222
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NineMileTower@lemmy.world 47 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Did anyone actually watch the video? She's upset that neither side represent what she deems acceptable.

She's young and doesn't understand that government doesn't get fixed in a day. Where we are is the result of influence from corporate stooges since Reagan. It's come to a boiling point and I understand her frustration. A vote for Harris is a vote for steering the ship towards what she deems is acceptable, but that ship sails slower than a lot people can understand.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 45 points 3 weeks ago

She's not that young, she's been doing music for a decade and working service jobs till now. And you can understand something and still feel it is unacceptable.

[-] ech@lemm.ee 21 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

She's 26. That's fairly young for a voter. Not really sure what her cv has to do with being considered old.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Service industry work can build wisdom.

[-] scarilog@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Idk about wisdom but I can attest to a speedy loss in faith of the human population.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

Some would say that can be the same thing.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] aalvare2@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

I agree with the core of what you’re saying except I disagree that she “doesn’t understand” how slowly politics works. I think her decision to vote for Harris anyway speaks to that kind of understanding, else she’d endorse a third-party candidate/write-in in a poor attempt to speed-run democracy.

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

She’s young and doesn’t understand that government doesn’t get fixed in a day.

I'm old and I'm still waiting for the government to be fixed.

[-] Triasha@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Abortion was illegal for 70-120 years depending on the state. It was 50ish years from the progressive era and the beginning of birth control to the ruling of Roe. Overturning roe was a 50 year political project by the right.

Sometimes it takes a lifetime.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

We keep breaking it by voting for Republicans every now and then.

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

If Democrats ran every branch of the government at every level I still doubt it would get fixed.

load more comments (27 replies)
[-] lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 2 weeks ago

She's been getting a lot of hate for not endorsing Harris and people fail to realize the difference between endorsing and voting. Her entire point is that the government can't be fixed in a day. Voting for Harris is the obvious choice but her being in office isn't going to magically solve all our problems.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

Except, by definition, she is endorsing Harris by publicly supporting her candidacy. Endorse doesn't mean you agree with everything they stand for, but if you are publicly saying who you are voting for, that's an endorsement.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

A: this isn't really an endorsement, more than it is an acknowledgement of how fucked the options are. If you'd like to know the difference, go look at what Swifts endorsement looked like

B: she wasn't even going to say who she was voting for, but libs decided to harass her until she did

example: I use windows for work but i'm sure as fuck not going to recommend it to other people. Saying that i'm forced to use windows for work is not an endorsement. I'd go so far as to say that in this context it's more of a complaint or indictment than a endorsement.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

She is telling the world that she thinks Harris is the best choice to vote for in this election. It's 100% an endorsement. Literally by definition. People seem to be confusing endorsing someone to marrying yourself to all of their views.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

declare one's public approval or support of.

Err, you working from a different dictionary?

This is why she resisted saying who she was voting for initially, and why she is explicitly saying she is not endorsing

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

The problem is she's trying to bring nuance to a bumper sticker platform.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah I get it. I was young once and I’ve even had to have the bitter realization that even Revolution neither happens in a day nor resolves anything quickly. I ask for the passion of the young to hold hands with the wisdom of us older folks. It’s easy to demand sudden change, and important too, but building bases of power are important.

Vote for Kamala then hold her feet to the fire. Vote in every primary. Discuss what you think with people around you when it comes up, I know I’m the annoying pro trains girl at work. Build the support and make those maga losers afraid to show their faces.

And entertainers can do so much. Cobain got people who wouldn’t otherwise thinking of homophobia as uncool for example

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I know I’m the annoying pro trains girl at work.

Ugh, train people are the worst. WE GET IT, YOU LIKE TRAINS.

Edit: I genuinely thought this was a typo and they meant "pro-trans." But maybe they actually did mean "trains."

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I’m not cis passing enough to be openly talking trans issues at work. Nah I talk public transit. Shit like replacing air travel with high speed rail.

[-] Triasha@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I also misread your comment as pro-trans, but we DO need more trains! So keep bringing it up, you are doing good work.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah I hope cis people will speak up for me. I’ll speak up for public transport, it’s what engineers should be doing.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

If it makes it better I’m also annoying about other infrastructure. Dams are excellent

[-] i_ben_fine@lemmy.one 3 points 2 weeks ago

Are you significantly older than Chappell Roan? Because I'm imagining you're the one who doesn't understand something.

load more comments (3 replies)
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2024
222 points (88.0% liked)

politics

19047 readers
4314 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS