If it’s raining a lot, they’re going to report on the rain a lot, too.
And by what metric is this article deceptive? Her speech was interrupted, and there are uncommitted voters concerned about her gaza policy. They even referenced the conversation they had with Harris before the rally:
Leaders of the Uncommitted National Movement, which supported voting “uncommitted” on Democratic primary ballots rather than voting for Biden, briefly spoke with Harris at the Detroit rally.
“Michigan voters want to support you, but we need a policy that will save lives in Gaza right now. I meet with community members every day in Michigan who are losing tens and hundreds of family members in Gaza. Right now, we need an arms embargo,” Layla Elabed, a co-founder of Uncommitted, told Harris, according to the group.
Y’all are just to traumatized to handle even the slightest political tension. This isn’t even necessarily a bad moment for Harris, it just alludes to some lingering disagreement between the base and leadership that has yet to be resolved, which is to be expected at this point.
She spoke with them, but the article is suggesting she shouted down protesters without talking to them about their cause.
Did you read the article? That’s not how they framed this situation at all. Here’s how they framed it:
Harris first acknowledged the protesters by borrowing a strategy President Joe Biden used earlier this cycle when pro-Palestinian demonstrators routinely interrupted his events, affirming the protesters’ right to voice their opinions while trying to redirect attention to the remarks.
“I’m here because we believe in democracy. Everyone’s voice matters,” she said. “But I am speaking now. I am speaking now.”
Harris famously told then-Vice President Mike Pence “I’m speaking” in cross-talk at a vice presidential debate during the 2020 election cycle.
As the protests continued, Harris’ tone grew more forceful.
I think that’s pretty fair. And the article explicitly says she spoke with them about their cause, wtf are you smoking?
Also, do you not find it odd that the big place this is being discussed is Elon Musk’s Nazi Twitter? Or is that not relevant?
I’m not on twitter, but this article makes no reference to twitter. Maybe you’re just seeped in political news and are projecting your overall vibes onto this particular article. I’ll again recommend touching some grass.
Not particularly, where else are you going to find a 50 second clip of an hour-long speech?
It’s also being discussed here, but I suppose that’s inorganic since nobody here would be discussing something potentially negative about Harris unless a troll were to bring it up?
Maybe you’re right - maybe only trolls discuss the negative aspects of our politics; real Americans ignore the uncomfortable parts.
And if you don’t like those, there’s Dailymotion and Vimeo.
I’m not sure why you’re not even aware of that.
But the main thing is that R2O has an agenda. They posted article after article about why we shouldn’t vote for Biden and they’re doing it again about Harris. If you read their comments in the thread, they’re not even being especially secretive about it.
But the main thing is that R2O has an agenda. They posted article after article about why we shouldn’t vote for Biden and they’re doing it again about Harris. If you read their comments in the thread, they’re not even being especially secretive about it.
He’s posted article after article pointing to real problems with the democratic platform, he’s not inventing anything that isn’t already there. If acknowledging those issues hurts democratic electoral chances, then maybe democrats should do something to address them.
Now that’s just a lie. Not only have they blatantly said their agenda was to get people to not vote for Biden (they were even temporarily banned for it), they are implicitly suggesting in this comment chain that people shouldn’t vote for Harris. That was the whole point of saying that things have to fall apart.
Lol, pot calling the kettle black? Isn’t this itself a fabrication? Saying things need to get worse for people to take action could also mean things in Gaza/Israel need to get worse before americans make it an important issue. He hasn’t said anything about “don’t vote for Harris”, and he was banned for saying he was creating opposition to Biden generally, not so that people didn’t vote. Being unhappy with your electoral choices is the bare minimum prerequisite before deciding you have to do something beyond simply voting. Pushing Harris to make the right policy decisions is an important part of activism.
“He’s trying to get Trump elected” is just a straight up fabrication.
If it’s raining a lot, they’re going to report on the rain a lot, too.
And by what metric is this article deceptive? Her speech was interrupted, and there are uncommitted voters concerned about her gaza policy. They even referenced the conversation they had with Harris before the rally:
Y’all are just to traumatized to handle even the slightest political tension. This isn’t even necessarily a bad moment for Harris, it just alludes to some lingering disagreement between the base and leadership that has yet to be resolved, which is to be expected at this point.
Go touch some grass or something.
Yes. She spoke with them, but the article is suggesting she shouted down protesters without talking to them about their cause.
Which is deceptive.
Also, do you not find it odd that the big place this is being discussed is Elon Musk’s Nazi Twitter? Or is that not relevant?
Did you read the article? That’s not how they framed this situation at all. Here’s how they framed it:
I think that’s pretty fair. And the article explicitly says she spoke with them about their cause, wtf are you smoking?
I’m not on twitter, but this article makes no reference to twitter. Maybe you’re just seeped in political news and are projecting your overall vibes onto this particular article. I’ll again recommend touching some grass.
The article does not. The comments here are. Do you not find that odd?
Not particularly, where else are you going to find a 50 second clip of an hour-long speech?
It’s also being discussed here, but I suppose that’s inorganic since nobody here would be discussing something potentially negative about Harris unless a troll were to bring it up?
Maybe you’re right - maybe only trolls discuss the negative aspects of our politics; real Americans ignore the uncomfortable parts.
Youtube. Instagram. Bluesky. Reddit. Facebook. Lemmy. Mastodon.
And if you don’t like those, there’s Dailymotion and Vimeo.
I’m not sure why you’re not even aware of that.
But the main thing is that R2O has an agenda. They posted article after article about why we shouldn’t vote for Biden and they’re doing it again about Harris. If you read their comments in the thread, they’re not even being especially secretive about it.
He’s posted article after article pointing to real problems with the democratic platform, he’s not inventing anything that isn’t already there. If acknowledging those issues hurts democratic electoral chances, then maybe democrats should do something to address them.
Now that’s just a lie. Not only have they blatantly said their agenda was to get people to not vote for Biden (they were even temporarily banned for it), they are implicitly suggesting in this comment chain that people shouldn’t vote for Harris. That was the whole point of saying that things have to fall apart.
Lol, pot calling the kettle black? Isn’t this itself a fabrication? Saying things need to get worse for people to take action could also mean things in Gaza/Israel need to get worse before americans make it an important issue. He hasn’t said anything about “don’t vote for Harris”, and he was banned for saying he was creating opposition to Biden generally, not so that people didn’t vote. Being unhappy with your electoral choices is the bare minimum prerequisite before deciding you have to do something beyond simply voting. Pushing Harris to make the right policy decisions is an important part of activism.
“He’s trying to get Trump elected” is just a straight up fabrication.