this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
226 points (93.5% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7124 readers
751 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

More than a dozen former Ronald Reagan staff members have joined dozens of other Republican figures endorsing the Democratic nominee and vice-president, Kamala Harris, saying their support was “less about supporting the Democratic party and more about our resounding support for democracy”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 32 points 4 days ago (2 children)

They’re trying to reach conservatives that don’t support Trump.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 23 points 4 days ago (3 children)

They're alienating people who hate Reagan.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago (15 children)

Are they? The campaign is not speaking in support of the Reagan administration. Harris is supported by the former administration over a corrupt and narcissistic megalomaniac.

Personally, I don’t see this as anything other than validation that Trump is that bad.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 19 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If you get endorsed by Hitler it reflects pretty badly on you.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (6 children)

Putin endorsed Biden, and now Harris. Do you honestly think that he wants Democrats in charge during his invasion of Ukraine? Politics is a game.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 15 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Right, his endorsement doesn't help. That's my point? Liberals shouldn't be cheering because Reaganites endorsed Harris.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Who said Liberals were cheering? This is aimed at disenfranchised conservatives.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago (7 children)

Do you think conservatives read The Guardian? This is for internal consumption, to make liberals think "wow even Reaganites are on our side, we must be doing something right!"

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee -2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

The Guardian is a newspaper. They are just covering the news.

Other outlets are covering this also, including conservative ones.

You are way too eager to find a conspiracy here... I promise you, this British newspaper isn't run by and for American Democrats.

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

no one is saying that is, but what queermunist is doing that you are failing to do is annilise the bias of the source, and consider the reasons for why they wrote something and the way they wrote it ... this is basic media literacy

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

There's no conspiracy? This is just liberals telling other liberals about the "good news"

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] anarcho_blinkenist@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

"disenfranchised conservatives" he says

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago

The liberals cheering is what told me the liberals where cheering. I mean ... Haris even gloated that Ronald Reagon himself would vote for her.

as for disenfranchised conservitives, this is a group that does not exist, like both halvs of the uniparty pander to the conservitive.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

That's a good question, but I think Putin's being honest. Trump is more likely to try to negotiate a peace deal, but if that goes badly, he's also much more likely to order some off-the-wall shit like giving Ukraine ICBMs and permission to use them. Remember this was the guy who was presented with a range of options to retaliate against Iranian sabre-rattling, and for seemingly no reason chose the most extreme, drone striking their top general! There's lots of reason to not want Trump in charge.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

~~What makes you think Trump would negotiate peace? He’s already said Israel should finish the job and stop recording their atrocities. He also repealed restrictions on Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory. Netanyahu was so grateful, he named a settlement after Trump in Golan Heights.~~

Accidental and unrelated reply. My mistake.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 days ago (14 children)

I'm not saying he's a dove or anything, but he doesn't really give a shit about NATO therefore isn't terribly invested in protecting the Zelensky regime, and he has been consistent about saying the war should be ended so Ukrainians survive, [which, to be clear, I doubt he personally cares about, but it's his platform] and even said this when he was pressed with the insanely unprofessional and ridiculous bait question "Do you want Ukraine to win?" at the debate.

Anyway, it's no guarantee, he's a very unstable and erratic guy, but I think he sees the war as a waste of money and would prefer friendlier relations with Russia.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I read it as the neoliberal warhawks are enthusiastic about a more level-headed maintainer of Empire who has promised the most lethal military in the world and to always support Israel.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Believe it or not, the President does more than determine support for Israel.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Yep, but the part that specifically draws the Reaganite fascists to Kamala is her promise to maintain the most lethal military in the world. Forever wars and endless profits for the MIC, endless support for Imperialism.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world -5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

And Trump has already proven to support Israel’s eradication of Palestinians and expansion into Gaza and the West Bank. Israel is not the point of comparison between them, although Trump is worse for Palestinians.

More money in the hands of the lower and middle classes stimulates the economy and drives stock prices. The middle class is considered the most wasteful class. That consumption drives consumerism, which increases stock value.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago (4 children)

And Trump has already proven to support Israel’s eradication of Palestinians and expansion into Gaza and the West Bank. Israel is not the point of comparison between them. Trump is worse for Palestinians.

