Next week they’re going to send you a poll on whether Biden should tie his shoes in the morning. Jesus Christ these fucking people.
2 Likes
Well, I hope you answered correctly! What if you’re the deciding vote?!
1 Like
Yeah, he probably shouldnt have answered “Bastard” then.
1 Like
Given the rules about the Judiciary Committee, this thread title could prove even better.
There hasn’t been a “quiet part” since Trump.
The worst part is Lahren claims she isn’t against a black candidate period, she’s against limiting a pick in advance. Ok, you can make that argument, we all know the real reasons but on its face, whatever.
Then she says we know how that worked out with Kamala.
A) The fuck has Harris done poorly? I know they hate her, but she hasn’t done anything. She’s VP their job is to not do anything.
B) Once she ends the sentence that way she’s claiming there aren’t qualified black women. Now she’s just being blatantly racist.
And I’m not sure she’s even smart enough to know that.
The show’s producers absolutely know that it’s racist, it’s the red meat that drives viewership. These propaganda broadcasts are scripted to a “T” and the talking heads parrot the same talking points laid out by think tank wonks.
Basically my point was just that even when they know parts of what they’re doing are racist, they don’t think it all is. The question is how overt does it have to be for them to start to realize it? She thinks she found the racism-free way to criticize Biden on this in a way that is racial and rallies the racists, but without being racist… But she’s too stupid to understand that nope she was just flat out racist.
Not that the distinction really matters, it serves the same purpose either way - which is why you can argue that even the parts that don’t cross the line are still racist based on the underlying motivations.
Not a fan of Biden saying he’ll pick a black woman so early. He did the same thing with his VP choice, he said he didn’t know who but he wanted a woman VP. It would come off so much better if he let other people theorize about what he should do, and just say he’s picking the best person for the job. And when it turns out to be a black woman it doesn’t look so fucking patronizing like he intentionally passed over potentially more qualified candidates based on race and gender.
Typical Biden, I guess. This is exactly who we voted for
13 Likes
The problem with not confirming he will keep the promise is it means the Left will spend the next few months dragging him for betraying the promise.
This is how he got South Carolina and thus the nomination. It was the deal with Jim Clyburn.
I don’t have a big problem with it in theory, the premise is that:
A) He already knows there are qualified candidates who meet that description who would be on his shortlist.
and
B) He knows people of that description are underrepresented in these positions.
But I agree that doing this does cause a political problem. For Biden, the bigger political problem was how to win the nomination and this was his solution.
He didn’t make the promise to the left, he made the promise to the left-center. There’s a pretty good chance the left will hate his nominee regardless.
2 Likes
The problem is making a stupid, desperate promise in the first place because he was getting his ass kicked and had to start throwing hail marys.
4 Likes
Biden makes a big dick-swinging promise to his base, gets votes, and we’re all mad that he will probably deliver? For crying out loud, when the Republicans promise to put deranged anti-abortion justices on the bench, their doesn’t get upset over the impropriety of it.
2 Likes
Nah I’m happy to see a black woman on the bench. I anticipate being annoyed that he’ll pick someone who’s not at all progressive, and I’m already annoyed that he’s going to take a month to name someone and then Dems will take too long to confirm, inviting bad outcomes.
That said it would have been better politics if he publicly just announced that he’d pick someone from an underrepresented group, and told Clyburn privately what he’d do. But maybe that wasn’t good enough for Clyburn…
The way he did it frames the choice as identity politics and reeks of “yeah I’m a crotchety old white guy who verbally abused Anita Hill but I’ll commit to appointing a black woman because fuck it, I’m polling single digits and losing to like Mike Bloomberg.” This approach delegitimizes the pick before it’s made.
1 Like
Don’t you have enough things to be enraged about? How can you even keep track of them all?
4 Likes
But now that they have no grounds to attack his pick yet, they will have to wait for him to nominate someone. Since no one cares about the actual characteristics of the nominee other than race and gender other than the 1% of people who understand legal philosophies, promising a black woman now is the furthest left option available
No it’s not, he could have promised someone who would protect workers rights, the environment, or any other number of things.
Your claim that a Black female nominee is automatically left wing is painting with a broad brush along racial lines, and that’s dangerous territory. Plus the names being floated aren’t left wing.
Well, there’s some Overton factors here. In the US today the “right wing” is explicitly white supremacy plus toxic masculinity. By default, a black woman is not “right wing” when the country is as broken as the US is broken. Although you’re right that doesn’t mean anything in normal times, but these aren’t normal times.
I do think the whole idea of advancing a black woman because of her black womanness is actually left wing. Inclusiveness is strictly a leftist idea.