectful.
Second, we're not using racist tropes against people of color. We're not.
So if you can't find a way to criticize Harris on the merits, please take your opinion elsewhere. Otherwise, you're welcome to converse.
Everyone knows that she’s a toy to the deep state! Do not defend her. She is a vile person that is complicit in the genocide of Palestinians. She’s supplying the USA agent, Israel to commit crimes against humanity and bragging about it. She has no personality and she’s not working for, even the good of the Americans. So stop changing the subject to a race or racism. The USA is the most racist country in the world.
Your use of ‘toy’ mirrors Trump’s label of ‘plaything’. It’s an incredibly sexist take. You might want to examine that.
Listen , your mind is set Zio! I have no time to waste with someone like you.
https://substack.com/@abotaym/note/c-73002793?r=e8vkh&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
Kamala is part of Obama's Kabala.
Let’s hope she loses bigly to Trump. .I don’t like Trump either. I hope she looses even more bigly to Jill Stein
I think Stein has the potential to play spoiler in at least one swing state. But it’s a fever-dream to believe that Harris would lose to Stein. That’s not how our two-party system is set up.
Typo She is Benji’s lapdog Both candidates are. I dislike Trump too . BTW Harris is against Black Lives Matter . So fucker too
NON O NO NON NONONO> shes wonderful. a good politician. as president she cant just be one thing. she has to represent the nation. its imperative she thinks about country as a whole and not just her state. or her party. NONONONONO> WRONG.
She is banji lapdog
what a stupid comment I have no idea what that means. sounds like shit coming from trumps mouth. total nothingburger. trump is a disease affecting the american psyche. lies lies lies lies and more lies. Kamala is fearless, she is very cool. men hate cool women.
Putting the Republicans back into power does nothing to help Palestinians relative to what Democrats have to offer. So why the preference for Trump over Harris? You can say you don't have such a preference. but actions speak louder than words. If Trump wins and later analysis show that a Palestine-related vote was responsible, you will have shown your political clout, but you will also have Trump in power. Come 2028 the Palestinian issue will likely be resolved in a way you do not like (so what did you gain) or worst case the Democratic party will no longer have the power to counter Republicans with or without you help (meaning any political clout you might have in the future will be gone for good). Ask yourself, how much power does the opposition in Russia have anymore?
I have spoken out about the dangers of Trump and MAGA for years. My Substack began in January, but I was very active on another platform for some time and have gone into much depth about Trump’s status as a cult leader, the dangers of authoritarianism, and so forth. Your perception is wrong.
I can criticize my party without being for a different party. You realize that, right?
That’s the thing about this closing argument that some ardent anti-Trump/pro-Harris voters are trying to press upon those on the fence. I say this as someone who is observing these interactions — my training is in social science. Observing is what I do. So, this tack is to insinuate or outright claim that any criticism of Harris is an attack on her or an attempt to bring her down. This is ridiculous. In the same vein is the idea that a nonvote or a vote for someone other than the two main candidates is a vote for Trump. That’s disingenuous to the point of dishonesty.
The truth of the matter is, my concern with the Democratic Party, and with Harris as the party’s standard bearer, is that I hold my party to a standard. It’s that simple. I expect them to be better than genocide. It’s not much to ask.
Now, what I have been doing is strongly voicing my opinion that Harris should come out and say that she will enforce US law. That’s also not asking much. That should be the bare minimum. Realistically speaking, this would cost her very little, yet has the possibility of garnering rich gains. (She might even recover Michigan in her win column — I don’t think it’s there at the moment.)
She’s making errors and she needs to look at those errors if she wants to win.
I l ove her. She's mindful. And knows to win she had to go toward the middle. Fully support her bringing republicans in who hate trump. And giving them a seat at her table. Saying she can cross the isle. Absolutely. Most of which you say here I see as griping about her moving toward the center, and to some extent , exaggerating her carefulness into faults. I am glad she is NOT LIKE trump, that she fought back on Fox, and talked over the chair. I am glad. The joy thing isnt that big a deal for me. Turns out it seriously turns off some guys. Many refer to her by her laught. But it gives room to for the god thing...
Good. At least Trump can't keep a secret.