Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders suggested Vice President Kamala Harris is not humble because she does not have biological children.

During a campaign event for former President Donald Trump Tuesday, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders suggested Vice President Kamala Harris is not humble because she does not have biological children.

The comments came during a town hall the governor moderated in Flint, Michigan, at first joking about how her children’s innocent remarks can make her feel humble despite her high-profile position.

🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • Rhaedas
    35•3 months ago

    First, this was a GOP talking point long ago. She’s late to the party. Second, she had to include “biological children”, inferring raising a kid that isn’t yours by DNA means you have NO CLUE what being a parent is like. Adoption and foster parents would think differently.

    Seriously, Sanders, get your own state in order before you chime in on things. And Arkansas, do better next time.

  • Cyborganism
    17•3 months ago

    Why? Because she won’t have enough underage workers for her state?

  • @nforminvasion@lemmy.world
    14•3 months ago

    Fucking hell. These people and their birthing kinks.

    Not an antinatalist, and not saying if you have kids you have a birthing kink. This is specific to these fundamentalist freaks who have this weird obsession with having kids for the sake of having kids.

    Being a parent I’m sure can be an amazing thing and you can do it for the right reasons but this… Weird evangelical need to force people to birth and force people to enjoy it is wild

    • @grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      8•3 months ago

      This is specific to these fundamentalist freaks who have this weird obsession with having kids for the sake of having kids.

      And having kids the “right way,” so no

      • ivf
      • pain killers
      • cesarean
      • adoption
      • step children

      I get that for many people, birthing a child will be the most dramatic experience of their lives (understandable), but there are other experiences to centre.

      The majority of people physically can’t have children at all, and we get up to all kinds of other things to define ourselves.

  • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
    -2•3 months ago

    Can we throw a dig at Sanders for looking like a Muppet that’s been curb stomped by Elmo several dozen times?

    Seriously, let’s crowdfund some corrective surgeries for that vile twat.

    • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      19•3 months ago

      If all you find to attack someone on is their physical appearance then you might as well just shut up… There’s plenty to criticize Republicans for.

      • @meowMix2525@lemm.ee
        4•3 months ago

        It’s not the only thing, it’s just funny that on top of being ugly on the inside, so many of them fall squarely into uncanny valley on the outside too. It’s an interesting pattern to observe. Now quit shaming people for speaking their minds on a casual discussion forum. They aren’t hurting anybody.

        • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          -4•3 months ago

          Stop normalizing attacking people based on their physique, no matter where it’s done there’s nothing ok about it and you wouldn’t accept it if it was an attack coming from the other side towards someone you appreciate.

          • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
            3•3 months ago

            I don’t attack people who don’t make a name for themselves by hurting others.

            You aren’t in any position to gatekeep me or my speech. I appreciate the moral apprehension to join in, you’re encouraged to not join.

            You’re not here to teach me a lesson let alone anyone else here, keep that in mind 🫶

            • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              -2•3 months ago

              Then attack them on what they did, not on what they look like. Attacking people based on their appearance just shows that you don’t have anything better to attack them on either because they’re actually right or because you don’t know enough to present a more compelling argument against them, in which case, as I said, you might as well just shut up.

              • @meowMix2525@lemm.ee
                1•3 months ago

                Are we not allowed or capable of having nuanced, diverse thought about a person? There’s certainly more than one thread in these replies…

                Nobody is saying she’s bad because she’s ugly, just that she’s ugly. You can draw those conclusions if you’re bad faith, but they’re obviously faulty conclusions that are more like what a parent tells their bullied child to make them feel better than anything politically sound.

                This isn’t the senate floor, this is lemmy. Maybe that guy doesn’t care that much about the politics, maybe they do. We can’t really tell from this comment alone. Regardless, they have just as much a right to be here as you do. So, you “just shut up” first lol and learn how to use a period while you’re at it.

                • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  0•3 months ago

                  I’m sure if it was someone you liked your would be in agreement with me, that’s the problem with these attacks, they have no value and disagreeing with them is as simple as saying what I’ve been saying from the get go “If that’s all you have then clearly that person must be right.”

                  If you think it’s a good thing to lower yourself to their level to attack them then you’re no better than them.

      • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
        -1•3 months ago

        So I’ll start the GoFundMe with a meager donation of $5.

        Any contributions from the morally superior ones on the audience?