If you’re a progressive who thinks the Democratic Party is a tool of corporate America, talk to someone who still can’t forgive themselves for voting for Ralph Nader in 2000—then ask yourself which candidate, Harris or Trump, would give you any leverage to push for policies you care about.
This is contradicted by this:
Like you, we wish for the return of the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, a party animated by actual ideas. We believe that American politics are healthiest when vibrant conservative and liberal parties fight it out on matters of policy.
I don’t want a return to party of Bush. I want the American people to have the highest standard of living in the world - not the people of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
If you’re saying that Kamala will restore the GOP, then it seems that the American people will never be prioritized. In which case, we should all leave and emigrate to Scandinavia where their people are treated like human beings rather than servants
Bush lied about Iraq having WMDs and oversaw the patriot act, Guantanamo Bay waterboarding, and Abu Ghraib. He stole the election in 2000 in Bush v Gore. He was a fascist and damaged the US worse than Trump
If the US won’t ever have single payer then we should emigrate to Denmark. Why would I want to live here?
You’re saying Kamala will help restore the GOP to the party of Bush and McCain. That is a terrible thing to admit. The neoconservatives are monsters who harmed the country, to say nothing of the innocents abroad who were tortured and murdered
Where the eff is this BS from? They clearly said if you cut off the toxic poisoned head spewing hate and venom, the Republican Party can rebuild around ideas, policy, maybe even around morality (doubt). If you’re a conservative, that ought to be a good thing. If you’re pro-democracy, the renewal of two sane choices battling for ideas ought to be a good thing.
I’m sure I also would disagree with those ideas, but I welcome the competition, I welcome the possibility of respecting g our national leaders.
All I can say is that when Mitt Romney talks family values, he means actual family values. When Ronald Reagan said he’d trickle down on you, you could smell the urine. When Ross Perot talked about corporatism, he meant it
The poster above you didn’t put the entire article. Their post was merely the snippet from the end of it.
Earlier on, the article stated:
The Atlantic is a heterodox place, staffed by freethinkers, and for some of us, Kamala Harris’s policy views are too centrist, while for others they’re too liberal.
In other words, this endorsement is the decision of more than one person. It isn’t contradictory for different people to want different things. The whole point was that multiple people have found multiple reasons to come to the same conclusion.
But the article isn’t behind a paywall, and the link is right there. In the search to make sense of an extracted quote, the original source is a good place to start.
.
This is contradicted by this:
I don’t want a return to party of Bush. I want the American people to have the highest standard of living in the world - not the people of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
If you’re saying that Kamala will restore the GOP, then it seems that the American people will never be prioritized. In which case, we should all leave and emigrate to Scandinavia where their people are treated like human beings rather than servants
.
Bush lied about Iraq having WMDs and oversaw the patriot act, Guantanamo Bay waterboarding, and Abu Ghraib. He stole the election in 2000 in Bush v Gore. He was a fascist and damaged the US worse than Trump
If the US won’t ever have single payer then we should emigrate to Denmark. Why would I want to live here?
.
What was McCains stance on all of the above?
Pining for the party of Bush is pining for evil and diminished living standards
.
You’re saying Kamala will help restore the GOP to the party of Bush and McCain. That is a terrible thing to admit. The neoconservatives are monsters who harmed the country, to say nothing of the innocents abroad who were tortured and murdered
.
Where the eff is this BS from? They clearly said if you cut off the toxic poisoned head spewing hate and venom, the Republican Party can rebuild around ideas, policy, maybe even around morality (doubt). If you’re a conservative, that ought to be a good thing. If you’re pro-democracy, the renewal of two sane choices battling for ideas ought to be a good thing.
I’m sure I also would disagree with those ideas, but I welcome the competition, I welcome the possibility of respecting g our national leaders.
All I can say is that when Mitt Romney talks family values, he means actual family values. When Ronald Reagan said he’d trickle down on you, you could smell the urine. When Ross Perot talked about corporatism, he meant it
It was WHAT!?
.
The poster above you didn’t put the entire article. Their post was merely the snippet from the end of it.
Earlier on, the article stated:
In other words, this endorsement is the decision of more than one person. It isn’t contradictory for different people to want different things. The whole point was that multiple people have found multiple reasons to come to the same conclusion.
But the article isn’t behind a paywall, and the link is right there. In the search to make sense of an extracted quote, the original source is a good place to start.
How does that help? If it’s plausible that she’ll restore the GOP then that’s very bad