“Listen, bigotry is sad and shameful. I don’t agree trans people should be made illegal. But taxes and immigrants…”

Enjoy the clip where Harris makes the completely accurate comment that “being a part of the role model club means sometimes being the only one in the room that’s had the experiences you’ve had”? The clip where she is just making an honest comment? The clip that you framed as her crying and being narcissistic? That clip?

Sure I’ll enjoy that clip since it shows she’s human. But as a reminder, this is not a community where you post an article and then say “just ignore the article and enjoy the clip”

What the fuck is this article? At the top it uses a roughly 30 second clip of Harris from a talk she did as California AG in 2016. Which is a clip where she talks about being a role model. But the article also claims she was crying while praising herself? She was not crying, she was literally laughing about how tough it can be to be a person who has been the first to a lot of things going like “its tough. Its tough.”

They literally introduce this article as

In this video, we analyze Vice President Kamala Harris’s recent speech at a women’s event. While her achievements are significant, many felt the focus was excessively on herself.

But for the life of me I can’t find what women’s event this article is talking about where she only talked about herself. Everything I’ve found is her talking about abortion and sure her being the first woman vp might come up but she never gushes about it like this article claims.

Im also fairly sure this is a porn site that also posts other things but I went to the home page and saw multiple porn videos. And the person who posted this article on the site has also posted porn articles.

I would argue that this should be removed because it is just not a real article with any actual reference to the supposed women’s event and uses a clip at the top that is from 2016 and frames it as if its from this month and is mostly a link to a porn site.

He said this when asked whether he thinks she worked at McDonald’s

“I know she didn’t. We checked it out,” the former president said. “They said she never worked here. She even picked the store. We went to the manager. The manager’s been there forever. ‘You remember her. No, she never worked here.’”

This is fucking hilarious. Harris is 60 this month. She says she worked there as an undergrad so let’s be generous and say 21. That means that it was 38-39 years ago. So the manager must be at least mid 60s. Which I just kinda doubt. Seems crazy that a manager of McDonald’s from the mid 80s is still working at the exact same McDonald’s as the manager. And if they are the exact same manager, there has probably been hundreds of people who have worked there in the last 40 years, I doubt they remember any of them.

Edit:not teens, during undergraduate, numbers updated

I don’t think this article is good journalism. The guy is taking the very incorrect polling from 2016 and 2020 and claiming that because Harris isn’t at that level of incorrect polling and that her lead is only 1-2 points that that means she’s losing bad. Which completely disregards how inaccurate polls have been since roe was overturned. They were predicting a 30 seat swing in 2022 and that was no where close. It also doesn’t take into account the amount of polls that are far right rigged polls to try and flood the averages to make it seem like Trump is so far ahead that he will naturally win and they will only lose by cheating. Providing cover to challenge the election when he loses.

Also. This quote is near the end. “Democrats have only two hopes. One is that today’s polls are more accurately gauging the electorate, and that Harris is therefore at least close to where she needs to be. The other is that by suddenly coming out of hiding to take friendly interviews, she can convince an electorate that seems unconvinced.” Which is. Just. So fucking stupid. Openly saying one of the reasons things are closer with the polls being at least a bit more accurate than 2020 and 2016, and then saying Harris has just recently “Come out of hiding”? That’s just bullshit far right talking points. She’s been doing interviews and rallies for well over a month as well as the debate that was a bit over a month ago. This is the same shit as when someone says “but what about her policies? She’s been so vague” which is also bs because if you want to know her policies all you have to do is LISTEN to her. But of course gotta have the far right talking point of her not being able to explain her policies.

This article was also written by J.T. Young who is the author of the upcoming book, “Unprecedented Assault: How Big Government Unleashed America’s Socialist Left” so if that doesn’t tell you his leanings for the interpretation he’s putting forth then nothing will.

But just in case, here’s some of his articles from the Washington Examiner “Why’s Harris so bad in interviews?”, Democrats need to replace their own radicalization, not sotomayor", “Sorry Joe, you’re no capitalist.”, and “Biden has no right to take credit for slowing inflation”.

Oh and some of his The Federalist articles “Trump should hit biden for completely ignoring the fentanyl problem”, “Leftists’ open borders and defund-police policies have come home to roost”, and “Trump assassination attempts are the logical result of the Lefts Marxist ‘Oppresion’ narrative”.

All those articles are from the last 4 years, some past couple months. Bu what I find interesting about this particular article is it shows just how much the far right has invaded the mainstream media and how they are given a platform to spew their propaganda. But hey, this was an “interesting” article.

It’s the framing of trans women as “biological men” as opposed to just calling them trans women. It gives ground to the right as trying to frame us trans folk as fakers as opposed to showing us as who we are, trans men and women.

Ah, a Marxist who has taken actual lessons from past failings of those who adhere to the ideology. How refreshing.

I bet the first question will be about the border and the second will be about the supposed 9 month abortions. Anyone wanna take my bet?

Correct. You posted it. Which means you wanted others to read it. And I don’t understand posting something written by a piece of shit when there are plenty of other anti Harris articles out there written by not pieces of shit. You don’t have to post everything you find interesting, you chose to post this.

And that doesn’t answer my question of why you’d find an article praising Trump to be interesting? I’m trying to have a conversation with ya and you seem very resistant to it. I’m not trying to be insulting, I’m just wanting to understand your rationale.

Don’t have to subscribe to every viewpoint in articles you post? Sure, I get that. But to post one written by someone who is so obviously anti everything you believe in is just weird. There’s plenty of other anti Harris articles out there to post that aren’t written by people inherently opposed to everything you believe in.

