• NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 minutes ago

      Enough to be a backbone? To stand in morality? No one made her back genicide. Like the fuck we talking about?

    • ceenote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      She had complete control over her own campaign platform, where she chose to be in lockstep with Biden.

      • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        This. It’s up to the politician to build a platform that gets as many votes as possible. The DNC and Harris choose to ignore their base, shout down the Muslim vote, and took more money from special interests groups than Republicans.

      • frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        54 minutes ago

        I wouldn’t say that, she was beholden to the party donors that would have stopped sending money to all of the corporate Dems if she had a different stance. Biden also wasn’t going to let her distance herself on any of his stances. It was a lose-lose situation from a messaging perspective.

        The more ethical choice would have been to have stop taking the big donor money and to have distanced herself from Biden’s stance, but likely still would have lost by doing that given she was trying to win over the average swing state voter.

        Personally, I think looking forward, that the corporate Dems that are taking money from pro-Israel PACs should be told they can either keeping taking those donations and be primaried, or they can stop and they will have the support of the voters. Ideally we want progressives but convincing the the corporate Dems to not put money first does matter.