Trump is the same as Harris with respect to genocide. He can't just buy bombs on his personal card and ship them via DHL, this is a bipartisan effort because the basis is economic, not moral.

More money in the hands of the lower and middle classes stimulates the economy and drives stock prices. The middle class is considered the most wasteful class. That consumption drives consumerism.

No idea why you're bringing this up.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Having read about Hitler's meeting with the military heads that line was bonechilling when she said it

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago

What are they going to do about it?

Please say campaign for electoral reform in their respective states.

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago (4 children)

why though? there is a large untapped market to the left of the Democrats, that they constantly ignore instead focusing on trying to just BE the republicans and take the fictional moderate.

In reality here everyone in that space has decided, and is not going to be swayed a large majority of them are with trump, They should move back to ATLEAST new deal politics but expand it to all not just white americans, that will both re-expand there voting window and allow for a diferentiated base

[–] Belgdore@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Taking one vote from another candidate is worth two votes from someone who is not voting, or who is voting for a non-viable third party.

I know plenty of people who wanted to vote for Kennedy but will probably vote for Trump now that he’s out. This group is likely to listen to former Reagan staffers and republican presidents that they liked.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] anarcho_blinkenist@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

because their interests don't allow it. Their donors and the people they work for, recruit from, and get hired by after leaving office, are all the billionaire imperialists that benefit from exactly what the democrats are doing and have been. It's in the base structure of the democrat party. A lot of times these capitalists donate to the democrats, then vote republican. Both parties work for the same class of capitalist imperialists in whose interest they are so entrenched, they literally can't do anything else but fly to the right and become more and more indistinguishable from each other as they both compete for who can be better at committing genocide and who can be more fascist on immigration and the border concentration camps and also militarily and operationally abroad

The only way to break the duopoly is to throw weight behind a 3rd party (the further left the better, PSL or greens if you're a liberal or your state is strong for it and you like that idea), which would starve the democrats of the margin they need to ever get power, and force a reorientation where the ruling class would have to float a reformist "labor" party to keep people from further radicalizing and flooding to the socialists away from the open-fanged republicans, who would remain as the only real political force when the mouth-closed-smiling but just-as-fanged democrats, entrenched in their position, can no longer cruise-control on "not being the republicans." Which they already are in most ways, and in the ways they wear a mask of not being they're totally feckless and actively capitulate in order to drum up more fear about the republicans to scare people into voting for them without doing anything to earn those votes (Obama had both houses of congress. He could have codified abortion rights and LGBTQ civil rights protections into law then and there. He didn't. He also gave away a supreme court seat. And Biden has not only not forcefully pushed to expand and pack the courts, but has actively denounced the idea as "politicizing the courts" as if that ship isn't already past the horizon. And has done fuck-all to stop the book-burnings, anti-LGBTQ laws, criminalizations of abortion, etc that are currently happening under a democrat president. They don't care about any of us and never will, and it will continue to get worse under the duopoly).

The ruling class floating this "labor" party would itself cause the democrat party to split in half, with half hedging their bets and pouring into the 'labor' party and the farthest-right establishment remnants stopping pretending they're anything else and joining the republicans. Which would then "democrat-ize" the "labor" party and alienate their left wing who were trying to escape those same people and interests into joining with the socialists. This is why I say throw weight behind a socialist 3rd party. Because then you actually have a growing counterweight pushing forward against this rupturing contradiction and highlighting how badly these people play politics, as the establishment and their bourgeois politicians are scrambling in retreat to reorient and reconstitute politically, having obviously grown so entrenched and corrupt and complacent they've forgotten how to play politics.

[–] RageAgainstThe@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I would like to add that the Democrat party stance on gun control only hurts minorities and LGBT from defending themselves, as rich white liberals are sheltered from any problems the actual working class face.

they love to fear-monger about Project 2025 (Which is a real threat) while disarming the people who need firearms the most. "Trust the police, you do not need weapons of war" while they give speeches with armed security details nearby at all times. Both parties do not want an armed working class

load more comments (2 replies)