Also, something I’ve genuinely been wondering, why post any articles praising Trump? He’s a fascist, you’ve said you’re not scared of him, but he’s still a fascist. Fascists are not worthy of any praise. You can say you don’t agree with the articles praising him, but why do you even find those articles interesting?

I understand you post articles you find interesting. But this article does not jive with your supposed socialist beliefs. The article is literally calling Harris a Democratic Socialist, which would be a good thing.

Harris’s agenda is almost identical to that of the Democratic Socialists of America, who are anti-capitalists.

It talks about how her wanting to pass a bill that codifies Roe is her refusing to find common ground with anti-abortion crazies.

This article was written by Merril Matthew’s who works for the Institute for Policy Innovation which is a think tank that, among other things, argues for less regulations to stimulate economic growth instead of any kind of stimulus or investment in the economy through the government, thinks we should reform (probably lower) taxes on insurance companies so they lower prices and “promote policies that create value-conscious shoppers in the health care marketplace.”, and that we should have less regulations and government investment with energy production because they “believe that free people operating within a free economy using voluntary risk capital will out-innovate government-directed central planning funded by taxpayer dollars.” They are very obviously a rather conservative think tank that is a piece of shit and thoroughly not socialists and I’d argue they think socialism is toxic.

They also have articles with such headlines as “What They Aren’t Telling You in That Crime-Reduction Happy Talk” (where they try to argue while crime is down, its actually up in some areas and criminals are becoming more aggressive and you should still be scared of crime), “Overturning Chevron Deference” (where they talk about how overturning Chevron is a good thing), “Net Neutrality: Regulation for Ideology’s Sake” (where they talk about how bad net neutrality is), “The Left’s Newest (Old) Idea: Let’s Build More Public Housing!” (Where they argue public housing is really bad and a horrible investment simply because its not well maintained due to federal funding being cut by republicans), and “About the ‘Warmest Year in Recorded History’” (where they argue that humans MAY contribute to climate warming, but really it’s not accurate to measure temps this way because we started measuring temps at a low point in global temperatures so there’s really no way to know for sure if global warming is man made or even out of the ordinary. There’s plenty more, but these were just in the first couple pages of their articles on their site.

So basically, this is an article written by a piece of shit who thinks that it’s bad to codify Roe and that regulations are all bad and who thinks that socialism is bad.

Why post this when it’s written by someone who is literally counter to your beliefs? Is it just because it’s anti Harris? Cause you should have a higher standard than that.

If we do some quick math since Concord only sold 25,000 units, that means this has only sold 18,000 units. Completely unsurprisingly since it was a remake of a game that no one asked for and also seems to have removed a core part of the experience with changing the camera.

“Listen, we’re not gonna play this game. We are focused on the future. Now, let us show you a future where we cheat just like we wanted and tried to in 2020.”

Okay so neither the CNN article or this article says that they’ve independently confirmed the reports/when the pictures in the articles were taken which i think is important but most importantly, this was 1989. He was 2-3 months off. This is likely just him misremembering from 35 years ago. He should have said he was there “around” tiananmen square but does that really matter much? CNN heard from a source close to Walz that said “the point Gov. Walz is making when he discusses this is that some folks in the World Teach program discussed dropping out after Tiananmen Square, but he continued on with the program because he believed it was important for the Chinese people to learn about American democracy and American history.” which makes sense.

CNN also said he has exaggerated the amount of trips he took to China saying 30 times once and dozens and dozens another time. They reached out to the Harris campaign who said it was likely closer to 15. When you go to a country that many fucking times it’s not surprising to lose count. It’s not like you’re counting it. It’s not hard to lose track. My mom has been to Greece tons of time to visit family but could she say how many times she’s been there? Nope. She’d generalize because that’s how that goes.

But of course we have to be pedantic and “fact check” this because it’s important to be fair and who cares if we ignore some of the shitty things trump said during his rallies or how he’s obviously mentally deteriorating, obviously Walz misremembering is so much more important. And obviously this shows it’s a big scandal because earlier this year the news said that he said he carried weapons in war and he never served in combat even though he said he carried weapons of war during the war while he was stationed in the European theater. Which is accurate, but did the media care that’s what he said? Nope. Walz isn’t a consistent liar like Trump and Vance but sure let’s equivocate them and Walz.

Also the New York Times: “We have to represent both sides so we are fair, it doesn’t matter if one side are fascists, they’re still deserving of being represented.”

But it’s not a situation ripe for abuse. You can’t just call yourself a girl and get on girl sports, there’s requirements. And should we be limiting the very very few trans girls in sports because someone COULD abuse it? By that same logic we shouldn’t have social security because someone COULD abuse it.

Also sports will always attract people who have advantages based on who they are. Michael Phelps is a great example but so is anyone who plays basketball who’s over 6ft. Cis women can be super tall, should they be kept from playing because they’re so much taller than the other players?

And also, trans girls are girls, you saying that she shouldn’t get opportunities set aside for girls is misgendering her even if you use the right pronouns. Why shouldn’t she get the same opportunities when she puts in the work just like the other girls?

And best of all, almost all of them (the posts) are on communities that they made themselves.

He should fucking resign 100% although I have no idea who would replace him in the last 4 months of the administration especially since the secretary of state is a senate approved position.

Or it gives the current congress the possibility of trying to fuck with the next congress if democrats flip the house and keep the senate.

It looks like that’s toped with some kind of minced garlic, is that all you did to make them garlic knots or did you do more? I’ve started experimenting with breadsticks with my leftover pizza dough but have wanted to try garlic knots.