this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024

296 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19098 readers

4723 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
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.
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

296

'We're not going back': Some Never-Trump Republicans embrace Harris' 'top cop' persona (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 3 months ago by return2ozma to c/politics

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 19 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] ABCDE 41 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I think we'll see markedly different demographics calling this election this time round. The never/non/anti/anyone-but-Trump crowd called it last time without enthusiasm for Biden; Harris could easily do much better. The Rest is Politics went into Biden's courting of the black vote with his past and the appointment of Harris; what could she do for her VP pick? Aside from a mid-Western old white guy.

[–] sprack 28 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Mark Kelly would be a pretty exceptionally qualified old white guy.

[–] gAlienLifeform 21 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Why pull a popular senator from a western purple state who isn't term limited when there's a popular governor (Roy Cooper) from an eastern purple state who is?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Ties to Giffords.
im not convinced Cooper is someone we can collectively rally around yet.
His career makes a significant statement, and one that the right would have difficulty rebutting

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Any Arizona Democrat can warm a seat in the Senate. Kelly can do much more for the Democratic party at the national level than at the Arizona level. His background is too appealing to leave him at the state.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What’s his brother doing now? Put him in the Senate seat

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Not a terrible idea, but he's got the same sort of background and national recognition, and could be put to better work at the federal level.

I'd put Scott in the cabinet. He's qualified to serve as Secretary of Interior (the department that NASA falls under) or Sec Def. Or, we could signal that instead of eliminating Education like the GOP wants, President Kelly deems it so important that he wants his twin brother to look after it when he can't.

Or, if we don't want to give him a department, Chief of Staff: he can run the day to day operations of Mark's White House.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I really like him, but I think she'd do much better naming a younger VP. He is exceptionally qualified, but he's probably going to quell some of the enthusiasm young voters are showing for Harris.

[–] sprack 6 points 3 months ago

I partially agree, but there needs to be things that appeal to older and conservative voters willing to bridge the gap.

Plus an elder statesman that can keep the House under control will make Harris’ job infinitely easier.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Kelly's "True American Hero" angle will resonate with Never-Trump Republicans, without offending Democratic sensibilities. The worst thing anyone has said about him is he opposes Medicare for all, but his explanation for that opposition is not unreasonable, and does not preclude either universal healthcare or the ACA.

(His argument is that Medicare offers mediocre coverage, and people should not be forced from an employer-sponsored plan with excellent coverage into a plan that offers less.)

[–] very_well_lost 2 points 3 months ago

he's probably going to quell some of the enthusiasm young voters are showing for Harris.

There are a lot of younger voters who fondly remember all of the amazing science outreach that Scott Kelly (Mark's twin brother who is also an astronaut) did during his year long mission on the ISS. If anything, I'd wager that younger voters are more aware of the Kelly's than older voters — and are more likely to get excited about a NASA astronaut than some Midwestern governor they've only vaguely heard of.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

AOC is turning 35 in October. She should be VP. She can just tell people she's not picking a VP until 13 October.. People will get it.

[–] FlowVoid 13 points 3 months ago

She can't wait until October because she needs to meet ballot deadlines.

That said, you don't need to be 35 to run for president, you need to be 35 to be sworn in as president. So AOC could be nominated today in theory.

[–] SirDerpy -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Biden's courting of the black vote

I remember that.

If you don't vote for me you ain't black. - Joe Biden

I felt so understood, loved, and represented.

what could she do for her VP pick? Aside from a mid-Western old white guy.

The other old white guy. It's a big tent. The old white guys are voting identity and marketing just like you are.

[–] gAlienLifeform 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Do you think there's any ways in which Kamala will be worse than Biden was? I share a little bit of this cynicism that Harris isn't going to end up being as cool as we want her to be, but for the life of me I can't imagine a single issue where she's any worse than Biden and she probably will be better on a few (like, she ran on marijuana legalization and Medicare for All in the 2020 primaries, stances Biden was never willing to take).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

C'mon Democrats, is it really time to kick the progressives under the table again already?

It wasn’t always this way for Harris, who, in 2020, faced off against Biden and more than a dozen other Democrats as the party lurched to the left.

“Running in a Democratic primary at the height of the racial reckoning in 2020, her background as a former prosecutor, I think, hurt her,” said Conway. “In 2024, the country is in the mood for a candidate that has her background and can go on offense against Donald Trump.”

First, Harris has to reintroduce herself and, in the process, reassure moderates, Republicans looking to her said. While Conway, Whitman and Shays all plan to vote for Harris, others may need more to come on board.

...

Whitman is clear-eyed about the challenge of putting at ease voters who may have reservations about Harris’s liberal record and stances. “It’s going to be tough,” Whitman said. “A lot’s going to depend on who she picks as vice president. Even though she’s not way-left, that’s how they’re going to paint her, and that’s how she’s going to be perceived.”

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

C'mon Democrats, is it really time to kick the progressives under the table again already?

When have they not?